Bob

I understand that, but don't you think the actions of prisoners and their lawyers speak for themselves? I'd wager most prisoners sentenced to death do all they can to stay alive, starting from the moment they make their pleas.

M. Dancer made an obvious point. He couldn't be clearer. Your replies illustrate you didn't understand what he was getting at.

You like the idea of the the most reprehensible criminals being up for parole in 25 years (or less) after being sentenced to life imprisonment?

You've missed the point...

Exactly. Rest assured, most prisoners do what they can to stay alive and look for ways out.

So you're saying the opinions of Canadians change depending on the language used in the poll? That's unsurprising, but still disappointing.

Isn't the problem in Canada that "life imprisonment" still includes the possibility of parole after some years, depending on the crime? I think Canadian justice, at its most severe, will give someone life imprisonment with the possibility of parole after 25 years... and often parole eligibility is much sooner. This is a big problem. Certainly Milgaard and other wrongful convictions are red herrings given massive improvements in investigative methods over the years. Moreover, we could attach special conditions for the implementation of capital punishment ensuring its safety.

I certainly support the use of capital punishment for the most heinous of criminals, but I was always under the impression that the majority of Canadian oppose it strongly.

Who suggested that Harper has united the country?

I understand, I just wanted to clarify for others.

The dictionary is wrong. The term is only disparaging if said disparagingly. Is "white people" disparaging? Obviously not. But if I said something like, "...look at them dumb white folks, holdin' down the black man!", it'd come across in a different light. That's the point I was trying to make with my earlier example of a disparaging way to use the term "Goy" or "Goyim". It isn't inherently disparaging. Trust me, I know what the word means.

How about, "Haha, look at those dumb goyim paying full-price!"?

I don't know what Uber Alles Cabal means, nor do I care. For some reason you seem to say that every time you direct a post at me. You also seem to think it's funny to continue referring to Israel as "pile of rocks". Lastly, the term "Goyim" isn't a pejorative terms. Literally, it is the plural of "Goy", which means "nation". It's just a term for non-Jews, and I'm not using it in a disparaging manner. You should check your hypersensitivity at the door, it doesn't look good on you.

Here's an interesting video on related subjects, it's a lecture from Eliot Spitzer. There's also some Q&A at the end. Here's another interesting and related video with Joseph Stiglitz.

Are you serious?

I won't disagree with you, I think the concept of race is largely useless. As I said, there are some genetic commonalities among certain groups - this may or may be important depending on what we're trying to examine. In the big scheme of things, however, it's unimportant... especially considering the concept of Jewish identity.

I asked you two specific and simple questions a few days ago. You are now responding to me with tangents on another issue entirely. Bud, having a conversation with you is a waste of time - although I should've realized this instantly.

Race isn't entirely a social construct. There are groups of people with genetic commonalities. The importance of these genetic commonalities is of course disputable. Consider, for example, that some groups of people are more prone to certain illnesses, and other groups of people are more resistant to those illnesses. There's some utility in examining genetic trends among some groups. The concept of race has limitations... but it also has utility in some instances.

I agree with everything you've said. I want to see more, but we have to recognize that Harper isn't a strong leader and cannot sway the undecided to his corner. That's why he can't be more bold without greatly offending the entrenched leftist establishment of Canada. It's really too bad we can't get a stronger leader in the conservative camp.

Why are you refusing to answer simple questions? Please define "internationally recognized borders", and then tell me why this is the ideal we should work towards. You're evading simple questions. Let's get to core issues and stop wasting time with tangents. I won't even waste time addressing your rhetoric on housing demolitions. You don't know the first thing about regulations in Jerusalem with respect to construction. Please answer these two simple questions and stop dodging.

Apparently we're not distinct enough. Apparently we're just like everyone else, with small modifications. Therefore, according to TrueMetis and others like him, we should just assimilate into our host societies. We can only be singled out as different when we're put into death camps. That's when we are allowed to be distinguished as different.

You really think Israel doesn't evoke revulsion in its enemies? You think people obsess over Israel because they don't care about Israel? How can you not realize that the Israel-Ara conflict is one of the most, if not THE most, passionately fought controversies today? One more thing, certainly nobody can dispute an article you read advocating a particular point-of-view. If there's an article written stating a particular opinion, that opinion is indisputable.

Maybe I'm too cynical, but I feel this tension is true on most issues. Perhaps I focus too much on the most passionate vitriol from all sides, but I get the impression that the leftist establishment will oppose virtually anything from the Harper camp simply because it is coming from the Conservative Party. I certainly agree with you with regards to removing bad elements from our society that arrive here through immigration. We need to be more stringent and tough about demanding that immigrants adhere to basic core values. Can you imagine the outrage that would come from the left if we began to question would-be Muslim immigrants about their perspectives of, for example, honour-killings or women's rights?

You think I'm overstating how much time I've spent on these issues? You think I'm lying or misrepresenting myself? You think the amount of time and energy you've invested in learning about these issues is comparable to mine?

I've spent much, much, much more time examining and studying Israel's critics than you have. I read their websites, I've been to their demonstrations, I've attended their lectures, I've read their op-eds, I've talked to them in the streets. I know what most of them are about. As can be seen with TrueMetis, dig a little beneath the surface of what at first seems like a superficial animosity towards Israel, and you'll often reveal anti-Zionist and anti-Semitic leanings. See for yourself, go to the thread about Palestinians preferring Israeli citizenship over citizenship in a possible future state of their own, and read TrueMetis' comments. You think he is an exception? You think his perspective is rare? He's the typical anti-Israeli antagonist. Ask fundamental and basic questions, and the anti-Semitism quickly reveals itself.