Icebound

At least the post office never read my mail (well hardly ever)... and then used the information inside it in order to target me with ads. The real problem is that we allowed one of Canada Post's primary functions to be usurped by a faulty system that has no privacy controls. We let ourselves be f***ked by glitzy technology and we loved it. The CONVENIENCE, we said. or at least... somebody said.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/technical-deficiency-in-budget-will-sharply-raise-taxes-on-credit-unions-deloitte/article13973595/ In order to "fix" something which was not a problem in the first place, Harper has broken it completely. Now he is going to "fix" the fix. I've dealt with mechanics like that.... and software developers. We used to fire them. ...

This theory needs to be tested. I suggest DOP at Mosaic Stadium at 2:15 pm on September 1st. ... burning a green flag. Or a green sweater. A green handkerchief even.

Perhaps... but lots of people do it:.... http://wikiislam.net/wiki/People_Who_Left_Islam http://www.councilofexmuslims.com/

+1 North America may well be dominated by Muslims at some point.... or Slavs.... or Black Africans, or Black Americans, or Chinese, maybe even Spanish Americans ..... but it is not going to come about because of some book of religious teachings or because of immigration policies. In fact, the domination, (if it happens), may well remain off shore. Such domination, if it comes..... will come about by control of money. Worrying about immigration will not prevent that... immigration may well be your saviour from it. ...

Hardcore self-appointed leaders may not, perhaps, But you need to check out some of the forums for ex-Muslims... You can start with the Council Of Ex Muslims..... dot com Not really true. "Religious freedom" means that I do not harrass you because of your particular interpretation of afterlife. Or even because of your particular ceremonies that celebrate / commemorate your beliefs. If you decide to take your self-flagellation parade down Yonge Street at Easter time, you must have exactly the same parade permits as any other parade. If the competing religion across the street wants to hold a self-flagellation parade of their own, we cannot discriminate against them and must allow them the same consideration as the previous. BUT... if we are faced with 20 or 30 self-flagellation traffic shutdowns a year, and deem that might be detrimental to the city and society as a whole, then I submit that we are certainly within our rights to refuse permits to ALL such parades. And so if you want one, you can rent the Rogers Dome or Downsview Park or whatever, have your celebration there.... and I can't harrass you ...assuming you have all your health and safety ducks in a row. So, to that extent, I submit that the state CAN (and SHOULD) curtail religious observances in certain circumstances...... but wearing a crucifix or a turban can hardly be deemed worthy of "detrimental to society" consideration. To take that to a more extreme level, even in the privacy of a home, if someone claims that beating his wife is a religious requirement, the state certainly has the right to stop that.... just as it prosecutes "honour killings". THAT is a form of education that changes behaviour. I refer you back to that council of ex Muslims. As for the argument that Islam suppresses women.... well you know what? lots of women even in non-muslim households are "suppressed", some willingly because it is a way to ensure food and safety... some by circumstance because they have nothing better.... some are just plain lazy to get away... and some are actively looking for a way out. When we are able to talk to the 3rd generation descendants of Muslim ancestors in North America, that's when we will see how that is working out. ...

DOP, There are lots of ideas that won't die. Islamism is but one such idea... So is Marxism, Fascizm, Catholicism, secularism, Protestantism, Atheism, Transcendentalism, Capitalism, and any number of isms that have existed and do exist throughout the world. Each of these have their adherents, and each of these have had times of great growth, and times of serious decline. But yes, the "idea" doesn't die... there is always SOMEONE to keep it alive. But have any of them truly dominated, as you suggest Islam will?.... NO... because all of them have serious failures, and the grass becomes greener on another side of the street. A new idea is born, or an ancient one revived, and the course of history changes. For good or bad, I won't predict, but I will predict this: You will not stop an idea with laws that suppress the external suppression of that idea. You will only stop an idea with a better idea. So you don't like people practicing Islamism. Give them something better. I submit that even if it is not recognized at first, it will eventually be so. Usually at about the 3rd generation, maybe the 4th. But banning headscarves or whatever, is just a waste of time and parliamentary paper.... ....

It is not that long ago that some provinces required you to apply for a permit to purchase liquor, AND THEN, whenever you actually DID purchase, you had to show the permit, produce ID, and fill out a requisition that showed what you bought and how much. All in the name of "control", so that us unwashed masses would not become a mere alcoholic slime. Most of that was eliminated over the years... not because alcohol was any less toxic... but because the bureaucratic expense was not worth the supposed benefits of this "control". And strangely, productivity did not suffer....(after all, that's what this argument is REALLY about, isn't it?).... and the masses seem to have survived... even thrived... with their new alcoholic freedom. Marijuana was used here long before it was outlawed, and it is not going away. Trudeau's position may well be a recognition that, just as for alcohol, the bureaucratic expense is not worth the social benefits..... and that, like tobacco, unbiased research and informed education will go a lot farther toward eliminating use, than will prohibition....IF, in fact, research shows it to be seriously harmful. Just taking money away from enforcement and prosecution, and pouring it into research and education... with no other changes whatsoever.... will probably do quite a bit to curtail recreational usage in that case. ... and if you want to add a little taxation money to boot, well, usage could virtually disappear ... ...

We are making way too much of this. The Senate is useful and it does not need any "substantial" reform and certainly not abolition. (I have already mentioned the reason governments want Senate abolition by referring you to the 1919 fledgling political movement in Europe..look it up)... And it works pretty well because most Senators have loosened their ties to their original political masters, and actually do the "reviewing legislation" job that they SHOULD be doing. The greatest problems have occurred with Senators who were assigned.... not to be proper Senators.... but simply party hacks and bagmen. Weed them out and move on. Overall, it does a necessary and reasonable job. ...

Its easy to become energy "self-sufficient" or energy "independent". Simply quit doing "stuff", and let others do the polluting, etc. Energy consumption per capita in US/Canada, turned rather flat after that speech (from its previous exponential per capita growth). ...but you can guess what happened to in-country manufacturing, etc... vs offshore.

It will probably happen sooner or later. Financial Transaction Taxation is more equitable than Income taxation and may well replace it in time.... it is just difficult to implement, but evolving technologies will make it easier. And it does not have to be cashless to implement... you can still tax a withdrawal into cash, or a deposit from cash. ...

Considering that I have never BEEN banned, predicting a "next" time will be somewhat less than profitable. I am pretty sure that you are thinking of someone else.

It may be moot. But only because of the extensive video coverage. Absent that, would the witnesses be reliable enough to accurately count the shots and position the shooter? Also..."in this case"..... shouldn't EVERY case be treated with the utmost professionalism?

A year? How about a month? After all, the crime scene was not secured immediately and totally contaminated, so does not that always give the benefit of doubt to the accused?? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dsJWId4HU7I ...

I pretty sure that I do not have long to live (well, hopefully a couple of decades, maybe), but I don't think that I am "shortlived".... A buddy of yours, I presume???

I haven't read or seen either of those, but the plotlines seem correct

We should be hearing an apology from the Toronto Police soon.....

Yes, isn't it just too bad that we cannot treat "labour" the same as any other commodity? If we have too many potatoes, we let them rot in the fields. If we have too much oil, we let it sit in the ground. If we have too many cell phones, we dispose of them to the land-fill. Wouldn't it just be dandy if we could do the same with labour?

We should NOT abolish the senate. In another thread, I proposed an easy reformation of the senate that could be done in a matter of months without any constitutional haggle: simply force senators to renounce party affiliation and membership... and prohibit them from any fundraising, public appearances, etc., with any political party or elected member. (A few other minor things like term limits, etc., would be nice.) Then there is HISTORY. In still another thread, I put forth this simple challenge. Did anybody figure it out? quote: In 1919 a fledgling political movement published a short manifesto in a European newspaper. It proposed solutions for the four issues of the day: political, social, military, and financial. The "solutions" for the Political "problems" consisted of 5 very reasonable proposals, enumerated a) to e). Item c) was simply: "Abolish the Senate". I leave it to the readers to recall history and determine which political movement, and whose newspaper.... :unquote The senate may be expensive, inefficient, and a whole lot of other ills. But if we want some semblance of "democracy", it is still better than no senate at all. ...

Interesting. Because small-government, free market sort of conservatism is exactly what permits "sh*tting" in our neighbour's home without any immediate consequence.... but I digress: By virtue of the fact that we live, we have to sh*t somewhere. The trick is to reduce the sh*t to a bare minimum. And whatever is absolutely necessary, we clean up and reprocess it into something inert or something useful. The problem has been that we have been fed (and eagerly accept) the promise of "cheap". We buy cheap inferior products from offshore manufacturers, and we thrive on cheap oil. If anybody was to suggest that we REALLY build a "safe" pipeline that protects humanity, wildlife, environment...in other words, if we reduced the sh*t to a minimum...... if we actually funded an insurance plan fully which would allow complete clean up of any sh*t that did occur.... if we properly reclaimed the environment that the sh*t damaged..... if we did all that....well, then it would no longer be "cheap"... Hear the cries now when Oil at the refinery (after paying for all "safe and clean extraction, safe and clean transportation")...turns out to be $300 a barrel and not $100. Or when the Government needs 25 or 50c extra per litre to pay for the necessary research, regulation, inspection, infrastructure, etc... Ah, yes, hear the cries...... We (Canadians) don't do it because they (the rest of the human race) won't do it. So we accept a certain amount of sh*t as the cost of life. How much is too much? THAT is the argument. A meaningless argument, because there is no correct answer. So we reduce it to bare essentials. Do the people who want it built have more money and power than the people who do not want it built? Or vice versa. Damn the national requirements, damn the economic purpose, damn the environment,.... FACTS are irrelevant.... Money and power will get it built, or money and power will stop it. ....

meh... wind turbines are huge and boring. They are the Vic 20 or the Betamax of power generation. They will do for a while, but will they survive "the next big thing" whatever it might be.... Small economical nuclear, perhaps??

The Cellular operators in Canada seem to spend a lot of time on advertising and politics and lawyers and accountants and new ways to take our money.... ....and very little of it on solving the technical problems that actually result in better service. Somebody in this thread mentioned the inexpense of pay-as-you-go...., and somebody else mentioned big carriers piggy-backed on the locals. This very minute, there is a major city in Ontario of 100,000 plus population... where the following happens: I stand in the middle of the city with two cell phones, bought from and activitated by the same major carrier. Both are valid and paid up and have sufficient signal strength connectivity. One works, one does not.... For the one that does not, there is no option that you can buy to add on to MAKE it work. The difference??.... one is a pay-as-you-go (prepaid). And because of the ridiculous patchwork of infrastructure and carriers and plans, it turns out that this is one place where the major carrier IS piggy-backing on the smaller local carrier...And somehow, the major carrier's handling of prepaid pay-as-you-go is not compatible with the local infrastrucure. Nor is it likely to be, anytime soon. As an added insult, when you try to use the pay-as-you-go, you are told that "your service is temporarily interrupted"... and to please dial the support number... When you dial the support number... you guessed it.... you are told that "your service is temporarily interrrupted"... and to please dial the support number. Welcome to the 21st century. ...

Well, well, well... what goes around comes around... From the Calgary Herald: TransCanada CEO calls proposed east-west pipeline a 'historic day' for Canada I guess Pierre was just ahead of his time: ...as from http://sgnews.ca/2012/11/08/new-pipeline-directions/ " Politicians have also made a huge turnaround on this issue. In the 1980s, Alberta premier Peter Lougheed vigorously opposed shipping raw crude to refineries in Sarnia, as prime minister Pierre Trudeau envisioned, because it meant Alberta would also being shipping jobs out of the province. "

In 1919 a fledgling political movement published a short manifesto in a European newspaper. It proposed solutions for the four issues of the day: political, social, military, and financial. The "solutions" for the Political "problems" consisted of 5 very reasonable proposals, enumerated a) to e). Item c) was simply: "Abolish the Senate". I leave it to the readers to recall history and determine which political movement, and whose newspaper.... ....

Maybe. But it is surprising how people's loyalties can dwindle when there is nothing to be gained... like a cabinet post for example. They actually start to think for themselves and for the good of their "neighbours", ie: Canadians And in this day of social media and leaks, etc, "working behind closed doors" could prove very dangerous politically if it were to be found out that they were contravening rules. It won't be perfect... but it WILL improve things, and it can be done in a month.