Kanada Kev

alittle more: http://www.myfoxchicago.com/myfox/pages/Home/Detail?contentId=3216710&version=1&locale=EN-US&layoutCode=VSTY&pageId=1.1.1

It is a cool online music site. You could open an account and create your own playlists. You'd enter names of artists that you liked and it would pull random songs by them, and then toss at you songs that are of a similar style, composition, genre, etc. You could then give each song a thumbs up or thumbs down and it would LEARN your tastes. I really liked it because it wouldn't just play greatest hits, and would also open your ears to some new stuff.

I like the taste of tap water. Mind you, bottled water can be DAMN FINE sometimes

me too, about 90mins ago http://jambands.ca/sanctuary/showtopic.php?tid/240272/

Classic!!! Tinky Winky says bye-bye to Jerry Falwell The former TV star recalls the trauma of being called gay by the conservative preacher. By King Kaufman May 16, 2007 | Eight years ago the Rev. Jerry Falwell warned parents that BBC children's television star Tinky Winky was a hidden symbol of homosexuality. Falwell died Tuesday at 73, and the world wanted to talk to Tinky Winky. "They're calling again, again, again," he said by phone from his home in Islington, in London. A spokesman said the former "Teletubbies" costar got more than 100 calls from reporters in the hour following news of Falwell's death. "Oh dear, it's easy to say the wrong thing here," he said. "Tinky Winky sad whenever someone dies, but ..." He left it hanging there. In a 1999 article in his National Liberty Journal headlined "Tinky Winky Comes Out of the Closet," Falwell pointed out that Winky could be taken as representing gays. "He is purple -- the gay pride color, and his antenna is shaped like a triangle -- the gay pride symbol," Falwell wrote. "The character, whose voice is that of a boy, has been found carrying a red purse in many episodes and has become a favorite character among gay groups worldwide." In the resulting media firestorm, gay-rights activists called for Winky to come out while Christian groups demanded the BBC fire him so that he couldn't, in Falwell's words, "role-model the gay lifestyle." "It was traumatizing, really," says Winky, who now owns a holistic healing center and makes occasional appearances on British TV. "I'm a very private Teletubby. I just wanted to get away, go over the hills and far away. But when you're 7 feet tall and purple with an antenna on your head and a TV screen in your belly, where are you going to go?" Winky says he tried to contact Falwell after the article came out, but the evangelist wouldn't take his calls. "I wanted to know why he didn't talk to me first," Winky says. "It's not like I'm hard to reach. Have the pinwheel call me. But really I just wanted to clap him on the head with Tinky Winky bag." The star never has clarified his sexual orientation, insisting on his privacy and denying rumors over the years that he had affairs with two of his costars on the 1997-2001 show, the male Dipsy and the female Po. "We love each other very much," he says. "Big hug. But it's not like that. It was a kids show, know what I mean? And this Falwell guy and his followers wanted to turn us into something else. We weren't modeling a gay lifestyle and we weren't trying to corrupt anyone's kids. We were just kids ourselves, really. Give us a little Tubby toast or custard and a film of some kids washing clothes or something, that's all we needed. We didn't give a shit about modeling a lifestyle." Tinky Winky sounds angry. The wounds are still raw. "I'm just practicing my craft, working for the kids, and all at once the tabloids are everywhere on me," he says. "I couldn't even go out. Was it a gay club? Was I talking to a woman? It was bollocks." Winky chuckles. "I must say, though," he says, "without getting into too many details, we had a girl in the group who ran around this kids show yelling, 'Cooter! Cooter!' And I'm the gay one? Do me a favor." Through a spokeswoman, Po declined to comment for this article. Winky says the Teletubbies stay in touch, and he remains friends with both Dipsy, who owns a nightclub in West London where Winky is often seen, and Po. Winky says he and Laa-Laa never really got along during the show's run, but, "We're fine now. We've come to appreciate each other." Asked about Falwell's death, Winky turns serious and chooses his words carefully. "I'm not going to pretend I'm sadder than I am," he says. "There were late nights during the dark times when I wished to hear news like this. I'd be lying if I denied that. I don't feel that way anymore. I like to think I've grown over the years, gotten past all that pain. "But at the end of the day, I'm not terribly sad, and I think a lot of people feel the same way. Jerry Falwell was a divisive person, a hateful person, and what I've tried to be all about, in the Teletubbies days and since then, has been love. I've got to keep it that way. I don't want anybody feeling good about it when it's my time for Tubby bye-bye."

but of course!! he loves everyone ... kinda creepy knowing he's with you at ALL TIMES!!! He's even with the "bad people" when they're doing "bad" things and hurting other people. What a dude.

still lots of good stuff out there . I'm listening to http://finetune.com/ right now. A little Janis Joplin on "Stairway to Rock" right now

This blows. I just went to listen to some tunes (and discover some I've never heard before) and got this message: http://www.pandora.com/restricted Dear Pandora Visitor, We are deeply, deeply sorry to say that due to licensing constraints, we can no longer allow access to Pandora for most listeners located outside of the U.S. We will continue to work diligently to realize the vision of a truly global Pandora, but for the time being we are required to restrict its use. We are very sad to have to do this, but there is no other alternative. We believe that you are in Canada (your IP address appears to be 159.33.10.92). If you believe we have made a mistake, we apologize and ask that you please contact us at pandora-support@pandora.com If you are a paid subscriber, please contact us at pandora-support@pandora.com and we will issue a pro-rated refund to the credit card you used to sign up. If you have been using Pandora, we will keep a record of your existing stations and bookmarked artists and songs, so that when we are able to launch in your country, they will be waiting for you. We will be notifying listeners as licensing agreements are established in individual countries. If you would like to be notified by email when Pandora is available in your country, please enter your email address below. The pace of global licensing is hard to predict, but we have the ultimate goal of being able to offer our service everywhere. We share your disappointment and greatly appreciate your understanding. Sincerely, Tim Westergen Tim Westergren Founder

Happy Meal Girl finds pot, pipe, and lighter in McDonald's Happy Meal Well, there's no false advertising. That's definitely pretty fuckin' HAPPY. And why not? If Ben and Jerry can do a Jerry Garcia theme, why can't McDonald's?

I could say something about Brokeback Mountain, but I'll just leave it alone :

It's always the conundrum with recycling. It's easier and cheaper to just dump it, or ship it somewhere else. Ways and means have to be discovered to get past this. Did you check out the photos of the supertanker disassembly process in Bangladesh??? http://www.foreignpolicy.com/issue_janfeb_2006/endoftheline1.html

Jesus doesn't like parachuters

Killer ink!

Here's another item in a similar vein. This one is about the disposal of computer parts (the site has some other cool photo essays): http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=3686 Technology drives the forces of globalization. But when we replace our computers and flat-screens with the newest in high-tech cool, what happens to the hardware we throw away? Welcome to the digital dumping ground, where the poor make a living off other people’s spare parts. Each year, between 20 and 50 million tons of electronic waste is generated globally. Most of it winds up in the developing world. Some of the most popular destinations for dumping computer hardware include China, India, and Nigeria. It can be 10 times cheaper for a “recycler†to ship waste to China than to dispose of it properly at home. With the market for e-waste expected to top $11 billion by 2009, it’s lucrative to dump on the developing world. Computers are much more than just wires and plastic; they are also a source of highly valuable metals, including gold, copper, and aluminum. One ton of computer scrap contains more gold than 17 tons of gold ore. Circuit boards can be 40 times richer in copper than typical copper ore. For this reason, workers in e-waste dumps in the southern Chinese city of Guiyu carefully sort the computers’ hardware and melt down the most valuable parts. Lead, mercury, and cadmium are a computer’s most common toxic substances. When melted down, the machines release even more toxins into the air, ground, and water. Although developing countries occasionally attempt to ban e-waste, the shipments can be vital to local economies. Some disposal sites in China employ more than 100,000 people. In Guiyu, the average worker can earn between $2 and $4 a day for disassembling what was once someone else’s brand-new computer.

Brad, I completely understand your point. It would be nice if we all had a choice as to where/when/how anything about us is published. What does Grisman think about photos/videos of himself being used on the news? What about in newspapers/magazines? Does he have to approve every single one of those as well? The only reason I ask those questions, is that I see Youtube/Internet as almost an alternate publishing device. Yes, I know that rights are required for publishing photos. However, those are usually received from, and paid to, the photographer not the subject. If I want to publish an article on Grisman, I don't have to ask his permission to, but I do have to pay for any photo I use.

Unbelievable. http://au.news.yahoo.com/070515/23/13h44.html Wednesday May 16, 07:57 AM Mobiles to be blocked for Bush By 7News Mobile phone calls in sections of Sydney's CBD will reportedly be blocked during US President George Bush's APEC visit in September. News Limited papers report the sophisticated counter-terrorism measure will be used to prevent mobile phone detonated remote-control bombs. A helicopter fitted with signal-jamming equipment will shadow the President's motorcade. It will block all mobile phone calls within an area the size of a football field.

These are wild ... life size sculptures made of driftwood. http://www.jansch.freeserve.co.uk/life-size.htm

Hey, thanks for sharing that kickass video. I REALLY liked it. Hmmmmm ... who was it? Jerry Garcia and who? Oh, David Grisman. Cool. I'm definitely going to check out some more of his shit. You telling me that he's got a website that sells stuff? Right On! I'm going over there now to spend some money on his tunes. Bummer, too bad he sued Youtube and got his stuff removed. I just might have "discovered" the Dawg and chosen to buy some of his shit. Oh well

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18687287/ Ex-Grateful Dead musician suing YouTube Grisman contends site using his videos illegally, seeks compensation The Associated Press Updated: 9:11 p.m. ET May 15, 2007 SAN FRANCISCO - A mandolin player who recorded with The Grateful Dead is suing YouTube for posting his videos illegally. David Grisman, nicknamed "Dawg" by former Dead guitarist and singer Jerry Garcia, filed the copyright infringement lawsuit May 10 in federal court in San Francisco. Grisman and business partner Craig Miller, who run the San Rafael-based studio Acoustic Disc, said the case is about helping independent musicians whose music is distributed without authorization by YouTube's owner, Google Inc. The two seek an unspecified amount of money from revenue that Google received from their clips. "We are looking out for ourselves and all the other people like us — musicians and independent publishers," Miller told The Associated Press on Tuesday. The lawsuit says Google and YouTube "deliberately refuse to take meaningful steps to deter the rampant infringing activity readily apparent on YouTube." Grisman appears to be following Viacom Inc., which filed suit claiming YouTube used digital technology to "willfully infringe copyrights on a huge scale." Viacom says Google facilitated the unauthorized viewing of Viacom's programing from MTV, Comedy Central and other networks. In a response filed last month in the Viacom case, Google said YouTube respects the importance of copyrights and does more than is required under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. The law gives Web hosts protection from copyright lawsuits so long as they comply with requests to remove unauthorized material. Representatives from Mountain View-based Google did not respond to phone calls and e-mails Tuesday. While the lawsuit may seem a departure for Grisman who played with the Grateful Dead, a band that tacitly encouraged fans to record shows and distribute "bootleg" tapes of their lives shows, Miller said their is a difference between fan bootlegs and the global distribution of Google. "No one's looking out for the little guy," he said. © 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18687287/

http://www.lewrockwell.com/hornberger/hornberger127.html Empire or Republic by Jacob G. Hornberger We now live in a country in which the president wields the power to send the entire nation into war on his own initiative, without the congressional declaration of war required by the Constitution. We live in a country in which the president and the military wield the power to arrest an American citizen and incarcerate him in a military installation for the rest of his life on suspicion of being a terrorist, denying him due process of law, trial by jury, and other procedural rights guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. We live in a country in which the president wields the power to conduct warrantless searches and seizures, regardless of the provisions of the Fourth Amendment. We live in a country in which the president wields the power to ignore any law passed by Congress simply by signing a statement, in his military capacity as a commander in chief, indicating an intention to ignore the law. In fact, we live in a country in which the president effectively wields the same power here in the United States that he wields in Iraq, given his belief that the entire world, including the United States, is a battlefield in the “war on terror.†How did it all come to this? How did a country that once prided itself on being the freest nation in history end up with a ruler who wields such omnipotent powers? It’s not as if we haven’t been warned. Our Founding Fathers warned us repeatedly what would happen if we abandoned the founding principles of our nation. James Madison, the father of the Constitution, said that of all the enemies to liberty war is the greatest, because it inevitably encompasses all the other threats to people’s freedom. War is the parent of armies, and with armies come death, destruction, taxes, inflation, regulations, and ever-increasing assaults on liberty at home. John Quincy Adams, in his Fourth of July address to Congress in 1821, expressed pride in the fact that America does not go abroad in search of “monsters to destroy.†If America ever pursued such a policy, he said, she would inevitably make herself the “dictatress of the world.†Thomas Jefferson, in his First Inaugural Address, warned against entangling alliances and against our nation’s involvement in foreign intrigues and foreign wars. Our forefathers warned against the dangers of big standing military establishments, pointing out that historically rulers could never resist the temptation to employ them against others, which inevitably fomented new enemies and crises, which then would be used to suspend rights and freedoms at home, the suspensions being enforced by the military. What distinguished our ancestors from modern-day Americans was how the former viewed the federal government. Today, Americans look on the federal government as a close friend or even as a parent, sometimes even a god, given that it provides the people with retirement, health care, education, housing, food, money, and other “benefits.†Our forefathers, on the other hand, viewed the federal government as the greatest threat to their rights and freedoms. They believed that government, being force, was neither their friend nor their parent nor their god. The underlying philosophy of the Constitution, in fact, reflects how the Framers viewed the federal government. The primary purpose of its provisions was to limit the power of the federal government it called into existence. After all, if people trusted the federal government, what would be the point of placing restrictions on its power? With trust, the Framers would have simply said, “We need to elect the best people to public office and then delegate total power to them so that they can get the job done.†But that’s not what the Framers did. Instead, they divided the federal government and severely restricted its powers because they didn’t trust anyone, not even themselves, with omnipotent power. Even the restrictions on power in the Constitution did not satisfy the American people, however. Soon after the Constitution was ratified, people demanded and secured passage of 10 amendments to the document that expressly forbade federal officials to infringe on fundamental rights and to convict people of crimes without following long-established legal procedures, some of which stretched all the way back in English history to the Magna Carta in 1215. Why they hate us “But we live in a different time now. Today, the terrorists hate us and are coming to get us. The Constitution is not a suicide pact.†That raises the important question of why people around the world, especially in the Middle East, are angry and hateful toward our nation. The issue is important because getting the prescription right usually depends on arriving at a correct diagnosis of the malady. The issue of why they hate us revolves around two conflicting rationales. The federal rationale is that foreigners hate America for its “freedom and values.†The other rationale holds that foreigners hate our nation because of extremely bad things that the federal government has done to people overseas. The obvious benefit of the first rationale, from the standpoint of U.S. officials, is that it obviates any critical examination of U.S. foreign policy. In fact, its underlying premise is that a major justification for a pro-empire, pro-interventionist foreign policy is to project power across the world in order to protect America from those who already hate us. The second rationale contends that it is that pro-empire, pro-interventionist policy itself that generates the deep-seated anger and hatred that produce the threat of terrorism against the United States. Of course, this isn’t the first time that federal officials have attempted to shut down a critical examination of federal actions in the context of terrorism. After Timothy McVeigh blew up the federal building in Oklahoma City, recall the immediate response of U.S. officials when libertarians tried to point out why McVeigh had committed the act. Federal officials suggested that to engage in such an examination would “justify†McVeigh’s actions and, therefore, would not be in the best interests of the country. President Clinton even questioned the notion that one could love his country and, at the same time, hate wrongdoing by his government. Yet, is it surprising that U.S. officials would take such a position? After all, the last thing they wanted was a critical examination of the federal massacre at Waco, which was what had generated the enormous anger and hatred within McVeigh, which then led to his terrorist attack in Oklahoma City. But notice something important here: Since Waco, there have been no more federal massacres of American citizens, and there have been no more McVeigh-type retaliatory terrorist attacks. Who can doubt that if U.S. officials were still massacring large numbers of Americans, there would be more Oklahoma City retaliatory terrorist attacks? The situation is no different in foreign affairs, which is precisely why U.S. officials do their best to shut down any critical examination of federal misconduct overseas by their claim that the “terrorists†hate America for its “freedom and values.†Iran and Iraq Let’s consider two examples – Iran and Iraq. When Iranians took U.S. embassy officials hostage during the 1979 Iranian Revolution, I think that it would be safe to say that most Americans had no idea why the Iranian revolutionaries were so angry at the United States. No doubt Americans assumed that the revolutionaries simply hated America for its freedom and values. But Iranians knew that in 1953 the CIA had surreptitiously entered Iran and fomented a coup that resulted in the ouster of Iran’s democratically elected prime minister, a man named Mohammed Mossadegh. Not surprisingly, Mossadegh was highly respected by the Iranian people, and he also was selected as Time magazine’s Man of the Year. Ousting Mossadegh from power, the CIA replaced him with the shah of Iran, who, with his savage secret police force, proceeded to oppress, brutalize, and torture the Iranian populace for the next 25 years. It was no different with respect to the Iraqi people. While President Bush today bases his invasion of Iraq on the notion that Saddam Hussein was a dangerous dictator who was trying to secure weapons of mass destruction, he fails to mention that U.S. officials, including President George H.W. Bush, had been strong supporters of this dictator throughout the 1980s. In fact, the current President Bush also fails to mention that it was the United States and other Western countries that furnished Saddam with biological and chemical weapons along with nuclear technology. Then, when Saddam became the new official enemy of the United States after the fall of the Berlin Wall, the U.S. government, in combination with the UN, proceeded to implement what is arguably the most brutal set of sanctions in world history. Over the course of more than a decade, the sanctions contributed to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children. Ramzi Yousef, one of the 1993 terrorists who attacked the World Trade Center, angrily cited the sanctions as one of the reasons for that attack. Later, two high UN officials resigned in protest against what they termed U.S.-government–caused genocide. The most authoritative studies have concluded that approximately 300,000 children lost their lives from infection and illness attributed to the sanctions. But when U.S. Ambassador to the UN Madeleine Albright was asked by 60 Minutes whether the deaths of the Iraqi children had been “worth it,†she answered that, yes, the deaths had been “worth it.†Then there were the illegal “no-fly zones†over Iraq, which had been authorized by neither the U.S. Congress nor the UN. The missiles fired by U.S. warplanes in the enforcement of the “no-fly†policy killed an untold number of additional Iraqis. Finally, there has been the brutal invasion and occupation of Iraq, a country that never attacked the United States or even threatened to do so, which has resulted in the deaths and maiming of hundreds of thousands of more Iraqis (a recent study by researchers at Johns Hopkins University put the number at more than 650,000), not to mention the conversion of Iraq into a hellhole and wasteland of violence and destruction. It is almost incredible that, although U.S. intelligence agencies have recently concluded that the invasion of Iraq has increased the threat of terrorism against the United States, there are still U.S. officials who maintain that all the bad things that the U.S. government did in the Middle East had nothing to do with the anger and hatred that led to the 9/11 attacks. It’s all because they hate America’s “freedom and values,†not because the U.S. government has killed, tortured, abused, and humiliated people in the Middle East for years. A deadly dead end I could be proven wrong but my hunch is that U.S. troops will be trapped in Iraq for the near future. Since President Bush has suggested that anyone who calls for exiting Iraq is a cut-and-run coward who would put our nation in jeopardy from terrorists, the chance that he will convert himself into such a person by ordering a withdrawal from Iraq is remote. While U.S. officials and their mainstream media supporters have been fairly successful in immunizing Americans from the horrors of the war, death has an interesting way of forcing people to face reality. The increasing number of casualties among U.S. troops has caused Americans to confront the war in Iraq, like it or not. Moreover, since Bush undoubtedly wants to continue the occupation until he leaves office, Iraqi insurgents will have plenty of time over the next two years to ensure that Iraq stays on the minds of the American people with well-planned ambushes and sniper attacks. The Iraq intervention might well be the dead end of the pro-empire, pro-interventionist, “super-power†foreign-policy paradigm that has held our nation in its grip for decades. If so, then as the death and destruction continue to mount, Americans might well begin looking for an alternative paradigm – one that not only is workable but is also consistent with the principles of morality, liberty, and limited government on which our nation was founded. That’s why the libertarian paradigm on foreign policy and civil liberties is so critically important. By restoring the principles of a limited-government republic, libertarianism provides a way out of the morass into which the pro-empire, pro-interventionist paradigm has plunged the nation. Returning to the founding principles of our nation, libertarians would rein in the federal government by bringing home all U.S. troops stationed overseas, including those in Iraq, South Korea, Europe, Latin America, and Japan, and discharging them into the private sector. The libertarian paradigm also entails dismantling the enormous military-industrial complex that President Eisenhower warned us against (along with the enormous taxes that fund it), retaining a relatively small but sufficient military force. Its sole purpose would be to provide an initial defense to an invasion of the United States, until able-bodied citizen-soldiers were able to come to its assistance. Given the fact that no nation today remotely has the military capability to invade and conquer the United States, the size of such a military force would be minimal. By the same token, libertarianism calls for unleashing the private sector – that is, the American people – to travel, trade, and interact with the people of the world. That would entail the dismantling of all sanctions and embargoes against all other countries, including Cuba, North Korea, and Iran. The private sector, not the federal sector, provides the best means of restoring America’s rightful place in the world, one which reaches out to the people of the world in friendship and harmony. The paradigm of empire and intervention has brought our nation nothing but death, destruction, militarism, taxation, and tyranny. The paradigm of libertarianism would restore liberty, free markets, and a constitutional republic to our land. What better way to lead the world? May 15, 2007 Jacob Hornberger [send him mail] is founder and president of The Future of Freedom Foundation. He will be among the 22 speakers at FFF’s upcoming conference on June 1–4 in Reston, Virginia: “Restoring the Constitution: Foreign Policy and Civil Liberties.†Copyright © 2007 Future of Freedom Foundation

http://www.xenu.net/archive/leaflet/xenuleaf.htm Who is Xenu? I'm going to tell you a story. Are you sitting comfortably? Right, then I'll begin. Once upon a time (75 million years ago to be more precise) there was an alien galactic ruler named Xenu. Xenu was in charge of all the planets in this part of the galaxy including our own planet Earth, except in those days it was called Teegeeack. Xenu the alien ruler Now Xenu had a problem. All of the 76 planets he controlled were overpopulated. Each planet had on average 178 billion people. He wanted to get rid of all the overpopulation so he had a plan. Xenu took over complete control with the help of renegades to defeat the good people and the Loyal Officers. Then with the help of psychiatrists he called in billions of people for income tax inspections where they were instead given injections of alcohol and glycol mixed to paralyse them. Then they were put into space planes that looked exactly like DC8s (except they had rocket motors instead of propellers). These DC8 space planes then flew to planet Earth where the paralysed people were stacked around the bases of volcanoes in their hundreds of billions. When they had finished stacking them around then H-bombs were lowered into the volcanoes. Xenu then detonated all the H-bombs at the same time and everyone was killed. The story doesn't end there though. Since everyone has a soul (called a "thetan" in this story) then you have to trick souls into not coming back again. So while the hundreds of billions of souls were being blown around by the nuclear winds he had special electronic traps that caught all the souls in electronic beams (the electronic beams were sticky like fly-paper). After he had captured all these souls he had them packed into boxes and taken to a few huge cinemas. There all the souls had to spend days watching special 3D motion pictures that told them what life should be like and many confusing things. In this film they were shown false pictures and told they were God, The Devil and Christ. In the story this process is called "implanting". When the films ended and the souls left the cinema these souls started to stick together because since they had all seen the same film they thought they were the same people. They clustered in groups of a few thousand. Now because there were only a few living bodies left they stayed as clusters and inhabited these bodies. As for Xenu, the Loyal Officers finally overthrew him and they locked him away in a mountain on one of the planets. He is kept in by a force-field powered by an eternal battery and Xenu is still alive today. That is the end of the story. And so today everyone is full of these clusters of souls called "body thetans". And if we are to be a free soul then we have to remove all these "body thetans" and pay lots of money to do so. And the only reason people believe in God and Christ was because it was in the film their body thetans saw 75 million years ago. Well what did you think of that story? What? You thought it was a stupid story? Well so do we. However, this story is the core belief in the religion known as Scientology.* If people knew about this story then most people would never get involved in it. This story is told to you when you reach one of their secret levels called OT III. After that you are supposed to telepathically communicate with these body thetans to make them go away. You have to pay a lot of money to get to this level and do this (or you have to work very hard for the organisation on extremely low pay for many years). We are telling you this story as a warning. If you become involved with Scientology then we would like you to do so with your eyes open and fully aware of the sort of material it contains. Most of the Scientologists who work in their Dianetics* centres and so called "Churches" of Scientology do not know this story since they are not allowed to hear it until they reach the secret "upper" levels of Scientology. It may take them many years before they reach this level if they ever do. The ones who do know it are forced to keep it a secret and not tell it to those people who are joining Scientology. Part of the first page of the secret OT III document in L. Ron Hubbard's own handwriting Now you have read this you know their big secret. Don't let us put you off joining though.

Thanks for the tip. I'm d/l'ing a copy of it now: http://torrents.thepiratebay.org/3633494/Manufactured.Landscapes.2006.DVDRip.XviD-xV.3633494.TPB.torrent Hopefully I'll get a chance to watch it soon. I enjoyed Oil: The World Over a Barrel as well. I caught it on CBC back in March. Maybe they'll show it again: http://www.cbc.ca/documentaries/oil/

William, Aside from having to look at your avatar that was a wonderful post. THere are so many factors that come into play when the oil debate arises. There are a lot of elements to it that people are often in the dark about. The history is all important as well. Those that control the oil flow have power ... we are encouraged to feed the beast and anything trying to go against it is easily squished I've always loved asking people what they paid for their bottled water when they are complaining about the price of gas at the pumps. I'm all for higher gas prices as well. HOWEVER, the extra profits should not being going to the oil companies, but rather through taxes that would be levied. Those taxes (kept in check by public watchdogs) would then be used to fund alternative energy sources, encourage citizens to opt for those alternatives, etc.

it was just a temporary pause for everyone to collect their thoughts and joy . Now, WE CELEBRATE :D a sampling of some of Mr. Falwell’s greatest quotes: “Christians, like slaves and soldiers, ask no questions.†“Someone must not be afraid to say, ‘moral perversion is wrong.’ If we do not act now, homosexuals will own America!.. If you and I do not speak up now, this homosexual steamroller will literally crush all decent men, women, and children who get in its way…and our nation will pay a terrible price!†“AIDS is not just God’s punishment for homosexuals; it is God’s punishment for the society that tolerates homosexuals†“I listen to feminists and all these radical gals - most of them are failures. They’ve blown it. Some of them have been married, but they married some Casper Milquetoast who asked permission to go to the bathroom. These women just need a man in the house. That’s all they need. Most of the feminists need a man to tell them what time of day it is and to lead them home. And they blew it and they’re mad at all men. Feminists hate men. They’re sexist. They hate men - that’s their problem.†“The whole (global warming) thing is created to destroy America’s free enterprise system and our economic stabilityâ€

No prob ... i saw it and was pretty much blown away. Numbers are numbers and without something to compare it to, they can lose their impact sometimes.