B. Max

We don't have to assume anything. Iran created and controls Hezbollah. They are only rational if you consider a nation of thugs who are a state sponsor of terrorism to be rational. Actually using nukes would not necessarily result in their destruction. The appeaser king, Clinton, changed American policy. The change stated that America would absorb a first nuke strike. What that means I don't know exactly. Does it mean one nuke, or does it mean ten at once. In the world of leftist appeaser fuzz it is at the very least scary.

Whatever, you can go on appeasing these thugs all you want but it looks like those who know better are at least getting ready to be in position to kick some Iranian butt. http://www.lookoutnewspaper.com/archive/20060911/index.shtml http://www.navy.forces.gc.ca/ottawa/about/...asp?category=87

The marine barracks in Lebanon. But you can take your pick from a long list after that.

To an appeaser with his head stuck in the sand that would be impossible. Yes Iran created Hezbollah. http://www.free-lebanon.com/LFPNews/2006/J...y19/july19.html http://www.michnews.com/artman/publish/article_14252.shtml http://www.nationalreview.com/script/print...00405100900.asp

Sounds like an appeasers last words. Iran was behind the latest war with Israel and in fact created Hezbollah and continues to fund and arm them. Iran and Syria are largely behind the continuing fighting in Iraq. Iran is in bed with North Korea in developing nukes and have been reportedly been seen with North Korea test firing missiles from container ships. Yeah they are all just a bunch of misunderstood thugs.

That's funny when you consider since Person's time the left has vested the countries sovereignty at the UN. A leftist cesspool of corruption from they get their marching orders which can easily be demonstrate by simpily looking at all the nonsense they've signed onto.

He could be the Garth Vader of the evil watermelon empire.

It's just one example of many on Daly's work. If you want to change the topic say so.

You're implying all non-Quebec, non-Aboriginal Canadians belong to the United Empire Loyalists/British nation, which is dead wrong. Nope, never implied that. I implied the English defeated the french as a response to this... : Sure: why don't you come up with your own distinct language, customs, cultural traditions, etc. Sure: why don't you come up with your own distinct language, customs, cultural traditions, etc.

Ok then, it's a fraud.

I'm a western Canadian Anglophone. yet I have no connection at all with the nation you're referring to. So what.

Sure: why don't you come up with your own distinct language, customs, cultural traditions, etc. Actually we did, and they defeated the french. The entire Quebec problem from the beginning has been an attempt to gain through the ballot box what they were unable to achieve on the battle field.

Sit down and be quiet. Your only role in all of this is to foot the bill for all of it.

Where did I say that.

We're not talking about sea levels. How ever, no study yet can show CO2 has contributed any significant amount to global warming or that any global warming is not natural. That theory is based on the assumption that it does, and uses computer models to try and prove it. Computer models that can't be made to match the known historical temp. records using the CO2 assumption. The fact remains that most global warming took place before 1940 and from then to 1980 a cooling then a slight increase and then cooling and then a constant level trend.

What they don't tell you is that since 79 the satellite data has matched the US historical temeperture records. The diffence / correction they are talking about are the unreliable world historical records. The US records are considered accurate where the others are not. Below are the world temp. records, the satellite records, and the US temp. records. http://www.john-daly.com/giss2000.gif http://www.john-daly.com/nasa.gif Global trend per decade = +0.128°C, (Northern Hemisphere = +0.205°C, Southern Hemisphere = +0.050°C. ) August 2006 Global = 0.239°C, (Northern Hemisphere = 0.414°C, Southern Hemisphere = 0.064°C.) http://www.john-daly.com/usa-1999.gif

That won't sit well in the west and especially in Alberta. It's about the most ridiculous thing I've heard of. No doubt Quebec will still expect to bleed the rest of the country for billions. It should be coming completely clear to all Albertans and I think it is, that symbolically keeping the country together at all costs is simply not worth it. More than ever Alberta needs a strong leader like Ted Morton not another Ottawa song and dance man. http://www.canada.com/topics/news/national...1f4&rfp=dta

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lindzen Wrong, you obviously never read it. There is no faulty data in historical temperature records. Historical temperature records don't change. What is faulty are the phony computer models. There is also no proof of C02 man made temperature increase.

Economic treason laws, huh? What sort of penalty do you get? Yeah, you is why we economic treason. duh. What perhaps needs to be floated is the idea of criminal charges against those who purposely and dishonestly downplay the threat of Global Warming. That's like emerging from a burning basement and telling people the fire is out. Those who spew the man made global warming nonsense when there is no proof need to be put on trail. Now we have the eco nazi's attempting to silence free speech. http://www.junkscience.com/Skeptics_on_trial.htm

heh Perhaps they'll go after Garth Turner for that. Yeah that watermelon would be a candidate.

Economic treason laws, huh? What sort of penalty do you get? A minimum of ten years.

Mr. Lindzen is paid by the oil and gas industry. The report he wrote prior to 2001 had faulty data. The new data reported warming whereas the original data did not. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lindzen Well you don't know who he's paid by. Even if he was so what. It is the oil industry that gives us our standard of living and drives the economy. You are an example of why we economic treason laws.

Retired people don't produce work that refutes what you say. Are you opposed to actual studies done for Canadians to see if it is actually a problem? I'd welcome studies presented on the subject. I haven't actually seen any peer reviewed work of Friends of Science that calls into question the other work that has been done out there. I will believe friends of science and the national academy of science who claim that the media even misrepresented their news release. http://opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=95000606

Just because they are retired doesn't mean anything. So what. They can can still look at the evidence, and have, and concluded as they say. There is no evidence for man made global warming. As the letter stated they are either climate scientists or in related fields. My guess is if they haven't heard of these people they haven't done much work in the the field themselves. The entire global warming CO2 thing is based entirely on computer models that have been proven to be faulty.

They don't have credibilty because they are not scientists. Economists? Agronomists? Ok who is all on the list.