Tawasakm

For interest here is an automatic translation. Note the poor strructure. "I was much apprehension and afraid the other day - one should meet a catch which made a assassination at the 17 years age and was punished with the life with the prison. From there, I shared some information it with given with his sight on the system of prison and we answered. It wanted that us for ourself to ask quéstions how the company should punish people who have committed crimes, plus violent one. It council which the system of the prison does not function. Unfolding of the man: Born in the years 1960. Its environment was not amicable and it was frequently beaten. At the 14 years age, it left its house and was put in the Company Of aidance Children, and I suppose that there is verity in the stories we hear these young children, it left on the streets by selling drugs and using them. After quelquetemps, it is in the facility of detention for the young people. It ensured us that now it réflèté that it confused and was lost, and in the majority way, annoyed. One day, somebody was right in his line of rage, which it killed the man by knife. According to, it was punished with the life with the prison. Life of the prison: Note: I will deceive the word: System There are malicious criminals in the system of the prison. Like a teenager, you must adopt to survive a system of maximum safety. The moment you arrive in the system, you is in battaile: firstly for your city, following, for your after-life you have. For this reason, it was transferré with 5 various systems of prison. It was parollé after 13 years. In the system of the prison, you learn several ways of surviving and you enforce your emotions. Nevertheless, he was the ravageux man and at the date of the word, more annoyed. He has returned to drugs and for one year, income with system of the prison still, for 7 years more. Transformation Personnel: He took too many drugs in the prison and decided he needs to transform and become a man more conçernant. That wants to say, to handle against these conditions established in the prison. Because it was in the system of the front prison, and now it wants to change, it felt that it was not in agreement with the group of the prisoner, not which it can agree with the guardes. It is now difficult A to adjust with the Community life, the things which one finds easy to make, it must learn at this age. It is on intensive control by the boarde of parôle. From there, some points I would like to mention: Anyway some of the items I wanted to take up: - live prison is where poor people - middle class white people are not in the prison - many people who federal are serving time should not Be in the prison system like has petty theft gold minor offence. - Men are mostly found in prison - People tightens to get worst with the prison system - He sees the problem of crimes have society' S breakdown - Society C not know butt crimes and hate those who made it - public Governments respond to crys to punish and revenge criminals - Then has good business man says why pay so much money to keep criminals in prison. - bring back the death penalty It council the system of the prison ridges of malicious people. There is quelquechose appellé the personelle responsibility that the-ones in the prison should use in retrourne to be imprisoned for several years. Look at it like that, people who are in the system of prison for the life, have anything to lose. If they commitent viscieux crimes, to give another sentence for life is not effective. The systems of prison uses tests of batteries to learn how to control yourself. Each consecutive test that you passes, you is given a star. It is some bureaucrocies systematic you are given who do not worry for the responsibility. During the parôle, the system hopes that you silks free except it can put all kinds of banners and restrictions which makes it impossible to survive. Restorative justice It spoke about the restorative justice which quéstionne how that to use the vouloirs what passed. Of the person who A committed the crime to reçevoir the responsibility and the system to be supportif with the victims. However, there is not a system places from there to be recognized for the redemption. If you committed the crime, you are guaranti with consèquences negative. The system of prison is structured which exercise power in ways intesifié and deliberated. There is a separation of they with us. It says the punishment and retribution déhumanisé populates it which A already was déhumanisé. He says punishment and retribution dehumanised people who cuts been already dehumanised. What it suggests is a program to recognize the potential and value of a person which helps has restorer quelquechose lost like humanity. What He is suggesting is has program to recognise potential and worth of has person to help restore something lost like humanity. In what you do think?" Translation by Google Language Tools.

The logic of posting here in French (or a language other then English) always escapes me. You know everybody who posts here is fluent in English but you don't know that everybody is fluent in French. I'll go translate this to read it shall I?

Pocket Rocket, May I reiterate my earlier suggestion that we stop feeding the trolls. Especially those that are using more then one name to push the same tripe and/or having conversations with themselves in the one thread. Trolls do not deserve a response nor do they deserve your time in responding,

I Miss Trudeau Do you really believe that everything that Albertans identify themselves to be is only to deny Canadian identity? Surely there is alot more to it then that. I will also note that your premise is one I often read in connection to Canada - that Canada is a part of the US and their identity is nothing but a denial of that. That premise holds no water for me when associated to either Canada or Alberta - although I admit I know alot less about each then those who are native. Is this a case of binocular vision? Are you focusing one part of the Albertan identity to the exclusion of the rest? Michael Hardner, You responded to the entire thread and didn't quote me! My oversized ego has been severely punctured and is bleeding arrogance all over my floor.

I have to attempt to say something on topic here so that I can then make an off topic observation. RB, I'm sure that the market and society are influenced in part by stereotyped gender distinctions etc. I very much doubt they are the universal, overiding, dominating, conspiratorial factors which you believe them to be. Caesar, you appear to be knowledgable on this particular subject so I thankyou for sharing the information. In my day to day thoughts and musings it had never even occured to me that a universal clothes press may not be possible for women nor was I aware of all those potential difficulties. Thanks again. Now for my off topic comment. Thelonius, I love that signature!

Making posts on this discussion forum is not analagous to casting a vote since this is not a democracy. Some forums are run that way and that is fine. However this forum is not. Therefore I hold to what I said - if you don't follow the rules and guidelines of the forum then you do risk being banned and a part of those rules are to back up factual claims with reference to sources. This is not in the nature of a personal attack so don't misunderstand what I was saying the first instance.

I thoroughly enjoyed Farscape - at least that which I managed to catch. I also find the remake of Battlestar Galactica to be a good view. If you want to count Futurama as sci fi thats gotta count also On the topic of sci fi series my brother recently told me that the BBC is now producing new episodes of Dr Who oriented toward a more adult audience. That could also be quite interesting.

If worst comes to worst you can sacrifice a sock in an emergency.

The pages are far too thin to use as toilet paper.

Well culture seems to mean alot of different things to alot of different people. It is difficult to debate without some accepted definition. I suggest everybody may wish to debate around this definition. If only for the sake of simplicity. Also in regards to the points on Australian geography. I think Kimmy is correct in concluding that that is not as important as other factors. I agree that Canada is more diverse. Australia does not include within its borders any subsect with a different official language and a distinct culture (notwithstanding Aboriginal people). Additionally, as both Kimmy and I have pointed out, Australia is the only nation on this continent. We are isolated from our neighbours. Although they aren't all muslim as Kimmy suggests - New Zealand is not to name one. Canada, on the other hand, shares an immediate border with a super power. From my perspective this greatly influences many Canadian issues and perpectives. I've seen many arguments about the 'threat' of US culture coming to dominate Canadian culture. I believe this view, of seeing other identities as a 'threat' to national identity and sovereignty is important. Which I will get into more in a few moments. It is also true that a very good portion of our population is spread along the east coast. I am unable to compare to Canada though since I have no real idea of population distributions there. I do know that Perth (my home) is considered to be the most isolated city in the world. What interests me in this thread is that there seems to be almost a moral tone to much of the debate. There almost seems to be an argument that it is wrong to have an 'Albertan identity' because it takes away from the 'Canadian identity'. It is interesting to me that the one appears to threaten the other. This would imply to me that the Canadian identity is weak. This, I believe, is influencing the debate. It seems that a defence of national identity means denying Albertan identity. Consequently the debate does not seem to be centring around the concept of identity but rather around the apparent need for national cohesion. The one concept is hijacking the other. Basically what I'm attempting to suggest is that if all the respondents debate the issue of identity for a time without reference to national cohesion there may be more insights gained. And after that is done perhaps some follow up questions. Should debating the issue of a provincial identity even require a defence of national identity? What are the implications?

It is against the site rules to attack a member. Rather it is intended that members attack arguments. I, for one, would appreciate it if you attacked only the argument not the person.

Dear Theloniusfleabag, I never imagined for a moment that you were deliberately attempting to misrepresent me. I just thought the quote and comment could be misunderstood. Thankyou for altering it and for the apology (which I'm sure isn't necessary). I should thank you also for bringing the issue of feeding trolls to peoples attention.

Well I'd first need to research Canadian geography otherwise I cannot draw a comparison. If I can find the time I will.

Just so everybody is clear - the quote which thelonius uses was in reference specifically to paulpaul and nobody else. I certainly wasn't making any comment about MS. I'm sure that anybody who read the original post knows that but it occured to me that as a quote here it could be misunderstood. Just thought I would make that clear.

I suggest that everybody stop feeding the troll. We've all being doing that far too much.

Caesar has every right to ask other posters to back up their claims. Its not a question of right or wrong its a question of providing the necessary information to support a position.

Streamlining government is like the search for the holy grail. After all the struggles, quests and fights you still end up with nothing that you didn't have before. Perhaps I'm too cynical... But I believe you are correct in what you are saying. Government should follow simple lines which are easy to trace and therefore simple to evaluate. More later.

You stand on your left foot and be sure that all your toes are pointing south. It is important that you complete this task as soon as possible so that you can escape the influence of the Mind Beams. Then you can become 'educated' as to what has really been going on. In the meanwhile you can get around this problem by milking a goat at midnight and coating your current tin foil hat with that product at precisely nine am using two goose feathers which have been boiled in cat fat. Its the only way.

Yes, but are you wearing your tin foil hat? If you aren't then I can't trust you because the Illuminati are controlling you with their Mind Beams. It would be very silly of me to trust an Illuminati automaton. Please remember when you make your tinfoil hat to do it standing on one foot while facing the planet Pluto on the summer solstice balanced on the tip of a pyramid - this will maximise the effects.

Isn't that what we commonly call the education system? Meaning that you want to introduce more thorough models of critical thinking into the education system?

How true. There are no perfect answers. We can only aim for the best possible answer and accept the consequences - both good and bad.

Although its spelt wrong I am honoured that my name is in there. Thankyou August. Perhaps I should attempt to contribute more regularly.

My oustiders point of view is that Canadas identity is very fragmented. We have a great deal of state rivalry in Australia but almost everybody subscribes to a strong national identity. Your questions intrigue me Kimmy. Why is it that some nations can have distinct internal identities and rivalry while retaining a strong unified national identity? Why is it that others can't? Perhaps the starting point may be to look at what the differences are between Canada and Australia. Are there distinct differences which would lead to a different appreciation of identity? I haven't thought this through alot but I'll throw out of a few initial ideas. Australia is united by its sense of pride. Most people are proud of Aus, what it stands for and what it has achieved. You could say people are proud of the Aussie spirit. We are also the only nation existing on the continent which I suppose reduces outside influence from different cultures. It seems to me that Canada has opposing cultures within its own borders and there is the powerful influence of the US on the same continent. Additionally, and I may be mistaken, Canada may not seem to have the same pride. Alot of what I read from Canadians as it relates to pride in country is in the past tense and not really current (say within the last decade perhaps). Us Aussies are still congratulating ourselves on the Sydney Olympics. I think that people here (in Aus) also believe that Aus is growing in prosperity, power and influence. If I interpret things correctly it seems that many Canadians believe they are diminishing in those areas. So if there is a loss or reduction of identification to a national identiy it may be, in part, based on a perception of the success of that nation. Summing up I suppose I am saying that Canadians may feel greater differences within their own nation, be affected more by neighbouring culture, have some sense of a diminishing influence and less pride in contemporary (not past) achievements. Now I'm not sure that this is all true and I'm just coming up with these off the top of my head. What does everybody else think? Do you think these factors are influencing the Canadian sense of national identity? By which I mean are these factors reducing identification with a national identity while reinforcing the strength of a provincial identity?

As I recall Greg used an administration option which meant that he had to read and approve MS's posts before they could be posted. Therefore there would have been a dialogue concerning then content of MS posts and interpretation over the contents. We just didn't see that dialogue.

RB please don't take this as an insult. I think you are stuck in the past. The above paragraphs make me think of the middle ages. These days there are still men who will have mistresses but while some portions of the population may find this acceptable I do not believe that most would. There are plenty of women who engage in infidelity also. The male 'image' is in a state of evolution. Male roles are in a state of evolution. This is, as I see it, a direct result of the change of womens traditional roles. It is a dynamic relationship - a shift in one will lead to a shift in the other. I believe your view of men is stuck in the past and, additionally, appears to place emphasis on a few specific areas. Apart from all that what is your answer anyway? What is the deviance that men are permitted that men are not? If I interpret your answer then its the 'deviance' to have non-typical sexual relationships - in your example it would be for man to be a virgin at 29. The 'deviance' for women would be to have sex with more then once man. So you postulate that men are allowed that 'deviance' from sexual normality and women aren't because the reaction to the woman would be more negative. Well in the first place I don't even see the behaviours as being directly comparable. I think if you want to draw a comparison you should compare likes - what are the comparable reaction to 29 year old virgins of both genders or what is the comparable reaction to an individuals of both genders that has sex with more then one partner at a time? Secondly I don't personally see a virgin as being guilty of 'deviance' by virtue of being a virgin. I'm also not sure that multiple partners would be considered 'deviance' particular if it exists outside a commitment to monogamy. Thirdly I would like to know, given that this is your answer, why it is that you couldn't just say so in the first place? You obviously don't know the women I know - who are as confident and proactive as men are. Your view of men and women seems so... stereotyped. I would also like to make the point that I do not use my 'tools' to dominate women. I like to leave my toolbox in the garage...