Utter arrogance...You speak for yourself. Why is it people are always saying stupid things like "I speak for Europe" or "I speak for the rest of the world". No you don't. We didn't elect you (Believe me, I would have remembered that campaign poster)
i stated several times in previous posts that I know my government has done wrong, and has given countries reasons to hate us. If you choose not to see that i've admitted that, not my problem not that i need to justify anything to you of all people, but I earned a 4.0 in the major from a top ten school in the country, and if you had read earlier, yes it was one of my majors, it is simply not what I am doing now as a career. And the only reason I mentioned it is because this sort of thing interests me, i never claimed to be an expert. I have no reason to critique canada, I find the country enjoyable and a majority of the people pleasant. I agree with the health care and social policies. I'm sure you have your problems as well, but you know what? I'm not going to take what I see on CNN as gospel and go bashing what I know nothing about. You are simply annoyed because people disagree with you, so be it, you are entitled to that form of arrogance. as for me, I have better things to do with my time then to go back and forth with someone who reads what he wishes to read, ignores what he wishes to ignore, believes his 'sources' are gospel and spouts pompous rhetoric. Be well wendy
Well GTech, you can send him money then Honestly, I think a lot of his efforts are misguided. While I agree it is an important fight, we are losing ground at home. Schools are closing, losing programs, losing teachers and education is going down the crapper. I'm willing to give up a lot of things, but education is something to cherish and to pass along to future generations. President Bush needs to recognize that and start taking some notice. I work with youth who has fallen through the cracks, and the cracks are just getting wider and wider.
mikmik is a very bright individual and so is Wendy mikmik, so how this got so personal I don't know but you are both very smart and there is no reason to take it personal.
There is never enough that can be done on education, Wendy. I've not stayed current on education enough to cover it. I remember reading last year that Bush has put more financially towards education than previous presidents.
Part of the education problem is the way the funding is set up. Most of it comes from the states and local taxes. But if you have a poor neighboorhood, there won't be as much funding available as the richer areas. It can make for a horrible cycle. I think reform is needed in that area, but has taken back burner for, oh just about forever. It's not so much a Bush problem per se, but it is frustrating to see 3 overcrowded as it is schools close when billions are going overseas. You may be right about Bush and his budget, i'll have to go look into that after my first cup of caffiene
This is too good to stay out of any longer Wendy - you'll have to explian what a '4.0 in the major from a top ten school' is, I know what a top 10 school is but I'm sure I'm not the only none US person who hasn't a clue what a 4.0 in the major is - when I went to school, majors were taught in music My definition of a Terrorist is pretty simple - some one who's aim it is to bring Terror to people. What frightens me, is simply this - the war in Iraq was justified by the existance of WMD ( Funny how so many ground troops were sent in without adequate protection against the weapons that we're supposed to exist, but that's another matter) and whether those weapons existed or not, the war had nothing to do with Terrorism, if it did then we (the UK and US) are as guilty as the Iraqys (can't spell that) as we both helped keep that regime in power over the years - thus we're guilty accessories to any crime that regime committed. Regardless of any war in Iraq (or the non-resaons for it), no true democracy can ever hold persons (of any nationality) in prisons (of any kind) without the right to trial. By doing so, we are now no better than those countries which are run by dictators we supposedly are hell bent on turning to democracy. Mr's Blair and Bush have brought in laws which violate one of the basic human rights associated with the so called free world - the right to trial. If you haven't got the evidence, then you can't hold the person captive. If you have got the evidence then you go to trial - so it stands to reason that the various people held under the terrorism laws are being held illegally. Holding anyone against their will (without trial) is illegal in any so called civilised country, and that is exactly what our two countries are doing. As it stands at the moment, our 2 governments could pull any one off the streets and hold them indefinitely under the anti-terrorism laws put in place - including people who simlpy disagree with the government. That is what dictators do (generalism - there may well be some that don't), not what the self proclaimed leading democracies in the world are supposed to do. Blair and Bush are making our two countries into hipocracies - simply do as we say not as we do.
Thats the highest GPO (Grade Point Average) A=4 B=3 C=2 etc. Take your grades form the whole cirriculum, average them and that the GPO. A 4.0 (not a 3.9, not a 3.8) is very difficult to get, especially at an IVY League school and would be a very small percentile.
Hell now we are all in trouble, we have a smart woman on the forum I hope crazy is more powerful than smart for my sake....... PS: Great post JL, in times of war things like this happen, ABU GRAVE...or at least it was/is a grave error on our part.
If she indeed graduated from a Top 10 University (Harvard, Yale, Brown, etc) then she would be able to run circles around anyone in this forum in her major. That would put her somewhere in the 99.99999999% percentile. Right up there with Chelsea Clinton (She was Stanford)
Bill Clinton as head of NATO? This search shows in the results that some are wanting that, how about that http://www.alltheweb.com/search?cat=web&cs=utf8&q=Bill+Clinton+Rhodes+scholar&rys=0&_sb_lang=pref
I like the fourth result in that search chrishaas: Fuck Enterprise Rent-A-Car Current mood: frustrated. Current music: Drowning Pool. Fuck Enterprise Rent-A-Car. Congratulations to ladyrisa7 who submitted the best answer to my twentieth analogy. more hits from: xhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/chrishaas/15922.html - 16 KB lol... I wonder if thats a bit of word association with Clinton ?!?!
Good looking Blog..... Bill Clinton (Hillary) for President 2008, anything (a monkey) would be better than Cheney or Condi Rice
Our governments are not going after anyone, they are going after those looking to harm our countries and the people of our countries. The suggest of could does not mean it is being done. Perhaps your country is different. I know of no instance where someone has been detained without evidence or cause. I'm not talking about an hour, or a day, I'm talking about detained. As much as our MSM loves to criticize our country and often side with terrorists, they would be all over it. Times are different. And with the changing times, so will our laws change. I'd much rather have that, than to be on the other side complaining about how our governments are not doing enough. There is no room for being soft on terrorists. These very laws help capture people like these: http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050413/ap_on_re_us/hamas_trial_1 And there are plenty of other cases where these laws have helped. But I know of no incident where these laws have been used on the "average" citizen to detain the "just becase." BTW, Ghassan Elashi is the founder of the Texas chapter of the Council on American Islamic Relations—CAIR. Not the first senior level CAIR member to be convicted on terrorist related charges.
I hear your arguement GTech, but show me your proof that those held under the anti-terrorism laws actually committed any offence. You have none - ZERO PROOF - why because they have never gone to trial, without trial there is NO PROOF of wrong doing. That is a basic premise on which our two countries are run. How do you know the laws haven't been used on the 'average' citizen - you don't. You can't see what evidence they have (if any) because that would prejudice any case that they might ever get around to bringing. And I'm damn sure neither of our governments are going to stand up and say that they've detained someone 'just because' - they've been detained under the anti-terrorism laws. Is there evidence that the detainees in G'tmo (can't spell that place in Cuba) committed any crime - some of those returned to Britain are now walking around as free men, WHY, because there was no proof of wrong doing. In the cases you mention - you use the magic word - CONVICTED. This implies trial, thus they have not been held in definitely without trial under the anti-terrorism laws. Those cases are not what I'm talking about. I'm worried about those that are held indeffinitely without trial and without any eveidence being shown of wrong doing - and that is in breach of a basic human right that our two societies are based on.
NOTE: I'm not saying that either the UK or the US have detained people under the anti-terrorism laws, without trial - just that they could. And we (the public) would be non the wiser.
I have posted on this before also JL, you are correct, the President can use emergency power usurping the laws of the land and could detain any one of us for posting on this forum if he wanted to. http://vivisimo.com/search?v:sources=Web&query=President+Bush+Emergency+power+terrorists&x=38&y=10 That goes to show you what free speech in America is worth, there is no "free speech" if they want to make you "pay a price" for your thoughts.