Sir Bandelot

I did prove, to the best of my ability, that there were indications of a majority by Ahmedinejad. That does not mean I believe anything, but there is some evidence. For your assertions that the people live in fear, and the polls are invalid, you've provided no evidence whatsoever. I have not sidestepped it, I (try) not to make claims without substantiation nor do I have an urgent need to defend Iran. There are many easy ways to condemn Iran for what they do. But when I hear Tony Blair and others condemning Iran as causing problems in the region, by meddling it makes me laugh. Let the pot call the kettle black! I never said that is happening in Iran, as far as I can prove. But it has happened elsewhere that people voted for the leader that was not the preferred choice of the US, and there are many ways to interfere, like by funding insurrection. Barack Obama has approved millions of dollars to fund protesters in Iran: U.S. grants support to Iranian dissidents http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/...an-legislation/ etc

Theres all kinds of music, in every era. There's always mainstream commercially produced crap. Let each person enjoy what they want. But if we are to make any kind of assessment of the validity of musical forms. we need to agree on what makes it "good". Some might say, artistic innovation, as in the creation of new sounds, new rhythms, harmonies, or what have you. An example is the jazz era, people like Miles Davis. And there's clear reasons why I pick his name amongst the others. Another way of measuring "good" is the musical virtuosity of a player. Example Charlie Parker, or a rock guitarist like Van Halen. Is there another indicator? Probably. Michael Jackson sure is popular. I think it stems partly from his image but also from the grooves he wrote, the danceable rhythms, the melodies. Using those criteria I don't know who I can point to in todays scene and say "there it is". But I'd love to hear about it. There is no point in criticizing what people like. Everybody likes what they like, and don't like what they don't like.

I don't respond if I have no verifiable facts. That only leads to pointless arguing. "I think this, I think that..." Everything else is pure conjecture. Prove your initial statement, that I and CNN "are sadly unaware". Whats your source? How is it that you more aware? Its not easy to prove much about whats going on thousands of miles away. Also, just because I give the counterpoint to whats being fed us by the mainstream media, does not mean that I support the islamic regime. So I will not defend them on every point, since I don't agree with the way their country is run. ie. by Theocracy. BUT, if a vote is fair and its what those people truly want, I say they should have it. Let them lead themselves, by self determination. Let no foreign governments impose their ideology on a people who actually want islamic laws. Its s tough situation for those who vote against the regime. Remember Bush won in 2004, despite the fact that many didn't want him in again. Of course, they didn't have riots over it. I would have been more impressed with the protesters and Moussavi if they did keep it a civil peaceful protest. But stories showed it was violent almost from day one. That means, irresponsible troublemakers. They undermined the protest and call for democracy by burning buildings and smashing cars. Moussavi should have taken more care to control the protestors, it would have had miuch more impact that way. But now some will say, they had it comin.

I have done that already here in these forums, a few times lately. http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index....st&p=435385 Post number 37. "asking for a recount is not a capital offense " And yet, the authorities have offered a recount as a means of settling the dispute, but Moussavi refused, saying he will accept nothing short of a new election. This article was pulled from CNN. The link now shows a different article. But using the same wording in Google I found it elsewhere. The supreme leader called on those who don't believe the election results to use legal avenues, such as requesting a recounting of ballots in their presence. Meanwhile, the Iranian government said Saturday it was ready to randomly recount up to 10 percent of "ballot boxes." The Guardian Council, which supervises the country's elections, invited three candidates -- Moussavi, Karrubi and Mohsen Rezaie -- to its meeting Saturday, according to the state-run Islamic Republic News Agency. Two of them, Moussavi and Karrubi, failed to show up. http://news.findtarget.com/world/the_big_q..._rallies_today/

Yes. On September 6 1995, police riot squads stormed the Ipperwash Provincial park to apprehend the protestors. Various police officers fired on vehicles and buildings. Acting Sergeant Ken "Tex" Deane, fired three shots at Dudley George, who was carrying an elongated dark-coloured branch. After repeated unanswered appeals from the protestors for the police to call an ambulance, George was finally loaded into his sister's car and driven to hospital. They were arrested and delayed for over an hour en route to the hospital. George was declared dead at 12:20 a.m. on September 7, 1995 at Strathroy-Middlesex General Hospital. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dudley_George The Premier of Ontari, Mike Harris, was implicated in his death, having ordered the police to attack the protestors Former attorney general Charles Harnick in November 2005. Harnick testified that former premier Mike Harris said "I want the f****** Indians out of the park," during a high level meeting about the Ipperwash occupation just hours before the fatal shooting of Dudley George." http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/ipperwash/

You mean, like Dudley George?

No need to get misty-eyed. Replace "World Policeman and Protector" with "dominant empire". Yes, 50 years, as the sepulcher of power was transferred (not so willingly) by the British after WWII, a war which one could say, they also lost. The only way I can relate to what your saying is, we risk losing one authoritarian regime, to be replaced by another possibly much harsher regime. Better the devil you know than the one you don't know. Because,every empire has to be brutal at times, when there is uprisings that challenge its authority. So despite the US being the protector they also committed some atrocities in various places in the world. And people resent that, naturally. What they maybe don't know, is how much worse it could be if the other guys got in there first. Thats why the Germans wanted the US to get to Berlin before the Russians.

What I read is, not the demonstrators, but the riot leaders. They are going after the ones who instigated violence using weapons. As part of your quote shows- "I want the judiciary to ... punish leading rioters firmly ... anyone who takes up arms to fight with the people" Not saying I condone it, as I generally oppose capital punishment. But that is the distinction, one must avoid the reactive headlines that tend to omit certain facts. Also as I mentioned elsewhere, any state would prosecute those who incite riots, especially when there is violence and burning of buildings. Again I don't know if that happened, but the reports of it are out there. Although, suppressed. What exactly happened, we'll never know. But in the first several days of protests there was no violent retaliation by the state, so to this extent it was tolerated. Even Obama was reserved in his criticism, until the republican dogs cornered him on it. Those clues show its not as one-sided as the media and certain politicians would have us believe. All else is mere political manipulations.

Right, as do trolls who attack the person instead of work the ideas. So pick your poison. Also, some people are not experienced at posting or debating. They should be allowed to learn and grow, which is done by experience. I'm sure you were young and naive once? Ever tell a lame joke? No? Never? But jbg, what is it you expect to achieve by complaining about it? There is no rule against inanity. Maybe there should be, but who shall decide what is inane, or what is simply misunderstood. Once upon a time the moderator would jump in and remind everyone to stick to the topic, but they are only people too, they sometimes interfere wrongly and kill discussion that is being enjoyed. Oh well.

As I understand it, a small business does not have to charge the GST to a customer, if their annual income is below some value. Oh I can't remember if it was $16,000 or $30,000 gross income for a business. So that means my small sole proprietorship does not have to charge th GST. But I always have to charge PST, for any sales in Ontario. Now if it is harmonized, doesn't that mean I will have to charge the HST, no matter what? If so, thats where the tax grab is, for the little guy.

Say no more

Poor jbg. Everyone ignores him. Are we counting our success by the number of responses to a posting? Its so much easier to make silly jokes than it is to actually think, to research a topic and then take a stand, all the while risking that others will tear you down for it. Argus has demonstrated his mastery of provocative posting, no doubt developed over untold thousands of disdainful, mocking and banal posts. Maybe you should borrow a page from his book, if responses what you want

And turbans. Can I get a black one?

"Television coverage of Iran's turmoil has fallen since Jackson's death Thursday; on the Twitter micro-blogging site, Iran remained among the most discussed topics, but fell below Jackson and comments about the movie Transformers 2." http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31582572/ns/wo...ideastn_africa/ Too late... the publics short attention span has moved on to other things that they find more important. Thats the wonderful thing about the mass-media controlled public- their fickle nature works both ways. Kinda like Homer Simpson

Also, If you can post at Mapleleafweb.com, and still retain your cheerfulness avoid the right wingers gloom If you can defend the truth against Dog-On-Porch and Cheney, and not get sucked in, by Argus or Shady, Then you will be master of defending whats right exposing villainous posters on that dreadful web site

I am not so convinced. There was a poll released by CNN few weeks before the election, that showed Ahmedinejad ahead by a 2 to 1 margin. That information is suppressed now, to make it easier for people to believe what we are told. "our poll results show President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in the lead" http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/06/08/ballen.iran/ "our uncensored poll shows incumbent President Ahmadinejad in the lead with a plurality of support" http://terrorfreetomorrow.org/articlenav.php?id=5 "Whereas President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was a sure bet just 10 days ago, the race has closed this past week," http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/06/11/...pour.iran.poll/ "The poll found that Ahmadinejad was leading his nearest opponent, the more reform-minded candidate Mir Hossein Moussavi, by a more than 2-to-1 margin." http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/06...nian.democracy/ I don't know what the truth is, but I believe every country would do what Iran did, if they had violent protesters burning cars and buildings. And every country manipulates information to their political advantage.

Fine. Ok. But if you think this government wouldn't kill you in a microsecond, if you were perceived as a real threat to the state, you've been fooled again.

No

I am certainly not defending the bad guys, nor am I an american or leftist. You guys see your bad guys, the other guys see their bad guys. But you see your own guys, as good. The difference between me and some of you is, I see the bad guys, everywhere. So go on, continue defending Bush, I'll tell you he's a bad guy. Start defending Ignatieff, start defending Harper. Or Ahmedinejad, or Al Maliki, or... Hey if it makes you feel happy to wave a flag and "believe", go ahead. Just don't expect me to get onside Oh yeah and one more thing, don't you ever believe in "change" for the good of all. Just another, slick liar.

As stated, those who are in greater need move to the front of the line. If the problem was as severe as some of the statements made by those with a political agenda, it would have been dealt with by now. We who live here use the system when necessary. There is no advantage in hiding the facts if something is broken. Another way to compare using statistics is to use survival rates. I don't feel like looking them up, but I have seen where Canada compares favourably. Again, if people are dieing there is no benefit to hiding this fact... We are not in the busoiness of killing ourselves.

Actual response time depends on the severity and the needs of the individual patient. Politically unacceptable, is also having no health care. Yet that seems to have served the US well enough for a long, long time.

Thats right, statistics are just numbers. The way the Senator portrayed the information is flat out wrong. And I can speak to this directly, I live here and work here for over ten years. Population in this region is comparatively low and waiting lists for various surgeries and treatment procedures are typically a few weeks, not 6 months. The Senator’s statement, for example, that the average wait time for hip replacement surgery at KGH is 196 days, is incorrect. The actual average wait time is 91 days – less than half what was stated. Knee replacements were quoted as 340 days but our average wait time is 109 days. Senator McConnell states brain, breast and prostate cancer surgery targets are nearly three months. KGH’s average overall wait time for surgical treatment of all forms of cancer is 31 days (8 for neurosurgical cancer, 16 for breast cancer and 49 for prostate cancer). The Senator’s statement that Ontarians may have to wait six months for cardiac bypass surgery – “a surgery that Americans often get right away” – is again, not true. The median wait time for cardiac surgery at KGH is 32 days. They are politicizing the situation, obviously.

If thats what the intentions of the attack ads were according to Harper, it seems to have worked well in his favour. I'm no fan of his, or any of them to be truthful but I think we should know about who is in the leadership, what they've been doing and why they want to be the leader. I have no admiration for this Ignatieff guy. He even undermined his own leader Dion with his snickering and guffawing at Conservative jabs while Dion was leader. The attack ads are not controversial to me, if they are telling the truth. I say bring back Paul Martin. Leadership is about style. But since he won't come back, they should have went with LeBlanc. He would have the charisma, and negative attack ads on him would not look well for the conservatives. Choosing Ignatieff is yet another blunder on the part of the Liberal caucus that they will regret. Far too easy to make him look bad.

I work at that exact hospital, and its all lies.

Its just another typical day somewhere around the world, whether it be in Tehran, Paris, or a meeting of the WTO. Nothing is going to happen. There will not be any military intervention over this.