You are not logged in.
Tom, you'll excuse me if I think of you as a crazy, mixed-up kid. You don't make it possible to pin you down to anything that can be argued logically. Is that your idea? If so, you're a waste of time. Age brings knowledge, and that leads to less dependence upon Faith and religious dogma to explain one's existence. I bet if I lived to be 200, I'd come up with a new Theory of Everything, just using my own rather average amount of brain power--having peaked a 150, rather than 26 as in the case of Einstein, eh?. The more you use your mind, granted good geneology, the better your reasoning becomes. More humanistic, in other words. You should try it ... because, as it is, you're bloody attitude towards the disparate factions of the World will only lead your becoming another Dubja, sadly in my opinion. Education on the part of everyone is what's required, and that can't take place at gunpoint, eh? Religion is at the heart of today's "holy terrorism" both theirs and ours. Get rid of the gods of war, for cripes sake!
I am self-aware, I don't look forward to dying. What does terrorism have to do with it? I was just explaining why people like to believe in something, because the end of their existance is too difficult to contemplate, is that so very hard for you to understand. The World of Science tells you that you are some kind of animal, like a deer in the woods that gets shot, or a squirrel or racoon that gets run over by a car. When the squirrel gets squashed by the car, its existance is over with, that's fine and easy to deal with as you don't see through the squirrel's eyes as it sees that car coming, tries to avoid it and runs right in front of one of the cars tires, its existance ends, but what is it like for the squirrel to be squashed in such a way, what is it like to cease to exist, for that question science has no answers.
Offline
Gee, I always thought science didn't fail until after the squirrel got squished...
I never realized the issue of US-Canada relations was so philosophically deep. :shock:
"We go big, or we don't go." - GCNRevenger
Offline
Me too. Maybe it's because beavers never get squashed, but just keep on beavering away and die of old age. Then, "ceasing to exist" must be like falling into a dreamless sleep. Being tortured to death by a religious fanatic is my idea of real terror, though.
Offline
I was in a dreamless sleep before. I was put under before the operated on me. The next thing I knew it was the next day, with no perception of time inbetween. Dying is probably like the first part without the second part of awakening again. Still I don't look forward to dying. People with religion can accept it better, because they believe they will awaken again after they die, but if you don't have a religion, you just believe in the dying part. I think it doesn't really matter in the end from our perspective, we just see a person die, unless we are the one who's dying. My mother died in 1995, I really didn't know how to deal with it, and I don't know what to say to a dying person, if you don't believe in a hereafter, you really don't know anything to say that would comfort them or make their remaining time on Earth any easier, that is why I think this latest scientific crusade is wrong. I don't think it really matters in the end what a dying person believes, if what he believes in is false, I think he should be allowed the comfort of his beliefs regardless of whether you scientific types believe its true or not. People die all the time in this world, maybe there is a hereafter and maybe their isn't. One thing we can do is try to make those people we know are dying as confortable as possible, and if what they believe about life after death is wrong, so be it, it harms no one. Science offers no solution for the problem of death, it can delay it for some time perhaps, but it eventually comes for us all.
It is a strange Universe we live in, it is so vast. we are born, some of us learn as much as we can about it in the pursuit of science and all the time we learn new things, but we have only a limited amount of time to enjoy this knowledge. We can speculate about what it would be like to travel to the stars, but we'll never know, that future era will belong to someone else. If the human race does not end during our lifetime, we will perhaps never know if humanity ever travels to the stars. I'd like to see a few achievements before I die. Perhaps human interplanetary exploration and settlement. Maybe I'll see commercial fusion power finally become a reality, or artificial intelligence. Maybe those artificial intelligences will be smart enough to figure out a way to prolong our lives, and maybe I'll live to see that day, and perhaps live to settle the stars too, it is just a hope. I was born in 1967, and I think I may perhaps live to 2047, so there are a few decades remaining where these breakthroughs might occur, but if it doesn't it doesn't, I'm no worse off than I am now. So I'm very careful to try to live as long as possible. If some idiot blows himself up because of a twisted religion, then I want to keep his kind as far away from me as possible, its not really racism, or cultural bias, I just don't want them interferring in my plans to live as long as possible, If I had some sort of religion, I would probably be less concerned about that, but I don't. If someone wants to believe in X,Y, and Z, and he's not harming anyone while doing so, then I'm not going to tell him he shouldn't regardless of whether I believe that belief is correct or not. The religious fanatic Jihadist is a different story, but they are not real common in Western Society, and that's the way I'd like to keep it.
Offline
I see the US mid-term elections resulted in Democrat control of both the House of Representatives and the Senate. How will that affect Canada/U.S. relations? Conservative minister of Foreign Affairs, Peter McKay, said it won't; that Democrats are even more protectionist than Republicans. It's a known fact that prior to the last Canadian federal election, the Conservative Party sent campaign organizers to Republican school in the States. Conservatives (capital "C") are obviously biased. Yesterday the Liberal Party website announced the keynote speaker for their upcoming leadership convention:
Liberals announce Keynote speaker, theme of Convention
November 10, 2006
Montréal –The Liberal Party of Canada today is pleased to announce that the Chairman of the Democratic National Committee, Governor Howard Dean, will give the keynote address at the Party's upcoming Leadership and Biennial Convention. Governor Dean will be speaking to delegates, alternates, observers, and the attendees on the evening of November 29, 2006, at approximately 8:20 pm (EST).
...
"We are proud to have Gov. Dean address our Party. Aside from our obvious affinity with the Democratic Party, Liberals are excited to hear the Chairman's views on a modern democracy and the role of the Democratic Party in the new U.S. political environment. And the timing couldn't be better," said Steven MacKinnon, General Secretary of the Convention.
Online
Tom: Be kind, live for the day, and don't be so judgemental while you live ... don't allow a friend's or relations'd death to destroy your life. And above all (pun) let's get back to discussing space travel.
Robert: Just remember the Clinton years: they were Democrat dominated, and our relations not so bad. Once they get back Habeas Corpus and we never give up its equivalent in our Rights & Freedoms Act, things should get back to normal along the border. I wish Harper & Co. would stop being so hyper about averything begun by the Liberals and then starting from Square One again with the New Government of Canada's version of the same things. What a bunch of toady juveniles ... except for Nova Scotia's own McKay, who's a big baby.
Offline
things should get back to normal along the border
I seriously hope so, but I'm asking Americans.
Online
If the Democrats win again in 2008, everything that Bush ever touched will be dismantled. The next two years will consist solely of the Democrats saying "it is worse than we ever believed possible, it is imperative that the American people give us the presidency as well in order to correct the situation." While gridlock will likely prevent additional measures, I'm sure you'll have plenty of cause for grievance in the meanwhile, if only due to unthinking bureaucracy.
Fan of [url=http://www.red-oasis.com/]Red Oasis[/url]
Offline
I see the US mid-term elections resulted in Democrat control of both the House of Representatives and the Senate. How will that affect Canada/U.S. relations? Conservative minister of Foreign Affairs, Peter McKay, said it won't; that Democrats are even more protectionist than Republicans. It's a known fact that prior to the last Canadian federal election, the Conservative Party sent campaign organizers to Republican school in the States. Conservatives (capital "C") are obviously biased. Yesterday the Liberal Party website announced the keynote speaker for their upcoming leadership convention:
Liberals announce Keynote speaker, theme of Convention
November 10, 2006
Montréal –The Liberal Party of Canada today is pleased to announce that the Chairman of the Democratic National Committee, Governor Howard Dean, will give the keynote address at the Party's upcoming Leadership and Biennial Convention. Governor Dean will be speaking to delegates, alternates, observers, and the attendees on the evening of November 29, 2006, at approximately 8:20 pm (EST).
...
"We are proud to have Gov. Dean address our Party. Aside from our obvious affinity with the Democratic Party, Liberals are excited to hear the Chairman's views on a modern democracy and the role of the Democratic Party in the new U.S. political environment. And the timing couldn't be better," said Steven MacKinnon, General Secretary of the Convention.
Bash Bush and you get the Democrats who are more protectionist.
Offline
Bash Bush and you get the Democrats who are more protectionist.
Not such a bad thing, free economy and trade as seen as by Reps or by European lawmakers is a fake. All national industries grew up behind protective fronteers, and in a global economic system, industries settle where workers have the lowest wages and social rights, with high impact on social rights in develloped countries.
If tomorrow you have to compete with indonesian or pakistanese labour wage levels in your job, you may become a hobo in an industries emptyless country.
Think of it.
Having high dependency level on imported goods is a strategical weakness.
Offline
NAFTA was created as a free trade zone to compete with the EU. Members are Canada, USA, and Mexico. Canada signed the original Canada/USA free trade agreement, granting USA a right to Canadian oil in exchange for free access to American markets. When one Canadian steel company built a new furnace that was able to make steel that was better quality and lower price than any other Canadian or US steel company could make, American companies complained. They established trade barriers in direct violation to the free trade treaty. After the EU was formed, US president Bill Clinton wanted to include Mexico in the North American free trade zone to compete. Canada didn't want to, but agreed in exchange for a dispute resolution mechanism to ensure something like the steel crisis never happens again. It has, America has placed barriers to softwood lumber. The NAFTA dispute resolution mechanism heard the case and ordered America to remove the duties and repay 100% that has been collected to date. America refused to comply. That's over simplifying a complex issue, the decision wasn't entirely in Canada's favour. What I'm saying is America must comply with the decision of the NAFTA board. As others have pointed out, a negotiation results in concessions, you give up something in exchange for something you want. America has gotten what it wanted, but refused to comply with what it agreed to give Canada.
This has nothing to do with third world countries such as Indonesia. This is solely between two major, industrialized countries.
Online
Bash Bush and you get the Democrats who are more protectionist.
Not such a bad thing, free economy and trade as seen as by Reps or by European lawmakers is a fake. All national industries grew up behind protective fronteers, and in a global economic system, industries settle where workers have the lowest wages and social rights, with high impact on social rights in develloped countries.
If tomorrow you have to compete with indonesian or pakistanese labour wage levels in your job, you may become a hobo in an industries emptyless country.
Think of it.
Having high dependency level on imported goods is a strategical weakness.
Then I strongly suggest that your France goes back to Feudalism, that way neighboring provinces don't have to compete with each other, they and protect their local industries and manufacture everything locally, and the various municipalities can chage high tarriffs for moving goods across their borders.
Offline
Then I strongly suggest that your France goes back to Feudalism, that way neighboring provinces don't have to compete with each other, they and protect their local industries and manufacture everything locally, and the various municipalities can chage high tarriffs for moving goods across their borders.
While you're childishly chatchatting, Congressmen are taking care of balancing "free-trade" dirtorsions, and US jobs...
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL33317.pdf
Congress has been concerned with broad policies giving Chinese exporters
unfair trade advantages. The Senate approved a bill, added as an amendment to
other legislation, that would place a high tariff on Chinese imports unless China
revalues its pegged exchange rate (S. 295).
Offline
While you're childishly chatchatting, Congressmen are taking care of balancing free-trade" dirtorsions, and US jobs...
With all the extra workload a new tariff law could throw on me, I can't conceive that this will actually cost US jobs. :evil:
"We go big, or we don't go." - GCNRevenger
Offline
Canada/US relations?
And here I thought this was about getting a date.
What a bunch of hosers, eh.
Offline
Thank you Senator Leahy.
Online
While you're childishly chatchatting, Congressmen are taking care of balancing free-trade" dirtorsions, and US jobs...
With all the extra workload a new tariff law could throw on me, I can't conceive that this will actually cost US jobs. :evil:
Less money, less jobs, its as simple as that.
What taxes, tariffs, and regulations do is force companies to create unproductive jobs just to deal with the authorities. The money spent hiring people to cut through red tape and regulation is thus unavailable for producing product. With less product to sell, there is less profit and with less profit there is less money to hire new people with. The government imposes all sorts of burdens on business, businesses then can't expand so fast and hire new people, that is the price that is paid.
Offline
Thank you Senator Leahy.
Maybe he was just keeping an open mind about Arabs and Arab governments. If you wanted them to keep an open mind that not all arabs are terrorists, then the cliche about all Arab Governments wanted to torture people is another prejudice that was dispensed with. Saying he should have know that the Arab government was going to torture people is like saying, you should have know that black man was going to rob you.
Offline
Thank you Senator Leahy.
Maybe he was just keeping an open mind about Arabs and Arab governments. If you wanted them to keep an open mind that not all arabs are terrorists, then the cliche about all Arab Governments wanted to torture people is another prejudice that was dispensed with. Saying he should have know that the Arab government was going to torture people is like saying, you should have know that black man was going to rob you.
We are finally making some progress to resolve the friction between the governments of our countries, but you just had to open your mouth. Let Senator Leahy's statement stand, let him finish his work.
Online
Thank you Senator Leahy.
Maybe he was just keeping an open mind about Arabs and Arab governments. If you wanted them to keep an open mind that not all arabs are terrorists, then the cliche about all Arab Governments wanted to torture people is another prejudice that was dispensed with. Saying he should have know that the Arab government was going to torture people is like saying, you should have know that black man was going to rob you.
We are finally making some progress to resolve the friction between the governments of our country, but you just had to open your mouth. Let Senator Leahy's statement stand, let him finish his work.
Well which way do you want it? If we have a blanket assumption that all Arab governments are going to torture their people, how is that different from assuming that a muslim is a terrorist until proven otherwise. One could just as easily say we should have known that any muslim that crosses the border between Canada and the USA could be a terrorist, both assumptions about arab individuals and arab governments are prejudices aren't they? Why is it right to make a prejudiced assumption about one and not the other?
Offline
We don't have a blanket assumption that all arab governments will torture their people. If we did, the US would have sent the prisoners to any Arab government. But the US did not. The US sent the prisoners to specific Arab governments that are known to torture prisoners.
Offline
Canadian officials did their own investigation and determined there was no justification to placing Maher Arar on a terrorist watch list. After much discussion, Canadian officials finally got access to American information on him. The assessment was that Maher Arar is still innocent, there was no justification to deport him.
However, I see a larger issue. Even if there was justification to deport him, he was travelling on a Canadian passport. He should have been deported to Canada. Canadian government officials at the time demanded he be sent to Canada, but they ignored that. This demonstrates contempt for passports and international law.
Online
Which leads one to suspect that the current demand for everyone crossing the border carry a passport either way, is just a way to force the employment of a familiar document to become the individual ID that we'd never agree to, had it been created from scratch. By the way, Denmark accepts anyone--I'm told by a Danish national permanen resident here in Canada--without a passport of any kind. And, Scotland now accepts anyone from Poland, since it became a member of the EU, to work in any capacity they did at home and encourages and their families to stay on and become citizens, even. The Catholic churches are filled, where they were dying from lack of attendance before. Europe, which used to be obsessed with passport procedures and monetary exchanges, is now a breeze to get around within. There's got to be a lesson here, somewhere....
Offline
CBC: Arar will remain on watch list: U.S.
Democratic Senator Patrick Leahy, who last week grilled Gonzales over the Arar affair, said Monday that the letter does not "clear up the confusion as to why Mr. Arar remains on a watch list or why he was sent to Syria in the first place."
"The reason the Arar case is such a sore point and such an offense to American values is that he was sent to Syria, on the Bush Administration’s orders, where he was tortured," Leahy said.
Uhhhhhh (deflation), just when we were getting somewhere. At least Senator Leahy is doing the right thing.
Online
CBC: Arar will remain on watch list: U.S.
Democratic Senator Patrick Leahy, who last week grilled Gonzales over the Arar affair, said Monday that the letter does not "clear up the confusion as to why Mr. Arar remains on a watch list or why he was sent to Syria in the first place."
"The reason the Arar case is such a sore point and such an offense to American values is that he was sent to Syria, on the Bush Administration’s orders, where he was tortured," Leahy said.
Uhhhhhh (deflation), just when we were getting somewhere. At least Senator Leahy is doing the right thing.
And the Democrats want us to send diplomats to Syria where they'll be tortured after all the Syrians torture everyone we send there, we should have known.
Offline