B. Max

As if the white man always had a Safeway store on every corner.

There is no such evidence. Which is why the Indians lay all claim to ancient archeology discovered in the US less it be fully investigated and expose the truth.

Sounds like master race talk to me, combined with environmental nonsense. Such blatant arrogance arising out of the politics of envy. Speaking of ancient knowledge : we can without any doubt what so ever, put the white man in north America with large copper mining operations, no later than 4300 years ago, something we can not do with the Indians. Any such claim of Indians being here at even that time and most especially regarding the Caledonia area is at best hear say, and with out any proof and twice removed from reality. Since such claims form the basis of treaties and Indian land claims they should all be declared null and void.

You do realize that Israel gave up the west bank and the entire are it had in Lebanon only to be attacked over and over and over again. Our motivation isn’t “what we get out of supporting Israel”. It is that we are loyal to our friends and to those who are attacked by terrorist gangs (unlike most of Europe and unfortunately liberal Canadians). You mean they gave up what they illegaly occupied in the first place right?? Israel is smaller today than it was around 2500 years ago. How could they be illegally occupying any land since they've already given up land that was originally theirs. The entire problem with Israeli security is that all of the original borders of Israel were not restored in 1948 which allowed for its natural defense. In 1948 the surrounding Arab countries convinced the so called Palestinians to leave Israel, promising them they would destroy the new state of Israel and drive out all of the Jews. At the same time they killed or drove out all the Jews from Arab land. The Arabs failed to defeat the Jews and that is how the refugee camps originated that exist to this day. In 1967 the Arabs again attacked Israel. Israel again defeated the Arabs and Israel kept the land which they had been attacked from. Land that was once part of the original Israel. Israel should never have given back any of the captured land. If you attack from said land and you lose. You should forfeit that land. As they give back the land they are again attacked from it.

B Max, I saw nothing predatory about the article you quoted. What is the problem with a more open, tolerant society? What is the problem with taking the stigma out of sexual orientation? Homosexuality has always existed, it isn't a lifestyle choice it is an inborn characteristic, and it doesn't harm you in the least. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> That is a complete nonsense from any any proven scientific fact that one is born that way. You are either born a boy or a girl / man or a woman. In fact, if we are to believe that, then we must also believe that pedophiles, murders, rapists, transgenders and what ever else is born that way. When in fact it nothing more than a perverted unbridled sexual desire. Making these people lust driven predators which must not be tolerated from any aspect of a moral society. http://www.familyaction.org/Articles/issue...y-hollywood.htm

I'll bet you think you hear lots of things... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Ritter has been a kind of poster boy for the anti american bush bashing UN oneworlders. I guess it's kinda depressing when they turn out to be traitors and perverts.

The guy is real piece of work. I thought i heard ritter say in an interview one time that he is no longer a citizen of the US, but that he is a citizen of the world. It certainly sounds like UN brainwashing to me. I wonder if ritter is involved in some of the UN's sex scandals.

Not according to this. http://globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO411C.html

I think it's long past time to put these preditors back in the closet and lock the door. http://www.cwfa.org/articles/9144/CFI/education/index.htm One poster, titled, “Things you can do to eradicate gender or multiply it exponentially,” features cross-dressing, and has these suggestions: • “Think twice before you ask people if their child is a boy or a girl. • Spend a day in drag. • Refer to everyone by the incorrect pronoun. • Challenge binary gender paradigms over Thanksgiving dinner. • Hang out with children and teach them how to cross dress Barbie and G.I. Joe. • Refuse to check off your sex when filling out forms.” Clearly, the homosexual movement's effort to recruit children has never been stronger than it is now.

I find it interesting that you call Ritter a traitor for opposing the Bush party line on Iraq yet you openly advocate the break of Canada. Seems to me you have you priorties reallly screwed up. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Not at all.

Ritter is a fool and a traitor, he should have date with the hangman. McDermott collected the payment from Shakir al-Khafaji, the same Detroit-based Baghdad apologist who paid former U.N. weapons inspector Scott Ritter $400,000 two years ago to make a pro-Saddam documentary about Iraq. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/903913/posts

Yours is the level of attack the messenger rather than inject sound facts. The last refuge of a scoundrel.

For one thing, the petition you present is 7 years old and much has been discussed in the interim. I don't believe, as you do, that global warming has been debunked. Nor do I believe it is junk science. I think my links will show how credible this problem is and will be in our future. http://www.koshland-science-museum.org/exhibitgcc/index.jsp http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/20...al_warming.html http://maui.net/~jstark/nasa.html http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/ http://www.newscientist.com/channel/earth/climate-change/ http://books.nap.edu/collections/global_warming/index.html What scares me is not that people like you might deny the problem, but that you and your like-minded folk would deny the science. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> What you are looking at is science fraud. There is nothing new there, it's the same old junk science, misleading information and outright lies. But the science on global warming, and its putative causes, is by no means settled. The earth's atmosphere has both warmed and cooled over the centuries without any human activity being responsible. Dr. S. Fred Singer, president of the Science and Environmental Policy Project (SEPP), points out that a study of CO2 and temperatures over the past 11,000 years that was analyzed in both Science and Nature in 1999 found that the increase in CO2 in the atmosphere tends to follow, not precede, a rise in temperature. Dr. Singer reminds us that "the bulk of the temperature rise in the 20th century took place before 1940, while most of the CO2 emissions took place after 1940 and coincided with a slight climate cooling between 1940 and 1975." The satellite temperature readings from 1979 through June 2002 have risen at the rate of only 0.1 degree Fahrenheit per decade or 1.0 degree per century. http://www.aim.org/publications/aim_report/2002/15.html [The] perhaps most controversial presentation was that by Prof Gerlich. He did not find a good word for climate modellers and their models and even went so far to suggest that some of the CO2-global- warming theories contradict fundamental laws of physics. In a highly temperamental presentation he argued that atmospheric CO2 with a fraction of only 0.03% of the atmosphere's total volume was quantitatively much too insignificant in order have any measurable temperature effect. With help of mathematical computations that were far too complex and difficult to understand, Prof Gerlich maintained that climate modellers were worse than astrologers, the latter of whom at least observed real planets and their movements.’ http://www.melaniephillips.com/diary/archives/001065.html The mainstream scientific consensus on global warming is becoming clearer every day: changes in our climate are real and they are underway. Now. But we can do something about it. The evidence that human-induced global warming is real is increasingly clear and compelling. Actually, it is not clear nor compelling. It is a tragic fake. The "scientific consensus" does not exists. The "evidence" claimed by the IPCC has been shown false and based solely on "computer simulations". Virtual worlds. Kids video games are far more real. http://mitosyfraudes.8k.com/Calen/UCSscam.html The IPCC did not prove that human activities are causing global warming. Alarmists frequently quote the executive summaries of reports from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), a United Nations organization, to support their predictions. But here is what the IPCC's latest report, Climate Change 2001, actually says about predicting the future climate: "The Earth's atmosphere-ocean dynamics is chaotic: its evolution is sensitive to small perturbations in initial conditions. This sensitivity limits our ability to predict the detailed evolution of weather; inevitable errors and uncertainties in the starting conditions of a weather forecast amplify through the forecast. As well as uncertainty in initial conditions, such predictions are also degraded by errors and uncertainties in our ability to represent accurately the significant climate processes." 5. A modest amount of global warming, should it occur, would be beneficial to the natural world and to human civilization. Temperatures during the Medieval Warm Period (roughly 800 to 1200 AD), which allowed the Vikings to settle presently inhospitable Greenland, were higher than even the worst-case scenario reported by the IPCC. http://www.tufts.edu/as/wright_center/iecw...g_is_a_scam.pdf Myth 4: CO2 is the most common greenhouse gas. Fact: Water vapour or clouds, which makes up on average about 3 % of the atmosphere by volume, and - according to several researchers - about 60% by effect, is the major greenhouse gas. 97% of greenhouse gases are water vapour by volume. Moreover, because of its molecular weight and absorptive capacity, water vapour is 3000 times more effective than CO2 as a greenhouse gas. Those attributing climate change to CO2 rarely mention this important fact. http://www.friendsofscience.org/index.php?ide=4

You mean can he bend alberta over far enough for quebec, that Ont. will vote for him. Some people have what i like to call the lincoln syndrome, keep the country together at all costs. Something dysfuctional as this country, can not, and should not be kept together. I don't see any abe lincoln's on the horizon, but i do see a federalist centerist government prepared to stay in power at all costs. Better to save a piece of it rather than go down with what is really nothing more than a sinking ship. Any attempts to save it now would be nothing more than rowing out to the titantic after it hit the iceberg.

Can you say, "Lonely, bitter crank from waaaayyyy out in right field"? I knew you could. Ummmm, you posted a bunch of proof... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Nothing cranky about. When people start losing their houses and whatever else, and they know it's all based on a farce they will be looking for somebody. That's not to hard to figure out. I don't think those articles appear on that site to endorse the global warming propaganda, but rather to show the hypocrisy of those that promote it. They want it both ways, don't they? If the glaciers recede, it must be caused by "global warming." And if they advance? It must be "global warming." The trouble is that the public believes it. What a masterful piece of deception.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has a dog for every trick. It wouldn't matter what the weather was doing, it would be because of climate change global warming or some other nonsense of which there isn't the slightest proof. Of course it's all the fault of the oil companies coal companies or some such boogie man that they can demonize. The answer of course is always to tax them, drive them out of the country or out of business. I wish the hell they would. I would welcome the resulting wars to clean up the crackpots and losers of the world. Go ahead get at her i can't wait.

The glacier is melting, not growing, causing rapid movement. Glaciers traditionally move at rates of inches per year. Debunked, my foot. Didn't you read the article? Or did you just not understand it? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Yeah i did read the site. Obviously you didn't. Ice and snow piling up over a large area of Antarctica - 19 May 2005 - According to a new study published in the online edition of Science, the East Antarctic Ice Sheet gained about 45 billion tons of ice between 1992 and 2003. The ice sheets are several kilometers thick in places, and contain about 90% of the world's ice. Using data from the European Space Agency's radar satellites ERS-1 and ERS-2, a research team from the University of Missouri , Columbia , measured changes in altitude over about 70% of Antarctica's interior. East Antarctica thickened at an average rate of about 1.8 centimeters per year over the time period studied, the researchers discovered. The region comprises about 75% of Antarctica 's total land area and about 85% of the total ice volume. The area in question covers more than 2.75 million square miles - roughly the same size as the United States. (This means that more than 90 percent of the world's glaciers are growing thicker … while the media keeps yelling about the ones that are melting.) http://www.nature.com/news/2005/050516/full/050516-10.html http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/20/science/20ICE.html

The only thing foolish are the people who refuse to accept the facts, but prefer to go with junkscience. With 90% of the worlds glaciers in advance how could anyone suggest it is only a few. The few are the 10% in retreat. Water vapor, 97% of greenhouse gas. I guess if one could ignor that 90% of glaciers are expanding it wouldn't be much of a leap to ignor that 97% of greenhouse gas is water vapor. What's really idiotic is that the chicken little scare mongers were the ones using the shrinking glaciers as proof of global warming or climate change or whatever they call it on any particular day to suit their purpose. Now that that has been debunked it's idiotic to mention them.

The indians up north have pretty well killed off the norman wells pipeline with their demands. The oil companies have said it's just about to the point where it's not worth it and are considering scrapping it. Two groups have said they are happy with it, and one group is holding up the whole thing. Going across BC one can expect the problems to be ten fold.

Martin went on CNN yesterday and basically said the same thing to Americans.http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/Art...ront/TopStories Although this one example is not going to convince many Albertans to vote Liberal it is nice to see creative solutions to problems that don't pit one region of the country against another. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> For some reason i'm still waiting for the other shoe to drop. I believe they already have plans to start exporting oil to asia. Suncor has plans to build a five billion dollar pipeline to the west coast. Last week they still hadn't decide on terminal location on the coast. Most likely they are going to find groups opposed to it lined up all the way to the point where they'll end up srcapping the whole idea.

How many H2s courses have you taken. The fact is there has been nothing really proven as to the health effects of H2s. True, laboratory tests have been done on H2s but not in conditions one would find outside the laboratory. H2s is a very interesting gas. More deadly than cyanide gas. Yet it can be worked in in amounts of ten parts per million for up to eight hours with no known health effects. At 200 to 500 ppm it can cause death within hours. At 700 to 1000 ppm death can be immediate. The body has H2s in it all the time. In fact everything has H2s in to some degree. A persons close can retain enough H2s to knock one down or even a mud puddle. A sour gas well is a natural gas well only laiden H2s. The H2s is removed and you are left with natural gas. Making ridiculous statements about the energy industry that drives our economy and gives us our standard of living, is something best left to the crackpot crowd.

I agree 100%, but look on the bright side, at least there won't be any homosexual classes for a while. To bad they didn't go on strike early on in the summer it might have given the government a chance to sell off all the schools and go a hundred percent private.

So if glaciers are growing, does that mean there is global cooling or climate change. What if some glaciers are growing while some are shrinking. What then does that mean. A radical treehugger who had a radio show in calgary was going on one day about a glacier that gives calgary water. He was telling everybody they had to cut the amount of water they use because the glacier was melting faster. So i phoned this guy and asked him how cutting the amount of water one uses would slow the rate of the melt. There was silence. Then he said well so there would be more water for people down stream. I said if it's melting faster shouldn't that make more water for everybody. He hung up. What's really scary is that this guy got elected to office. http://www.iceagenow.com/Growing_Glaciers.htm

Did the idea of claiming that scientists don't agree just pop into your head, or did your dog tell you this.... If you can provide any kind of credible evidence (ie. not funded by Exxon, Chevron, BP, or Haliburton) I'm all ears....Or is this a "conservative truth", that you have to be a Conservative to understand why it's true ???? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Can you provide any credible evidence other than the canadian government and the UN. Who themselves have not provided any proof what so ever and are the least credible of all. Their only proof is to claim over and over again that they are right and claiming the debate is over when in fact there never was a debate, and in fact have done everything they could to make sure there wasn't. http://www.sepp.org/pressrel/petition.html

Have you ever heard of the modern "fiction" called global warming. Many in this forum would say that it's fiction and disagree with the overwhelming majority of scientists in the world. However, most people haven't read much about the predictions and real consequences of global warming. The whole planet is not going to get warmer... On average yes, but places like England and Ireland will become ice communities.... That is due to a predicted change in the Gulf Stream.... It's funny (or maybe not) how people won't believe many things until it hits them in the head..... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> They can barely predict the weather for five days never mind years down the road. The majority of scientists do not agree on global warming. This year in alberta has not been warm and has had no drought. There has been all kinds of different years as far as weather goes and this is just one of them.