newbie

Then let him sit as an Independent and prove it.

I hadn't plan on watching, but now as a result of this dicussion I definitely will be tuning in. Thanks guys.

I echo that. While I feel we don't need to go to Iraq, we made a commitment to go to Afghanistan. I offer my respect and thanks to the Canadian military.

Oooh, big fonts. I hope you realize how silly that looks, much like a kid in kindergarten would do. Ah well...

Actually, these were the charges: CHARGES: All eight defendants face the same set of charges — broad counts listed in the court's charter under war crimes and crimes against humanity: — Premeditated murder. — Imprisonment and the deprivation of physical movement. — Forced deportation. — Torture. This trial definitely should have been held in the Hague.

Roy, you might want to consider the deaths caused by Bush and his illegal invasion of Iraq. Someone suggested on this forum that Bush acknowledged he made a "mistake" with the WMD in Iraq. That is totally unacceptable when hundreds of thousands of innocent lives were at stake (and probably killed). Iraq was far better off with Saddam in power than they are today. At least you could go to the market or walk down the street with no fear of getting blown up, not to mention the free education and medical care. It will take Iraq decades to begin to rebuild itself. Saddam was a little irritant that was kept under control by sanctions. There is no denying he could be ruthless against his perceived enemies (as is the current U.S. administration, given their "shock and awe" approach at solving problems). But look at the alternative Iraq faces now. All the purple fingertips in the world won't bring true democracy as long as fundamental religious leaders sit in the Government.

Keep looking at him , cause you arent fit to lick his boots. Apparently Bush didn't think as highly of him as you do. His "resignation" (firing) was long overdue and I'm glad Dubya finally got it.

Geoffrey, I think the case in Alberta is that they (the Gov't) amalgamated Social Services with Career Development and Employment. When they were separated funding was more specific. And what's happened is that in the rush to clear Alberta's deficit, they actually created more problems for AISH recipients, welfare cases and persons looking for employment. So persons with disability stand basically in the same line as a person applying for UI, etc. And I don't think there is funding available for strictly placement purposes either. Klein's comments about a person not looking "bad enough" to receive AISH didn't help.

As a former rehabilitation consellor I can assure you that this is not the case. How many employers are willing to undertake a work-for-welfare program, or supported employment, or institute a wage subsidy program? I also know the other side of the coin for I am out of the workforce due to disability (Multiple Sclerosis). Try finding me a job. No employer can accomodate what I require, or the needs for the vast majority of persons with disability.

Yeah, all the while in U.S. custody, tried for crimes against humanity which should have taken place in the Hague. The Iraqis that killed him only had him for a few minutes prior to his execution.

Well, I think it's quite obvious to mistrust the establishment after you've been lied to continuosly. Look at Iraq for example: no imminent threat, no WMD, no Al-Queda connection, and on and on. Bin laden has "bin forgotten." But believe what you will. There are just some of us folks who don't buy into everything the Government and media feeds us. Guess that's how we're wired.

Poly, seems like you're wasting your time on these close minded skeptics. They obviously will believe nothing but the official version of events, much like the sheep on the right side of the equation. And it's funny; they are the ones most likely to quote the famous line: "The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."

More bad news for the anti-global warming kooks: link

In fact, he is endorsing those laws and the laws state that all non-believers must be killed. A point of order: Matthew 23:37-40. Just another contradiction in this great and wonderful holiest of hypocricy. Kill the unbelievers? Not a Jesus I would like to follow.

Quotes to ponder: YALE PHYSICIST Dr Henry Margena, “To put it bluntly, science no longer contains absolute truths … the old distinction between the natural and the supernatural has become spurious.” NOBEL LAUREATE PROFESSOR CHARLES RICHET, “We must accept dowsing as a fact. It is useless to work up experiments merely to prove its existence. It exists. What is needed is its development.” PROFESSORS OSIS AND HARALDSSON, ON DEATH BED VISIONS, “Death-bed visions, combined with other afterlife research, make possible a fact-based, rational and therefore belief in the life after death.” DR CARL JUNG, one of the greatest psychiatrists ever, “I shall not commit the fashionable stupidity of regarding everything I cannot explain as a fraud.” DR FRED HOYLE, British cosmologist, “When science begins the study of non-physical phenomena, it will make more progress in one decade than in all the centuries of its experience.” PROFESSOR BERTRAND RUSSELL, “We should not go for complete skepticism, but for degrees of probability.”

Lee's letter might have a little more credibility had he won. I'd rather read Lincoln's speeches. A "gem" is just a little over the top.

The have to GTFO now!

James Randi deals with extra-sensory and other 'paranormal' claims in a scientific environment. Anyone who can prove these abilities in a scientific environment can earn themselves or a charity of their choice $1,000,000 US. Randi is a major con man and has been proven to be a genuine fake. His test is set up to fail. No one can meet his expectations, much like Victor Zammit will give 1/2 million if someone can prove there is no afterlife.

Point of interest: Socrates said the earth was round centuries before the flat earth society even existed. I don't believe Socrates used science, just faith. Or maybe a lucky guess.

If by "closed and totally skeptical" you mean, go there expecting him to back-up what he's saying with more than gibberish, speculation and other sorts of absurdity, I'm not even going to bother. No, what I mean if you're totally committed to atheism stay away. But he does present some interesting and factual information. Peer review is difficult with this topic as most scientists balk at talk of the afterlife. But if you're willing to be open to the possibility, it can be a thought provoking website. He presents much information that can be independently researched. The bottom line is that it is still up to us regardless.

This guy claims empircal evidence of the afterlife. But if you go through there with a closed and totally skeptical mind, don't even bother visiting his site. link

Randi's little test can never be passed, just like the one Victor Zammit has for proof of the afterlife will never be passed. link

So let me get this straight: in your world - Jesus is reduced to a charlatan, as are the people who witnessed his miracles, - everyone who has ever had a vision or seen/felt a presence of God are nuts, - all mediums and psychics are bogus, and - every religion is wrong. Hmm, centuries of belief out the window. Thanks for clearing that up for us.

I would include reading books that weren't included in the Bible (Gospel of Thomas for example) and consider other spiritual leaders (such as Buddha) and modern spirituality. And throw in a sprinkle of evolution and you'll have a good mix. I would never limit myself to just one narrow path such as Christianity.

Reported to moderator. That's rich Argus, given your history of bigotry on this forum.