Sir Bandelot

Tell you what, when you two snuggly bugs can stop high-fiving each other over every issue we might get to the matter at hand. Forget what the congressman says. It's not about that, it's about the sybolism in the mind of the American public. Oh lookee, we have a muslim problem. What shall we do what shall we do

Forum Felacitator sounds like a boring and thankless job. You'd have to always be on your best behaviour and not make any personal digs. That is a not a big problem for me but given the apparent (lacking) level of authority, it amounts to not much more than being the resident chivoto. I fail to see how it is any different than what is expected of all members here. Keep it civil, stay on topic, report when you see a problem. What's interesting is how it appears to have changed the tone of certain posters here, who apparently have an interest in securing this position. We are seeing Shady ask people to be more civil in their discourse, and Michael Hardner has not finished polishing his halo yet. His posts are now like dry white toast. I for one cannot stand the idea of being quite so puritanical. Therefore I withdraw my nomination for the position. I wish to thank all my supporters...

It's the thin end of the wedge.

Here is another event that indicates just where things are going these days- Congressional hearing on US muslims A veritable "Wannsee conference" in the making?

And yet, do they not do likewise in the way they behave towards people at very event they've come to protest? Are we now the pot calling the kettle black?

At any moment, there are thousands and thousands of planes in the sky. Yet we still have sunny days? The real problem with chemtrails and the like is, they affect everyone, even the families of the "bad guys" would be affected. So why would they do it? Now for the video, my thoughts are- those straight looking lines of precipitation on the radar must be very wide. Think of the scale of the image. To me it seems doubtful that a single plane could create such a long, thick line in its exhaust. You would need a whole fleet of planes. And if there are thousands of contrails from the thousands of planes in the air at all times, made up of principally water these do not show up in weather radar. The density of the contrails is not significant enough to make the radar reflect and show lines. More likely that such lines are created due to "fronts", regions where there is pressure differential and where there will be high winds and precipitiation activity.

I agree the behaviour of protesters towards muslims in general was over the top. But they (the muslims) did come to hear the words of the two controversial speakers, which indicates some level of support for these individuals. And ths in a way harkens back to a certain American visitor who came to Ottawa University about a year ago. The medium is the message.

Yes it does and I suspect the choice of Ignatieff himself as leader, and Dion previously also lies in that same problem. And as in the game of hockey, the ones that play together as a well integrated team instead of individuals cherry-picking for a goal, will be the most successful.

But it is also much to the detriment of Canadian politics, in my view. By not offering a viable alternative, starting with Dion and now Ignatieff, Liberals have failed the country. It would probably be best if the party completely imploded (as with the progressive conservatives) and a new party created from the ashes. The NeoLiberal party. Oh god, forbid it! The real problem with the Liberals I suspect, is internal conflict between various factions who want to hold power. Bob Rae, whose name should always be followed by large expectorations of mucous.

Yes some of them are antagonists, (as are many Canadian members here) but it would only be fair if we did not frequently attack US politics too. Which we love to do

Being a whiner makes you a poor Canadian.

My version is all-encompassing, and gives answers to everything you really need to know. I think it summarizes the body of all my posts quite nicely. Really no need to go on at all, after that...

Well, in a nutshell- In the beginning there was chaos, violence, deceit, betrayal, suffering and despair. And it stayed that way, until the end.

But there is a need to maintain it, and prevent revisionism.

And so this means I am paying more taxes than ever before, but receiving less services for my money? Yeah sure, I feel good about that.

It's a good list. Well at least we're near the bottom so that gives me a smug sense of superiority. How about this claim- "I was born in Kirkuk, the major Kurdish city in Iraq. In 1974, when I was twelve, the U.S. government encouraged the Kurdish people to rise up against Saddam Hussein. My family joined the struggle against Saddam, but the United States betrayed us by signing the Algiers treaty with Saddam and Kissinger. My people were brutally massacred by the Baathist government, while the United States and other European countries helped Saddam procure the weapons and chemicals he used on us. The helicopters that bombed us while we were fleeing Kirkuk were US helicopters." http://www.peacepalpitations.com/article.html I have heard things like this before, and that US fighter jets were ordered nt to engage, but could only observe the massacre from a distance. True, or not?

Looks like it's time for another "reductio ad nazium".

Yes. The Kurds were gassed by Hussein, and died in large quantities. "The provision of chemical precursors from United States companies to Iraq was enabled by a Ronald Reagan administration policy that removed Iraq from the State Department's list of State Sponsors of Terrorism. http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/42293000/jpg/_42293264_saddam_getty.jpg

I have no idea what you're saying here. But ff that's all you have to offer, then I believe this thread is finished. There is little doubt actually, your assertions have been utterly annihilated, by the truth. The rest is simply trollish opinions and posturing for attention. Therefore I say good day to you, sir

"The unanimous vote also approved the immediate referral of Libya to the International Criminal court over alleged abuses during the current violence, and a complete arms embargo on Libya." Oh Yay! We should all start feeling better now, that something effective is being done! It hardly matters, since over the past ten years the British have been selling them every sort of weaponry the Libyans ask for! And made some nice money on the way... all in exchange for a mere Lockerbie bomber... but of course our government wouldn't have known about these things before they happened. UK 'set for record Libya arms sales' Sarkozi gets cosy

HAHAHAHAHAHA... (demockracy)

Yes they do, the infamous bill S-10. Even if the mandatory minimum sentence was very short, once you are convicted and serve time in prison, when released you're an ex-con. And that is like a life sentence, regardless. Therefore the decision to impose a prison sentence must be carried out, not by the command of bureaucrats, but by somone who is WISE.

My concern is over certain policies they might implement. With a majority there is little to keep them under restraint. It's fine to say, if they go too far the pendelum will just swing back again, but it's the damage that could be done, long or short term. Peoples lives hang in the balance. Mandatory minimums for non-violent crimes is one policy I cannot accept. In doing so, people will be dealt with not by justice or intelligence but by the inhuman face of the system.

Actually believe it was Powell who strongly wanted UN involvement, and not to go into Iraq unilaterally. Others in the admin maybe did not care so much about that. So if true then in this sense, it was his baby. I believe that Cheney was quoted as saying, if Powell should fall on his sword over this speech, Cheney would not mind that happening. This tells me there was considerable doubt and speculation over the data. But that, as B_C points out was not terribly important. So now having thought this over, it hints that Powell et al may well have known this story to be false, but what hangs in the balance is UN involvement. They went ahead and made the case because, either way, this war was going to happen.

Powell writes that he had reservations about making the speech at the time. Why? He was reluctant to do it, but the duty fell upon him. Lies or no, he did his "job". And he knew it, and now he carries the shame of it. Bush either knew, or didn't know. If he knew, our judgement of it is obvious. If not, then he and the whole of the intelligence apparatus can be judged as either ignorant, incompetent or criminal. Ignorant- they refused to listen to other intelligence agencies about the reliability of this "curveball". Incompetent- they did not check the validity of the information, like fools they trusted illegitimate sources. Criminal- they didn't care about the real truth, seeking only to pursue their aggressive military agenda.