Good_Jorb comments

USA well, this kind of thing had to happen in Mexico etc..to get you all your nice natural drugs from south of the border.

As was going to say something along the lines of what SolidariTea said, Canada sells large amounts of Marijuana to the US, and yet you don't see beheadings, street blockades and the army attacking drug kingpins. So I don't see why those kind of things had to happen in Mexico.

And hopefully that plan will keep the Muslim Brotherhood in the minority.

Why? If a majority of Egyptians want a government lead by the Muslim Brotherhood, no one has any right to interfere. If the majority want a Sharia state, then that is their right to want it. Some vote to not allow gay marriage to be recognized by the state on the religious grounds, limiting some peoples personal freedoms, it isn't undemocratic, simply it is the will of majority of people.

Well Harper got elected by having more votes so those Liberal protesters are not really representative of the will of the people.

An odd analogy, considering Harper runs a minority government and therefore also doesn't represent the will of all or even the majority of Canadians. How is the Egyptian Army siding with Mubarak a show that the protesters don't represent the will of the majority of the people? How many Despotic governments stay in power only becuase the army supports them (I.E. North Korea). What is apparent is that a significant amount of Egyptians have lost so much confidence in their president that they are willing to take to the street in protest. Mubarak shouldn't step down but should call for an immediate election, proving if the majority of Egyptians have confidence or no confidence in him (The democratic process).

Anyone with any experience with firearms will tell you that if you pull out a gun to shoot, you shoot to kill.

Anyone with firearms and common sense should know to carry one, where it is legal to do so. There are plently of people who complain about people from Pakistan(muslims) trying to impose their laws in United States, now that the shoe is on the other foot...

It seems as though he broke Pakistani law, and if he did, he will have to deal with whatever judgement Pakistani law, judges to be his punishment.

(IE lower taxes, less regulation)

If you look at economic strategies that used lowing taxes, in particular corporate taxes, the end result has always been the same, less taxes = more debt (see the amount of national debt that grew under Reagan, hint: he doubled it). As well less regulation, compare what happened to US banks(less regulated) vs Canadian Banks(more regulated) during the financial "meltdown". The government should deeply cut non-essential program spending, halt a large majority of it's foriegn aid (the US should do this as well) and if they really need to cut taxes, give tax breaks to the largest comsumer base the middle class and they will eventually start consuming more and business entities profits will increase. Otherwise they should focus on paying down debt, interest payments are wasted monies, especially in when it comes to government spending.

You just gotta love religions.

Because religion slapped a bomb on itself and killed a bunch of pilgrims? It's always easier to blame religion then it is humanity.

But this is about America, not Canada.

Considering it was America that had to bailout it's banking sector (with the biggest welfare cheque ever written) with Chinese money. It is about America (Canada didn't need to bailout it's banks = no need for Chinese money).

Wal-Mart is one of the most powerful businesses in the world and became so through excellent supply chain management, a little bit of muscle applied to its suppliers, and staying power.

and the hard work of Chinese labourers, which causes a significant amount of USD to leave the US. The same USD that leave the US are then lent back to the US with interest Fees. More commonly known as a broken business model.

Re-ordering politics, political discourse and society itself so as not to upset the druggies, the feeble-minded and the mentally unsound.R.I.P. to the Republic.

Is that to say that there is no room for intelligent, well researched and informed arguments without rhetoric, hyberbole and misinformation?

That being said I don't think it's congress's problem but more their vocal extreme left and right supporters. I don't see these groups turning down there rhetoric, childish agruing is ingrained part their of psyche. If politics in the US stays on the same course a comma is going to be needed in God Bless America. God, Bless America (they need it).

In the end it's rich and elite that walk away laughing, they've been able to fleece the American public for years and no one cares because they are to busy agruing with their perceived enemies on the otherside.

If you have something to say then spit it out and be done with it because we have a lot of work to do. When I go to China or anywhere else I follow their customs, but when they're in my house I expect them to follow mine.

Considering a lot of that work seems to entail seeking bailouts from government (manufactoring, banking, farming, et al.) to cover for market inefficiencies, I would have thought that wining and dining a lender/donor was part of that "work". On the other hand, perhaps Obama should have taken Hu to McDonalds for a supersized big mac meal or shopping at Wal Mart, American customs for average Americans no?

To most Americans, the third Monday in January is just another day.

Is that because King is black?

Assumably most people take the holiday off, if it was just another day, why don't people go to work?

Apparently sharing your opinion with millions of interested listeners, is now inciting hate in your mind.

That is exactly what pundits on the left and right do, the tea baggers blah blah blah, the libtards blah blah blah..., it clearly childish and hateful but you're right it's their right to express their opinions. Besides it's not their fault, that their millions of listners (both the extreme left and right) are on the wrong side of the IQ bell curve. The ridculous agruments on both sides are enough to make someone go crazy (perhaps even Loughner).

The right isn't going around demanding people be taken off the air, or have their freedom of speech revoked.

I seem to remember that there was a lot of people who wanted Dixie Chicks removed from the airwaves for questioning the president. Since there are no really statistics, I would hazard a guess that both sides are equally as hatefully, childish and quick to point the finger. It's the old chicken before the egg agrument. If it wasn't taken so serious by some (like the gunman possible did), it would be funny in a satirical sense of haha. This shooting and commentary that has followed, has turned into a sad testiment of what partisan politics is like.

Whether he is right-wing or left-wing remains to be determined but his attitude and actions are a sign of where partisan politics is heading. Increasingly the extreme left and right are becoming angry, bitter and indoctrinated souls, who seem to be losing their ability to have rational, educated conversations with each other. Conversations have been reduced to name calling, hyperbole and out right misinformation feed to them by msm pundits (CNN, Fox News, et al), who’s main concern is fuelling the fire for ratings. The vast majority of the public that isn’t on the extreme left or right need to stand up for themselves and tell extremist to take a hike before more people starting violently expressing their political ideology. One thing for sure, the media will be sure to exploit this case, as will political pundits on each side and the really issues will continue to be ignored.

That is a ridiculous comparison to the jihadist groups around the world who a clear source (the koran and haddiths) and a clear, world-wide vision (the Caliphate).

Jihadist groups are just better financed. Joseph Kony, the leader of LRA beleived he was a prophet of god and created the Uganda Christian Democratic Army (followers he inherited from his aunty) which became the LRA and the armies goal was to liberate the Acholi which they beleived would start paradise on earth. Had they been sucessful, they would have started "liberating" other countries and brought them paradise on earth to other countries. (a clear ideological lineage)

Democracy at gun point, religion at a knife's edge, liberation by liberating body parts. All violence be it anti anything has the same roots, human nature.

You don't quite often hear "God is Great" as mass murder is conducted in the name of Christianity. Unless of course it's in Arabic ... How many heads did they cut off? Oh the reality! The Reality!!

An interesting question, how many Sudanese, Congo and Ugandan hands, nose and breasts of mothers has the "lord's resistance army" cut off in the name of God? Let me guess becuase they don't speak English, they aren't Christian?

A moot point anyways, people are killing and using religion as a way to justify it, when in fact the underling reasons are far different. Human nature not religion is killing people, it's no different then "liberating" a country in the name of democracy and trying to force democracy on those countries, even though they don't want it.

whalers threw heavy nuts and bolts at people in rubber dinghies

That is one step above SSCS, who fired line rifles at Faroese police in rubber dinghies, in an attempt to sink them.

You don't see it? If you have to pay less to the government, ...

1) Capital Improvements are tax deductible over a set period of time, so tax cuts would have a very limited effect on a return on investment calculation.

2) Unless the jobs are highly skilled jobs, the jobs will still be outsourced as it is still far cheaper to outsource.

3) Less taxes means that less money will be spent on infrastructure, such as fiber-optic, highways, seaports and airports reducing the chance companies will setup headquarters and/or the likelihood of high-tech jobs moving in, which would mean manufacturing jobs, which again are outsourced to countries with far cheaper wages.

4) Governments that have reduced corporate taxes often have greatly increased the debt load of the country (See Reagan vs National Debt), which means that they have only deferred having to play higher tax.

Instead the government should focus on effective spending of tax monies and becoming more efficent, instead of wasting tax dollars.

Actually, Hitler was a socialist.

Hitler wasn't a socialist, he was fascist, who used anti-immigration and racism to get into power. Chavez, used people power to get into power. Then end result is almost always the same. When an extreme left or right wing party gets into power, the result is always bad. Mostly because their party supporters become ignorant sheeple.

The funny thing is that if the barbers were not armed they would probably be dead meaning that 2-3 people would have died instead of just this one mother.

I think the article was most likely referring to the patrons inside the barber shop not necessarily the barbers themselves.

Excessive gun violence, just another reason never to live in the US. I feel plenty safe with the baseball bat behind my usually unlocked front door.

I would rather watch DREAM Dynamite, K1 is OK but not quite as exciting.

You stated it wasn't a targeted selection of files, then admit it was.

A targeted selection of files would have only been selecting the papers showing what you wanted it show. The Pentagon papers where released in their entirety, I.E. nothing was targeted but instead the whole file was released to the public.

Like I said, there is a huge difference here to anyone with the brains to see it.

More to the point, what matter in legal terms is whether those items released relate to "national defense and international affairs", as per the supreme justices findings, which clearly the Wikileaks leaks are. I've asked twice and you have yet to state which law he broke and you can imply I have no brains all you want but at least I can answer a simple question, whether or not you agree with answer is your choice.

There is a significant difference in the release of a targeted selection of files, designed to show evidence of corruption and malfeasance, and the wholesale release of hundreds of thousands of documents designed to harm the US.

The pentagon papers weren't a targeted selection of files, it's was a collection of almost all the files (7,000 pages) including diplomatic cables related to the Vietnam War. Part of the papers, showed that U.S. government lied about it's intentions in Vietnam, lied about the diplomatic relationships it had with the countries surrounding Vietnam, it lied about not attacking those said countries and etc. (assumably the pentagon papers should have damaged the credibility of the US government and by default America). Again, clearly the documents released by Assange related to "national defense and international affairs". So I ask again which law did Assange break when releasing documents related national defense and international affairs. It's easy enough to say someone is guilty of a crime, when you don't say which law he broke.

Publishing Stolen Material

The Pentagon Papers, were classified top secret government documents that were leaked/stolen by Daniel Ellsberg and which he then gave to the New York Times to publish. If you can't see the similarities here, then what can I say.

The judges were talking about their findings of the constitutionality Section 793 of the Espionage Act.

Under common law, the legal system the United States uses, supreme court rulings on the constitutionality of a matter, become legal precedent and all of the other court rulings have to follow the Justices outlined findings. In New York Times Co. v. United States, the judges voted in favor of New York Times.

Given that the Judges stated classified documents relating to "national defense and international affairs" are ok to be published, I fail to see which law Assange broke, given the supreme courts interpretation of the constitutionality of Section 793 of the Espionage Act?

Perhaps you would be kind enough, to state which exact law, Assange broke when publishing classified top secret government documents relating to national defense and international affairs.

Assange thought that somehow this would trump his crime of publishing it.

Really, perhaps an understanding of your own laws, might be helpful;

New York Times Co. v. United States, 403 U.S. 713 (1971) - The leaked "Pentagon Papers"

Justice Potter Stewart and Justice Byron R. White agreed that it is the responsibility of the Executive to ensure national security through the protection of its information. However, in areas of national defense and international affairs, the President of United States possesses great constitutional independence that is virtually unchecked by the Legislative and Judicial branch. "In absence of governmental checks and balances", per Justice Stewart, "the only effective restraint upon executive policy and power in [these two areas] may lie in an enlightened citizenry - in an informed and critical public opinion which alone can here protect the values of democratic government."

we are in a war, AQ needs fools to cry about freedom of speech etc..to then come back a blow up our planes, trains, homes etc...

They hijacked planes and crashed them into the WTC before wikileaks released the information, train schedule are posted at train stations and homes well you don't need wikileaks to find a home to blow up.

the USA must also control the internet at some point.

Assange didn't hack the U.S. database, a disgruntled soldier released information he apparently had access to. The internet doesn't need to be controlled, who they allow to access sensitive information does.

Assange is not American either and his website is not hosted in America, America can censor internet companies in it's own country all it wants, if that is what the majority of Americans want. I would however take issue any country that started to tell other countries what to do with their own internet regulations.

Amazing the amount liberty some are willing to give away in them security.

By-the-by China refers to Tibetans and Uyghur Muslim as terrorists and uses it as part of their excuse for controlling information.

I'm pretty sure al-Qaida already knew most if not everything that was on the list already. Either that or al-Qaida is not the maniacal terrorist group that it was made out to be.

I really can't see how people can continue to buy into Assange's rhetoric when his group releases information like this.

Some Americans really must think the rest of the world are idiots, or are idiots themselves. Do you think that everyone and their dog doesn't know what would be considered vital to US security. The list release for Canada, was a Nuclear powerplant, pipelines, a hydroeletric dam, unguarded border points and select manufactories. Anyone with a little bit of common sense could have could have made the same lists.

You forgot to include additional fees, that the econuts are trying to get imposed. The whole carbon trading scheme for example.

Anything that causes/forces enegry efficiencies is not a bad thing; yes it expensives now, but it will become cost effective, when fuel prices continue to increase going forward into the future. One of best bamboozles in recent times, is to make enegry efficiencies a gray area issue linked to global warming, instead of what it should be, a proactive cost saving issue. Gas prices will raise again to the point will people can not afford to fill their SUV's, people have to give up their Subuaban homes to live closer to work and food prices skyrocket(like in 2008).

that should be engery independence*

I think Knackerz is correct, it won't be global warming that causes food prices to double, it will be input costs, petroleum, potash, etc. Global warming may or may not be coming, but it certianly keeps the rich in the money. Energy efficiency is now assocaited with global warming and lefty hippy environuts , instead of being assocaited with engery dependence and cost stability. Those who own O&G shares are laughing all the way to the bank, well the sheeples' eyes remained covered by wool.