Matt

"Panic Room", "Alexander"...

Check out www.imdb.com..

Why am I fan boy for being glad that my favourite band has a nomination? The way you talked about K-os you seem more of a fan boy of his than I am of Limblifter...

The website was moved, www.hollymcnarland.net...

I was pleasantly surprised to see John MacLean and Sheldon Zaharko nominated in the "Recording Engineer of The Year" category of the year for their work on "Jumbo Jet Headache" by "Limblifter".

Some of it was funny, but the best part for me was before "God" cut to Cheney when he said something like: God:"George could you downplay our relationship?" George W. Bush:"What do you mean?" God:"Well like when you say "God wanted you to be president", could you downplay that?..."

If there's no "Jewish" state wouldn't that be discriminatory? The Jewish population has been kicked out of every European country at one time or another in the past, if a nation was offered to people with that type of history, they should take it. The Jewish population on whole made no efforts to have a country, only the Zionists. That is all that happened, however, Israel has been constantly attacked to the point where it seems they cannot trust the outside world. Anyone watch any of the news coverage on the 60th Aniversary of the liberation of Auchwitz? One members of the Israeli parliment said "let us not forget that no one came to our aid", that sets the tone for what happens. Instead of playing the blame game, steps need to be taken to build up trust in the area, that is the only way to help out, because once you build up trust, then you can work on peace talks. Also I found this article on www.cbc.ca. I like it because it is less biased then the intial one in this topic. News story from "cbc.ca"

I liked them better than "Incubus" live, "Incubus" was too over the top. "Incubus" were alright actually playing the music... But, "30 Seconds To Mars" was better live I think.

There was conflict from before Israel was created, that's why the British left. That's why several Middle-Eastern nations went to war with Israel in the first little while of creation of Israel. That war never ended technically even, and the only reason the Israelis survived was because of poor co-ordination by the would be invaders. The Israelis had enough time to ward off the attackers, and then re-deploy them in the next area where they were to be attacked. Israel has only taken land in the interest of protection of their people. Israel returned land they had taken from Egypt after the 6-day war, after a peace treaty was reached, which is also the only treaty in the middle-east which has not been broken, at least not yet. Quite frankly, Israel has been ganged up on since day one, but they've managed to survive, and usually come out of each conflict better than they were before, which is why they are not well liked in the Middle East.

Hopefully, it will be as good as the first CD by them.

This conflict is the ressonance of a religous dispute, it has to be resolved through clearing up issues revolving around religion.

Not everything is that black and white, especially in this situation.

I saw this movie, and I actually really liked it, I really didn't know anything about the movie before seeing it though.

Bill Clinton tried to help broker a deal too... But I don't think anything came out of those talks...

Israel gained the land through being constantly attacked by bordering nations. The system they have created may not be the best, but it comes from post-World War Two mentality, Jewish settlers in Israel didn't want to almost be wiped out again. Constantly attacking them didn't help confirm that Israel can have a peaceful existance in the near future, so they worked hard to try to survive. It seems that almost always the Jewish people are under attack. Whether or not you agree with the measures they have taken, would you allow yourself to be wiped out neccessarily either? The world does need to come together for a better understanding, but playing the blame game simply does not help people to come together, it distances them.

And guilty people can too. My logic works perfectly well. Why so many emoticons? Why not write an actual reply? And if the Canadian dollar is to keep rising we need to work on production of raw materials.

The Liberals have cut spending on nearly all social programs, and made it harder for the poorest Canadians to get medical care for things like worker's compensation claims, as now disabled people have to go through a much more stringent application process to get scaled back care, while getting smaller amounts of money. This outweighs the minor increases to healthcare spending that keep the system from collapsing while doing nothing to improve care. As for the casino license, if you had paid any actual attention to this issue, and followed it longer than the initial bad publicity (where the media were at Glen Clark's house for some reason before the police showed up, while the man in charge of the investigation was a Liberal party member who was at that time considering running as a BC Liberal MLA in the next election), you would know that this accusation went to trial, and Glen Clark was acquitted of any wrongdoing. So we've got a billion dollar corrupted sale of a public asset to an American owned corporation, directly counter to what the Liberals promised, compared with an accusation of Glen Clark having a deck built in return for a casino license, which was later proven untrue in court. If you're going to hack at the NDP for association with casinos, you might want to hack the Liberals just the same, as they've been encouraging increasing the number of casinos and gambling ventures in the province of late. Don't be a hypocrite now. The Fast Ferries issue is interesting as well. I agree that getting fast ferries was a mistake, they were ill-suited to the use they were put to. But you're criticizing it for all the wrong reasons. Firstly, it's never a bad idea to bring jobs to your province, especially unionized ones with high wages so as to put money into the local economies. How can you criticize those jobs as not being "real jobs"? Especially when the government you're defending is responsible for cutting masses of government jobs, bringing in the $6/hr training wage that's been terribly detrimental to the poorest citizens of the province, and creating nothing but call centre and Walmart jobs. In my Grade 11 year (2001-02), the government's cutbacks to the education budget resulted in every teacher in my district hired after 1995 being let go in June 2002. Jobs that pay well disappear, jobs that pay $6 an hour come in. If those are your real jobs, you've done a fabulous job of entirely discrediting yourself. As for bidding, when you are entertaining bids on a public asset, it is your duty as a public servant to get the best deal for the public possible. This was not done, and your Translink analogy fails entirely. Firstly, the company chosen was an American company. Secondly, BC Rail was running itself quite well, and turning a profit. The debt the government claimed was the motivation to sell a profit-making venture is a reality of rail companies. All rail companies have comparable debt. The profits of BC Rail were somewhere just under $100 million annually, meaning that our government sold the company for a 99 year lease for the profit it would make in 10, while failing to negotiate the best price possible, and leaving out the future coal revenue that needed to be factored in to give a realistic assessment of the worth of BC Rail. Thirdly, Translink is allowing bidding on things they cannot supply themselves. BC Rail was self-sufficient. It's also interesting that in your defense of the actions of Translink, you yourself point out that the poor choice in bidding by the Translink board has resulted in increased cost being passed on to those who require public transit, often those who are in the financial situation of being unable to afford a vehicle. So those who have no choice get screwed over just a little more. Elementary schools, regardless of how you believe curriculum should run, do not need their funding cut. Even if you want an increased focus on things like writing and other fundamentals, cutting the funding so that fewer materials are available, and class sizes are forced to increase is a detriment to the education of the students, due to decreased attention from teachers. I'm not sure where you went to school, but my school (Prince George Secondary School), as well as the rest of my district (57) were and always have been on the semester system. Justify cutting our funding in that case. Yes, money can be better utilized, but there is such a thing as cutting too much, and the manner in which the Liberals have done this (entering into signed contracts illegally and removing clauses they dislike, terminating school boards who turn in deficit budgets and replacing them with appointed councils, etc, etc, etc) is so oppositional to the people of the province that it creates a hostile environment before even considering reforms. Let's face it, if we have a $2 billion surplus in the province, those cuts weren't all necessary. Cuts are necessary, that suplus needs to be re-directed. Schools are run terribly, even once on the semester system things need to be run better. One of my English classes had 38 students, and I had a better education in that class than in ones with less than 30. The reason was the teacher, she spent time to actually make sure we actually learned the material, where as my other classes the teachers did not. Class size does not matter, and quite frankly if teachers want smaller sizes they should be willing to take a pay cut to pay for the increased teachers, spaces, etc. needed for it, not a pay raise. Taking away money forces people to better spend what they have, after they've done they have successfully done that, more money could be increased if available, currently, money is being wasted, too much to say cuts aren't neccessary. If you do not like the way medi-care is run complain to nurses and doctors. The B.C. Liberals have increased over 2 million dollars towards health care in the last three years, more than the N.D.P. ever did. Where is the money going to? The Nurses and Doctors, they are taking our money while not investing it back into the system. The government has incentives to have people go to the interior, but they cannot force doctors to go to a place they do not want to go. Guilty people can be found not guilty. The fact that Glen Clark had to go to trial should be cause for concern, so I stand by my statement. Currently, I have not heard of one of the new slot machines being placed in a neighbourhood that could be worsened by them drastically. Translink has raised the fares, but my point was is that they went with the company best suited for what they need over going over to a company that could do a worse job. The point is for the contracts to go to a company that would best benefit the people. Real Jobs always develop on the simpliest level and grow, this takes time, but quite frankly we need to evolve. We cannot be loggers, fisherman, etc. anymore. Simply handing out jobs that pay more than the private sector is ridiculous. Those jobs are meant to be filled only if they are needed, going beyond need is a waste of tax payers dollars. Developing real jobs, will help people integrate with the new job market, the old one is collapsing. Canada has not gone beyond the colonial mentality. We still export raw materials when we could create a product out of them ourselves, which could possibly bring more money into the country. With new job markets coming into B.C. those could develop into companys that make products out of our raw materials.

It would be cool if they tried to continue it on somewhere else. I've liked the show since the start so it's disappointing to see it end before it's time. Hopefully, the letter writing campaign will be successful though.

There could be another "Star Trek" spin-off in the near future though, because "Enterprise" came out after "Voyager" with only a summer break or something like that. There's apparently a letter writing campaign currently going on at http://www.saveenterprise.com/, I don't know if it will work this time though. However, after the original "Star Trek" was cancelled after only two years, fans wrote letters in a letter campaign which brought the show back for awhile.

News story from startrek.com

I would rather Canada fight in just missions than helping out in an un-just war. Sending Canadians troops to Iraq even now would say we condone the war, and I for one don't. The U.S. created this mess, they need to create a solution for it themselves.

We are proud to send troops, but not when we're sending them into violent situations like how Iraq is currently. Especially since Iraq wouldn't be this hostile right now if not for the actions of the U.S. government.

That's just ridiculous, that's called being smart. One casualty is quite frankly too many. People have the right to know that when they're asked to go into combat to know that government has not sent them into a horrible situation.

"I like the pottery barn rule "you break it, you fix it"" - John Kerry. The U.S. created an awful mess, but why should we put troops at risk over this? It's Military policy not to send troops into situations like that because one casualty is considered too many. The Troops have families too, and they deserve to know they are not being sent into a situation like that.

Maybe with some new characters, it will refresh the jokes a bit... I don't know though.