Shwa

I am not understanding you here. The point is not to create an economy idependent of foreign food imports, but to focus more on locally grown food and use those local systems in disaster planning. Could you expand on 'food insurance?'

Actually that is an interesting point. Of the top 10 countries of US immigrants, Canada sits 9th, a few percentage points ahead of Korea, which lumps Canada in with Mexico, China, Phillipines, India, Vietnam, Cuba, El Salvador and the Domminican Republic. Must be the cold. Eh?

I think it might be more apt to say, why haven't you seen homeless or begging Somalis? I think your experience and interaction with beggars and the homeless might be limited to the narrow scope of public places you are using for your observations. There could be Somali or Chinese beggars, etc. in their communities that are not visible to you for plenty of reasons including the method of their begging and homelessness.

"Smear attempt?" Pfffff, hardly. Let's read the defintion again, of those who would call Stalin and Casto dictators: In other words if you label them dictators you are of one of two camps: socialist or everyone else. Sounds like you are firmly in the 'everyone else' camp.

Ha! I hardly think so... In addition to voting, Con, Lib & NDP, I believe I might have voted for the Rhinoceros Party at least once, thereby extending the spectrum of craziness and place me more centrist that you. I say "I might have" because I was really high during that period and can't remember too many elections. But I know I wanted to, which is just as good as an actual vote anyways, right? The Rhinos 1979 Energy plank: "Building one nuclear power plant per household, including monthly distributions of lead underwear to Canadians. Indoor lighting would then be provided by radioactive citizens." Ya had to love the Rhinos!

An interesting video for sure, by a well spoken person who obviously has experience in the field - it seems more oriented towards addiction case workers than actual addicts. However, I find his whole premise to be very similar to what one might find in Narcotics Anonymous or Alcoholics Anonymous programs where the drug or drink is considered a symptom of the problem, but not the actual problem itself.

You are to blame and you are truly responsible for your own actions unless you have extenuating grounds or are going for the insanity plea. All you're known as is a screen name on an Internet forum which makes it diffcult to determine your actual gender. So the manhood-insult plea is not really extenuating... One would think that 3 years and some 10k posts later, you would know the rules by now Oleg. Suck it up and come back in two weeks having learned the lesson.

Humour me Nicky: which camp do you fall in to, since you called them dictators? So you are either a part of the socialist movement, or part of everyone else. Which one is it Nicky?

An interesting article from the Star: An Indian Industry has emerged amid the wreckage of many Canadian reserves A management by consultant approach: I have no doubt that many of those consultants, lawyers and bureaucrats are themselves Natives or have some FN community connections. But if not management by consultant, then what are some of the alternatives? Rotting First Nation, wealthy chief Of course, anyone familiar with the Indian Industry, will recognize such disparities as nothing new.

Why Argus, was the phrase "powerless white guy" a little too politically incorrect for you and now I must be the bigot? Or was it a simple demonstration of how predictable you have become? No doubt that you have a firm belief in peace, order and good government, but it is your utter distaste for the dirty work to get there that I find fascinating. And I get the sense of that dilemma of yours Argus: if anything has been demonstrated it is how women, aboriginals and immigrants have thoroughly emasculated you over the years. Who knows - maybe your emasculation is just the ticket. Now you can qualify for some of those equity programs you are always carrying on about. You know, the ones "peace, order and good government" created?

I'm sorry Argus, did you suddenly become a forum mod? I mustn't have seen the memo. Sounds like they turned you into a powerless white guy. Or were you actually powerless before the stand-off? And yet, here we are. So who knows Canadian history and law better than you? It would appear some old gramma clan mothers on the Six Nations reserve have a little more insight than the sum total of all your blathering.

LOL, you are taking Argus' bait there MG? I don't think "...whitey completely destroyed their way of life..." is quite accurate though, even with some of the devastation that has befallen most FN communities. The real bona fide cultural failure, when it comes to discussing Canada's Aboriginal people, is the policy of institutionalized assimilation. Despite the best efforts of goverment, through rule of law or rule or arms, is that many Aboriginal cultures - including the Metis and Inuit, are moving forward still. A really good read is John Ralson Saul's "The Metis Nation." His clear and concise use of Canadian history puts master-baiters to shame.

Really? You mean all those beggars haven't immigrated to Canada yet? Because to some posters here, it seems that the only thing we are bringing in are other country's beggars. And one would think that China is a country full of desperate beggars since most of them live an unpleasant life in that failed culture over there. Maybe the lack of Chinese beggars in Canadian streets is somehow tied into the quality of Chinese immigrant to Canada? Or maybe it is just a coincidence. Someone will have to do a study...

I would have guessed an epic battle between the forces of good and evil on some dusty plain in the middle east, but these scenarios are much cooler!

You're asking me or is that simply a rhetorical question? One would think that you would be able to supply your own answer, at least, by now.

Let's hope - you might even be able to start a true cottage industry and plan to stay there year round.

Too expensive for whom?

First page, 4th post. Do you have something you want to add or discuss about this? I wasn't necessarily attributing the view to you specifically, but as an idea that appears to come up often. Thanks for the personal evaluation Pliny, it really means alot, especially coming from you. Allow me to offer the same kindness in return, but using only one word to evaluate you: egotist.

Well, pull out that Last Spike and stab the CBC... I think the government has a fundamental responsibility in the development of nationwide infrastructure and this includes communications infrastructure. Whether they build it themselves and then operate as a crown corporation or they subsidize the building of it, it's their call. Feel the love. One thing to keep in mind is that government services and opportunity are accessed through the Internet. If you can access your EI claim or get a fishing licence on the net in Toronto, why not 2 hours north of Marmora? The upside is that a very healthy broadband infrastructure can spur economic growth in our beloved hinterlands and that is always a good thing.

One wonders how your observations would change if access to, or existence of, subsidized housing were drastically reduced. Keeping in mind that a sense of familiarity with the environment might make many homeless people more comfortable with the idea than those who are not as familiar with the environment. But give them time. I suspect these are your observations without actually digging deeper into that fourth world. You might be surprised to note the variation of peoples that are either homeless and out of sight, or on the brink of being homeless. Is being born with fetal alcohol spectrum disorder a choice? How about medical disabilities, mental illness, domestic violence? Does the wife choose to be beaten up by her abusive husband? I agree that there are poor choices involved - alcoholism and drug abuse - and even that some people choose to live on the street for one reason or another. But let's not make the very serious mistake of lumping in all the homeless into some sort of easy-peasy categories that one speculates by casual observation. It could you you have "never seen" because one might not might be as visible as the other. For example, if the "some white kid" were to go to school, live in a shelter, and basically not sit ont he corner with the sign, he would be considered homeless. ----- Would you elaborate on this a little more please? Of course, casual observations are one thing, but it seems that you have something to contrast like-observations. Again, there is the 'choice' factor to reconsider as well as they 'visibility' factor. But this is an interesting observation about cultural differences.

David Scenna, you dirty dog you! Hookers and Booze: Your tax dollars at work Gobsmackingly wonderful story about a visionary man, his dream and the people who pay for it. None of whom will likely receive any sort of real punishment. (except the tax payers!) Although from the looks of some of Scenna's credit card bills, he might have already received the 'discipline.'

1. Well, are you referring to maternity benefits or family allowances and tax breaks on household income and such as being an undesired thing? 2. Yeah I can see that. It is an interesting field of study though, more anthropology than any sort of workable ideology I think. 1. This excludes the change in divorce and property laws too I assume? 2. Mallick's words here is the private thoughts of someone enraged. Come now, how often do you share your inner thoughts and secrets? To me, I don't see anything in those opening passages to be anything more than the same internal dialogue that Atwood subjects Offred to. But again, this is no different that your private thoughts about some other group - an ethic or religious group or whatnot. I wouldn't hold these opening thoughts to Mallick simply because they are a literary device used to contrast her public thoughts through the use of reason to resolve the conflicts between the private and the public. By the end of the article, her private thoughts have been modified by her experiences. LOL, no I don't want to debate you on your choice of adjectives, although I was certainly hoping you would have debated me on mine a week ago. No, I am more interested in why you chose that word when I didn't hear her voice that way at all, even in the opening paragraphs. I am not a big reader of Heather Mallick, but I have read enough I think, to get her style. When I read her stuff I don't associate her narrative construction with shrieking or anything like that, so I am curious as to why you do. For instance - a fair question I think - when you read some of the more radical feminist stuff, do you hear their voices as shrieky or shrill, etc?

Gay marriage has been dealth with and the Sharia has disappeared. Unless you have some major breaking news about Sharia law in Canada. Do you?

And they're mostly agreeable good ones too! During the citizenship ceremony - I have witnessed quite a few, new citizens have to recite this pledge (they can swear it on their own holy book if they want): This is a bit contradictory though. Later on you say that Canada is "...easily one of the greatest countries/societies in the history of human civilization..." Well, this greatest includes Quebec and all the problems associated with "deep-seated multiculturalism" does in not? The problem - as I see it - is that there seems to be this attitude of 'if Quebec, why not us?' or 'if the Aboriginals, why not us?' Of course this attitude completely ignores history and our Constitution. I would agree that Canadian history and law should be pushed as much as possible in mainstream Canadian education and there needs to be standards around this aspect of education similar to reading, writing and math. I don't think that Canada's culture is largely defined as "being all cultures" but more about accepting of other cultures to the degrees in which they don't conflict with Canadian values. Canadians are pretty open-minded. This kind of reminds me of the Jesus-was-a Jew response to Christians who forget or ignore facts when criticising Judaism. Canada's fundamental openness to other cultures is not the result of some special ethnic interest groups that have recently arrived here. It is a legacy from our ancestors, our grandparents and all those people who foughts in wars to protect it. Well the allegiance thing has already been covered and I am a fence sitter on dual-citizenship. Unless there are long standing tradition or law, I think dual citizenship shouldn't be required. But... we live in a very international community where moving back and forth is a matter of a few hundred dollars and a few hours. Agreed. Not embracing this fact would approach a conflict with Canadian values. But does it? People should not confuse bitching as a sign that one is not enthusiastic about their country. Two points here - the reduction of the 'in-between' status designation and citizenship. Poop or get off the pot. Tougher prison sentences should include no special protection when in the can - that is, they go into the general population. The Toronto 18 might learn not confuse robbing a bank with contempt for one's country. Pretty much agree with you here. History should be used as a way of teaching language to new Canadians for example.

Really? Did a gang of big, bad Indian thugs march into the streets of Caledonia and start indiscriminatingly beating the poor, powerless townspeople up? Come on now. A couple of noses got poppped. There is worse violence over a couple weekends at the local cowboy bar for gawdsakes. What you are doing is the classic minimizing/maximizing routine. The town - represented by their elected officials - said nothing basically giving the council and the developer implicit approval to do what they wanted to do. Sure, I get ya. Protester tactics. Never mind the years of "tactics" used by the town and the developers, that doesn't enter into the debate once somebody gets popped in the yap right?