Hartamophone

That's unfortunate, c-towns, although I'm impressed that you knew how to find that image online (and from stdcarriers.com no less). I wouldn't even know what to search for.

Intrawest resorts are starting to institute new helmet rules: Link

Voted. In third place as of 9:51 Eastern Tuesday night.

I am confidently assuming that once you send something into the United States, with the intent that it will end up there, then you are operating within their jursidiction and can be subject to extradition, where possible. I don't think it is seen as much different from physically smuggling something in yourself. I am also assuming that he advertised or distributed literature in the United States, which might be how they got him. I am not sure of what the specific charges are.

Happy birthday, brah. And condolences, the bums will always lose.

That's just it, though. We're talking about idle tough-guy talk from lawmen and an empty campaign promise from a high-level politician. Prosecuting Morgantaler in the U.S. for something he did legally in Canada as a Canadian citizen would never fly under international law. Emery was very clearly operating within American jurisdiction, which is what landed him in trouble.

My point is that the same thing happened to Marc Emery. He waved and wagged it in everyone's face. It was only a matter of time and we all knew. so did Henry Morgantaler. and although he went to jail for a few months in the 70s (altho' subsequently acquitted) back when canada was still backwards' date=' [b']he was never extradited to the US for continuing to perform abortions on american women who came to his clinics in canada. I don't think that that is an appropriate analogy. Morgantaler was operating entirely in Canada. At no point was he under U.S. jurisdiction, and since he's not a U.S. citizen, not even the broadest of American laws could have touched him. Emery, on the other hand, was mailing his seeds to the U.S. There's a big, big difference there.

The argument is more about illegality. For example' date=' what if the US wanted to extradite me for vacationing in Cuba? Under Canadian law I can travel to Cuba freely, Americans cannot, so the US authorities would consider me a criminal. Should Canada send me to the US for trial? Or to hypothetically address the scenario you suggest, let's say that gambling was still illegal in Canada, yet the Flamingo in Vegas welcomed Canadian gamblers with open arms. Should Canada have the right to extradite the owners of the Flamingo and charge them under Canadian law with running a gambling house? [/quote'] The extradition treaty between Canada and the United States clearly states that extradition can only be sought when the offence is punishable in both countries by at least one year in prison, which is the case here. Plus, Emery made use of the U.S. Postal service (or a private equivalent), so he came within American jurisdiction. While I may not agree with the laws, I think Emery had it coming to him. Maybe his cause needs martyrs, but you can't conduct business as overtly as he has been for quite some time and not expect to end up locked up.

What did they play for you?

I always crack up (alright, maybe just on the inside) when someone pulls the cord as a bus is pulling into, say, Baseline Station, or in front of the Rideau Centre.

Over-reaching-award-with-massively-subjective-criteria forum, please.

Cool to hear what Trey has to say. As an interview, though, I found it a pretty annoying read. I think the writer spent a little too much energy trying to sound cool and like an old school Phan. When I come out of reading an interview feeling like I learned some things about the interviewer, I don't feel like he did his job properly. There are a couple of music journalists out there who I continue to read just because they get cool people, but I always end up rolling my eyes a bunch of times as they try and make themselves look cool with the questions they ask.

So I just saw it again and I can see where you're coming from. You're talking primarily about the section of Street Sleeper after the main verses and chorus are done, and it stretches out a bit, right? I don't think it's uncanny, but it's not as much of a stretch as I had originally thought. I do think that commercial is a little strange, though. The first time I saw it I thought the people were signing a petition, and the underlying message would be a sort of call to social action (which Keith's has done in the past, reminding people to vote). I was surprised that it was telling people to do nothing more than sign Alexander Keith's birthday card.

This has been my biggest U2 turn off (U2-urn off?) since probably Zooropa. I get that they are massively popular and inspire throngs of people (and I can't help but self-righteously wonder if that is largely due to a lack of exposure to anything better), but I would still put them at the top of my "most overrated bands" list, hands down. Granted I have never seen them, but the reviews I've read and clips I've seen seem to point to it being all about the spectacle at this point. I had this conversation with a buddy of mine who majored in music and has seen them a couple of times. He says that the real star of the show, musically speaking, is The Edge's guitar tech.

Seriously? I've seen the commercial a couple of times and don't think it sounds like GTB in the slightest. I'll pay closer attention next time I see it.

This was on the front page of the Citizen this morning. So, you can get it there.

I think you missed the point. The joke is about how a celebrity's actions become synonymous with the their name. That was the joke when he was talking about Kanye. But the punchline to the whole thing was a creative method of threatening to beat up your girlfriend. Whether or not he used a celebrity's name as a euphemism, I still found it to be a low level to stoop to for a laugh.

[color:purple]Yeah, because nothing says hilarious like a joke about threatening to pound the living shit out of your girlfriend.

Kanye on Leno was perhaps the most awkward moment of television I have ever seen. Sweet merciful crap. If you don't want to watch the whole thing, the worst part starts at about 1:55.

Hell yeah. I worked on a very similar (read: nearly identical) file at UVic's Environmental Law Clinic when I was a student there. We were taking the BC provincial gov. to task for failing to identify habitat of critically endangered species - most specificially the Vancouver Island Marmot - when the government knew exactly where the habitat was and had a duty to identify it under SARA. And in related personal news, I am interviewing with Ecojustice on Tuesday

Always a killer lineup at this festy. The story I've heard (which would be pretty easy to confirm or deny) is that they guy who is behind it is a huge music fan who has tons of $$$ and basically does this as a community service.

My experiences in Victoria were very similar. Motorists and cyclists have largely learned to live with each other there, and as a result you see a lot less anger and a lot more general compliance with the rules of the road from all sides.

Have a good one, brah. I hope it's Zappatastic.

I'm not asking you to cut some slack, nor am I making excuses for the excessively reckless cyclists. I'm merely suggesting we think about where the behaviour might originate from. If drivers (in general) were more mindful of cyclists in general, then cyclists (in general) wouldn't be up on the sidewalk. And people deliberately run reds and stop signs in their cars all the time, by the way.

Drivers might be conscious of the risk they pose to pedestrians, but far fewer of them are as mindful of the risk they pose to cyclists. I think cyclists pass off their frustration with cars onto pedestrians, which creates a vicious...er...cycle. Bikers get run off the road by cars all the time, and often end up with a bad attitude on the sidewalk - where they pose a threat to pedestrians - because it is unsafe for them on the road. As an avid cyclist who knows that many other cyclists have a horrible and dangerous attitude, I firmly believe that the problem starts with ignorant drivers. (And for the record, I also drive a car). There needs to be more understanding on both sides, but I think it should start with the bigger and more dangerous vehicles.