Sir Bandelot

It's amazing how quickly everyone can become friends again. Just a simple matter of saying your sorry, shaking hands and we move on...

It's likely there are even people in the government of Afghanistan that are good friends with the Taliban, maybe due to family or tribal allegiance, and they do not think the Taliban are so bad. Lately we have also been hearing about "moderate Taliban", who might be included as part of the government. This is what Mr. Karzai wants to do. So, unlike you the president of Afghanistan does not want to kill all the Taliban, everywhere. Some He even wants to collaborate with, as part of a call for a ceasefire. We're talkin amnesty, hand in your guns, and your crimes will be forgiven.

I wouldn't doubt that this has everything to do with money. Someone asked if this means the insurance companies aren't going to cover it anymore. The answer is, thats right, they probably won't cover it anymore. But you can get it extra, for a fee. Congratulations, you're now paying for a service other people used to get for free. Not only that, but probably paying more than they did, for less.

One can only surmise, they were out doing some christmas shopping...

Now here's a post from a thinking individual. Thank you for this, I agree. The photo-op was one of the first things that came to my mind when I saw the pictures. I understand there is quite a lot of support for Harper among the Indians and Pakistanis, Hindus and Muslims perhaps relating better to the "Conservative" brand. Too bad, if only they knew...

One rad per breast is a significant dose of radiation. If a woman gets both breasts irradiated, and gets 2 rads, that is 4 times the annual limit for nuclear radiation workers, like those who work at a reactor facility. In some cases the dose might even give cancer to a certain percentage of the women who get the mammograms. If that percentage/risk starts to approach the percentage of cases where cancer is detected and cured, it becomes questionable as to whether the risks outweigh the benefits. But its the job of the experts to determine where that dividing line is, and that decision should be done by understanding medical science, not determined by partisanship or in the interests of saving money.

These are the days of the counter-truthers.

Thanks Greg. Just to clarify, I was linking to an image file, not uploading. The image file was already hosted on another server. In other words I used the [/img] tags and put the url in between. But no image showed up. But if there is a security concern even for doing it this way, no problem I'm sure we can live with that.

Handling of Afghan prisoners covered up: report November 17, 2009 In an affidavit filed before the Military Police Complaints Commission, Colvin said he told officials in Ottawa about allegations of abuse and torture of Afghan detainees as early as May 2006. At the time, the government denied there were any credible allegations of torture. Colvin's first memo on the issue was sent to senior military and foreign affairs officials and described what he thought were "serious imminent and alarming" problems in the handling of detainees. Colvin wrote at least 16 more memos about the detainee issue, over the next year and a half. In October, CBC News reported the contents of one of those memos, written by Colvin in June 2007. The report was widely circulated at the senior levels of the Defence and Foreign Affairs departments. It was also sent to one of Prime Minister Stephen Harper's senior security advisers. The sources told the news agency there was a fear that graphic reports, even in censored form, could be uncovered by opposition parties and the media through access-to-information laws, leading to revelations that would further erode already-tenuous public support for the Afghan mission. The controversy was seen as "detracting from the narrative" the Harper government was trying to weave around the mission, said one official. "It is my contention that if this matter is properly unearthed and investigated you would see that the knowledge of these allegations of torture go right up to the prime minister and various ministers, at that time." Dosanjh told the CBC in an interview. --------------- It appears that the Conservative government ignored certain facts coming from the front lines and tried to cover up all evidence of these crimes,while portraying this war as a fight to create a just and free society in Afghanistan. How is that working out?

Wait, don't go away mad...

You don't understand propaganda do you, Mr. Dancer... I never expect much in the way of conversation from you. The others, they don't want to say anything. Just bouncing the title up and down in front of them, has been effective enough for today. And I thank you for your cooperation

You are my strawman, Dancer. I'm only using you for a puppet, because you set yourself up for it. You offered that ass up so high... Notice the real strawmen are staying away, because they know who I am talking to. Certainly not you... what makes you think I'm talking to you? What would be the point? Since you are a bald faced denier

Lots of people seem to have that problem with you, Mr. Dancer. Whatsamatter, ne pas parle le english language? Could it just be due to your poor writing skills?

Mr. Dancer says that he approves of the kerchief, but not the veil. What kind of kerchief, Mr. Dancer? Is it allowed to go down the sides of the head? Or just a small covering on the top. Red and white checkerboard, with the pony tail, or without? Please let us know of your advisement...

Right, but I think that you like many people don't like veils? So it's ok for our men to wear turbans, because we know that they WANT to. And other men can obviously continue to wear turbans. Women however should not be allowed to wear the veil... even if they WANT to.

I couldn't get the image tags to work. Tried manually adding image tags. It just shows a blank square where the image should be. Is it being blocked somehow?

http://images.ctv.ca/archives/CTVNews/img2/20091118/470_cp_harper_temple_091118.jpg http://images.ctv.ca/archives/CTVNews/img2/20091118/450_cp_harper_hat_091118.jpg Now, don't get me wrong here, I have no problem with this. But I want to know how some of these people feel when they criticize, say for example, Hillary Clinton for wearing a veil, or Barack Obama for wearing a Turban. Can I assume now that Harper has made your list of spineless self-haters who want to love the brown man?

And if the game is found out to be rigged, and it is, then there can be no real "failure" in the true sense, since there was never any chance to win at all. But looks to me like the rich folks did alright again, after all aren't they the ones who got the bailout money. I don't own a bank or run an automotive company. In fact I paid for part of that bailout they gave away to shore up the banks and corporations... some of that was money we paid to the state, to build better roads and schools, and hospitals. Those projects that keep getting cancelled, Mr. Senator... why do they keep getting cancelled while the banks walk away unscathed? They didn't just take the bailout money, they took more out of the peoples pockets, which halts consumerism, further crippling the economy.

While in China, Obama keeps his distance Low-key approach on human rights means no meetings with activists BEIJING - President Obama has steered clear of public meetings with Chinese liberals, free press advocates and even ordinary Chinese during his first visit to China, showing deference to the Chinese leadership’s aversions to such interactions that is unusual for a visiting American president. Mr. Obama held a “town hall” meeting with students on Monday. But they were carefully vetted and prepped for the event by the government, participants said. And the Chinese authorities, wielding a practiced mix of censorship and diplomatic pressure, succeeded in limiting Mr. Obama’s exposure to a point where a third of some 40 Beijing university students interviewed Tuesday were unaware that he had just met in Shanghai with their colleagues. This is no longer the United States-China relationship of old, but an encounter between a weakened giant and a comer with a bit of its own swagger. Washington’s comparative advantage in past meetings is now diminished, a fact clearly not lost on the Chinese. Human rights is the prime example... Yes indeed it is, as far as human rights go let him who is without sin... you know the rest. Obama shows that he is just as capable of grinning and shaking hands with countries, that are otherwise abhorrent to the concept of freedom of speech, freedom of the press, or basic human rights. Maybe while he's there he should start taking notes...

I posted the stats on Quebecers attitude towards the Afghanistan war, but ran out of time to do the rest (had to go to work!!) So here it is- The POLLARA survey indicates that support in English Canada has eroded: 32 per cent favour scrapping the monarchy, 45 per cent don't care and only 21 per cent support it. In Quebec, a strong 70 per cent favoured the abolition of the monarchy, while another 18 per cent said they are indifferent; only seven per cent still support it. http://www.pollara.ca/Library/News/dec_17.html Quebec is by far the most in favour of cutting ties. Three-in-four Quebec respondents (74%) do not want Canada to be linked to the British monarchy, 71 per cent say the same even if Prince Charles becomes king, and over half (51%) say they want no monarch after the Queen. http://www.angusreidstrategies.com/polls-analysis/opinion-polls/angus-reid-poll-monarchy-over-half-think-canada-should-break-ties-queen Opposition to the monarchy and the governor general is particularly strong in Quebec. http://www.macleans.ca/article.jsp?content=20060925_133506_133506&source=srch It's not necessarily a "proof" but the possibility of anti-monarchism in Quebec is there. Some would even swear by it, that its the one most important "wedge" seperating English and French Canada. The idea of replacing the GG has been put forward at various times before, with some practical solutions- The Cabinet in June 1978 put forward the constitutional amendment Bill C-60, that, amongst other changes, potentially affected the sovereign's role as head of state by vesting executive authority in the Governor General, and renaming the position as First Canadian. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debate_on_the_monarchy_in_Canada

Sounds like they've got it right then, thats likely the attitude of most Canadians.

Question: Do you support or opposed sending troops to Afghanistan? Response for those "opposed": Countrywide -- 50% B.C. -- 43% Alberta -- 51% Prairies -- 44% Ontario -- 42% Quebec -- 68% Atlantic -- 51% http://www.nationalpost.com/m/story.html?id=2143861 ----------------- "Residents in Quebec voiced the most opposition to the Canadian mission in the war-torn country, with 68 per cent of those polled in the online survey saying they were against sending troops to Afghanistan" http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Less+than+half+Canadians+support+Afghan+mission+Survey/2145527/story.html

What if it can be demonstrated that by removing the Crown we defeat the separatists, ideologically. No such protests would likely occur anywhere else in the country. And certainly not on that scale.

Point is that there are variations of the parlimentary system. It is not a hybrid of the repulbican system, it is essentially the same system as what we have now, the "Westminster" model, with a few minor changes.

In Parliamentary Democracy, the President and the PM are both elected, not selected. That gives a greater balance of power than just one person with the GG in his pocket.