G Huxley

By blackmailing the PLO to prevent them from seeking independence for the Palestinians. Keeping the people down. Makes you proud to be a Canadian doesn't it?

No we should stop trying to prevent Palestinian independence.

And using the money as blackmail against the PLO to stop them from pushing for independence. AKA neo-colonialism.

Derek L The hypocrisy is that to pay off the PLO to maintain order is acceptable to the neocon government, but to actually demand independence is unacceptable to same government. Talk about neo-colonialism.

Canada sold much of the rights to the tar sands to a totalitarian regime in China. Canada has no upper ground. Canada is simply trying to deny people their independence.

Unbelievable. How dare the Canadian Government threaten people who want their independence. Wilson's 14 Points and Roosevelt's Atlantic Charter both stated that people have the right to self-determination. The Canada government wants Canada in the mentality of a Middle Ages Feudal Crusader State. http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/national/Israel+urged+Canada+Palestinians+over+recognition/8636996/story.html

Segnosaur the book described why the cost of energy is the way it is including the costs that are airbrushed out of the picture by official sources like the department of energy who don't take into account things like nuclear waste disposal and storage in their figures. If you can't read that's not my problem. I quoted the text in full. So you don't have to track it down, unless you're disputing that I quoted it correctly in which case track it down, its not difficult to do.

Segnosaur don't complain that I source from a book that anyone can get from a library and then source from Wikipedia instead!!!!! If your local library system doesn't have the book. You can get it through inter library loan.

Bitumen is a term used for natural deposits of oil "tar" – such as at the La Brea Tar Pits. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tar http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Brea_Tar_Pits he La Brea Tar Pits (or Rancho La Brea Tar Pits) are a group of tar pits around which Hancock Park was formed, in urban Los Angeles. Asphaltum or tar (brea in Spanish) has seeped up from the ground in this area for tens of thousands of years. The tar is often covered with dust, leaves, or water. Asphaltum is bitumin and has been called such since Ancient times.

So they bought Nexen which controlled a large portion of CANADA's resources. Now they have the rights to it. So they aren't buying it from us anymore they already own a huge portion of the tar sands. Now its simply being sent off to China, and those profitting are the Chinese, not even Canadians. The only people who won out of this deal in Canada were a few rich traders. The rest of Canada loses. The Chinese did the same thing to Africa in the 20th century. They bought up all the local resources so that the local corrupt elites benefitting from the trades, now China owns much of the resources and the Africans get little in return for it. In fact the Chinese treat Africa somewhat as a colony. Selling Canada for scrap to totalitarian one party China is a crime no matter how badly you want to whitewash it. It is what it is the treason is done.

Probably not.

PIK the insane mining techniques for coal in Apallachia is very similar to tar sands mining. The India China angle doesn't have sway. We are giving away the tar sands to China (see Harper allowing Nexen one of the biggest tar sands companies to be sold off to China). The Northern Gateway project was designed to send tar sands oil to burned off in China with estimates of at least a thousand gallons of gas predicted to be spilled in B.C. waters each year (also why it didn't go through). Giving away our resources to China is traitorous. If we want to be turned into another Africa its a great way to go by the Quislings that make the Harper government and their backers making away like thieves off the transactions while Canada is sold for scrap. If you aren't embarrassed by that frankly you don't give a damn about the future of Canada.

Keepitsimple your own statements show the falseness of your conclusion. Only a small pinprick of the tar sands have been exploited yet. (700 sq k.) When they are fully exploited there's 142,000 square kilometers utterly devastated. To put that into context that's 40,000 square kilometers more than the face of the entire country of Bulgaria and between 4 and between 3 to 4 times the size of the entire country of Denmark. The only reason it hasn't been exploited much before is because mining the tar sands is so incredibly inefficient only peak oil and high enough oil prices can drive full exploitation, which is what is being banked on.

The tar sands are made of bitumen. Bitumen in ancient times was called asphalt and is still used interchangeably as asphalt today. If tar doesn't make asphalt what does? Tar sands is the correct term.

“But the analysts and salespeople championing nuclear power as a carbon fighter and natural-gas conserver generally forget to add a few critical caveats. For starters, nuclear power remains (the most expensive and captital-intensive fuel on the planet. Once bill as too cheap to meter, nuclear power remains too expensive to build. Since 2003, the cost of constructing a nuclear plant has increased by a rate of 15 percent a year. A 2009 study by the Vermont Law School found that recent cost projections are four times as high as those made a decade ago. Moreover, numerous studies have conluded that renewable energy and efficiency improvements cost but six cents per kilowatt hour, while electicity from nuclear power costs between twelve and twenty cents. The business community has never been fond of such highly centralized technology because it tends to behave like a Soviet commissar with little financial accountability. (Margaret Thatcher tried to privatize England’s nuclear power plants, but no entrepeneurs were dumb enough to volunteer for the money-losing opportunity.) Plagued by cost overruns and technological failures, public utilities served by nulear power carry some of the world’s highest debt loads. In fact, no nuclear power plant has been built in Canada on budget or without taxpayers’ money. Electricite de France, which receives 85 percent of its power from nuclear reactors, is among the most debt ridden companies in the world. So was Ontario Hydro, whose nuclear powered debts led to its dismantling into separate corporations in 1999.” Text quoted from Tar Sands: Dirty Oil and the Future of a Continent by Andrew Nikiforuk (2010) p. 150-1 ISBN:978-1-55365-555-8

The Tar Sands: Dirty Oil and the Future of a Continent by Andrew Nikoforuk. The tar sands in Alberta is perhaps the most environmentally destructive extraction technique on the planet. For hundreds of miles covering the areas of small countries the entire ground soil, earth, wetlands, ponds, forests, wildlife is being removed to get at the bituminous sand underneath. It is actually far worse than clear cutting. In clear cutting at least when you remove the trees, you still leave the forest floor and plant new trees in its place. In this technique even the forest floor is removed as well. http://www.amazon.com/dp/1553655559

Oil sands is a propagandistic misnomer. It isn't oil there it is bitumen. Since Bitumen was originally called asphalt, tar sands is accurate.

Hard to explain, but basically when I smoke cannabis (not very often) I feel happy, humorous, laughing after smoking, buzzed, peaceful and languid. I think languid would be the best descriptor.

Anybody who calls cannabis an 'extreme high,' has never smoked cannabis.

Well put.

Its easy to forget we're only one species on the planet... http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/story/2013/06/19/pol-one-in-eight-birds-threatened-with-extinction.html?cmp=rss

Yet still possible. Why?

Yes we should all adulate and grovel before our dear leader. Our dear leader who never sought power for himself. He selflessly sacrificed everything by being in charge because he's just such a swell guy. - Says in monotone Zombie Voice.

“At last, the edifice of drugs prohibition is starting to crumble,” http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2013/jun/14/edifice-drugs-prohibition-crumbling

I already said I don't trust anyone operating machinery under the influence of anything including marijuana. Why ask me again? Give me second hand cannabis smoke any day. I'd much prefer that to 2nd hand tobacco smoke. Yeah I agree the two should be done simultaneously. Legalize while banning it for using heavy machinery, surgery etc. you get the idea. They kill a holocaust of people every year. And I've never met a responsible person drunk. But I have been attacked by many drunk people, and had a friend who was stabbed to death by a drunk. Tobacco yes, alcohol no.