This has been something I’ve wanted to get off my chest for a while since a lot of people I’ve met seem to follow him like sycophants… and please if anyone disagrees with me tell me why I am wrong.

I don’t like Alex Jones, even if he does speak some truth, I don’t think he is a very ideal leader of the anti new world order movement or whatever you want to call it.

First off, he is a religious nut. I mean come on: he claims to fight against conspiracies / widely believed myths yet he buys into one of the biggest of them all Christianity and he uses the most obscure reasoning to justify it. He comes across as very anti-science in general by talking about how we need to stop the scientific dictatorship from taking over, and calling Darwin an evil man & linking him to the Nazi’s. He doesn’t even believe in evolution. He believes in intelligent design. I recall him saying “the theory of evolution” with disdain in his voice during his movie End Game (as if it hasn’t been pretty much proven as a fact at this point) He is not just a moderate Christian, he is a fundamentalist Christian with some pretty extreme views ranging from everything from his pro life stance to an open hatred towards homosexuals among other things .

Plus he doesn’t even believe in man made climate change even though the scientific community / evidence pretty conclusively supports it. He seems to be against any steps to reduce carbon / pollution, such as treaties between nations, since from his paranoia filled point of view the whole green movement is just another plot by the elite to have more control over us and make us pay higher taxes . What does he expect us to believe that basically the entire body of scientists who study climate change and have recommended that these changes be put into place for the good of the world / humanity, have been bought off by the elite and instructed to lie to us? yea right, like that’s believable. How can anyone actually buy into the rhetoric that excessive carbon is actually a good thing when the forests & and oceans that absorb it are dieing?

As for the whole 911 thing i don’t think there is enough to conclude that it was an “inside job”, or the Zionists. or the lizard people were behind it or whatever… In fact the scientific / skeptic community for the most part doesn’t buy it.. Skeptics Magazine as well as Popular Mechanics even did whole issues refuting truther claims… even Ron Paul who most of the truthers support for president doesn’t buy into it… I think as I’ve heard many people say all ready: that whole thing was basically a big distraction from the really important things that are going on under are noses having to do with people’s rights being stripped away more and more every day. I do fully support an investigation though, better yet an independent investigation, because you know that there will still be coverups if they investigate themselves. I deffinitely don’t believe we have the full story behind what happened on 911. I’m also not in anyway saying that there aren’t people controlling things behind the scenes who aren’t using events like 911 and climate change to take advantage of people and take away their rights either. These people will use threats real & imaginary to further their own goals…

Another thing I feel is important to point about about Alex Jones is that he conducts himself like someone who is full of rage, even mentally unstable. Shouting in peoples faces with a megaphone like a lunatic doesn’t do a hell of a lot of good for your cause I would think. What it does do is cause average people to look at you and just write you off and all your beliefs off as loony. Why doesn’t he actually try having rational conversations with these people?, and get them on video tape, interview them, try to trip them up and catch them in there lies. Wouldn’t that serve your cause more instead of screaming in every ones face phrases like “we are not your cattle!, death to the new world order! we are not your cattle!” like a crazy person. Maybe he is justified sometimes, but he should know that average people see this kind of behavior as mental. Or how about an instance on a recent show of his where he shouted something about being a chimp who was warning all the the chimps that danger was coming, and started jumping up and down shouting “ooh ooh ahh ahh” repeatedly… http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wyNISU_ocOI

I am also questioning this whole libertarian philosophy that these guys seem to promote… Maybe I am ignorant and I don’t know enough about it but If the economy were totally free market, wouldn’t it lead to the rich getting even richer and the poor getting even poorer and the poor and middle classes being even more oppressed than they are now? Seems to make logical sense to me. I can’t speak as an American, I know the hole has been dug pretty deep for them unfortunately, and perhaps they need drastic solutions, but as a Canadian i like my social programs and my government run healthcare system etc… and I know I wouldn’t want to lose that. Maybe the new American healthcare bill is flawed and written by the insurance companies, but that doesn’t automatically mean that the whole idea of a publicly run healthcare system is necessarily bad.

So for these reasons and more I am puzzled why anyone would want to follow this guy…. He does make some very valid points about people running things behind the scenes, and generally screwing over / slowly taking rights away from the common man. Also he makes good points about both parties in the U.S. being almost the same thing these days and neither of them are really serving the people. The fact that politicians are bought off by the special interests that finance their campaigns, and the system needs to be changed should be something that is fairly obvious for everyone to see by now. At least he is doing some good by getting people to question there own beliefs and try to uncover what is really going on, but it scares me when i see people taking his word like it’s the gospel, especially when he actually really believes in the gospel. Also, after watching this guy for a little while I’m beginning to think that he just automatically opposes anything that either the government or the general scientific community is behind. No matter what it is he will find a way to paint it as a conspiracy, because that’s what he does, that’s how his paranoia filled mind works.

When I have a conflict about whether something is true or not I always base my decision on what the majority scientific view is or what the majority of people in that field say, based on what the evidence says… not on what some arrogant megalomaniacal douche who doesn’t have any credentials scientific or otherwise says. Because he is not a trustworthy source I don’t consider it worth while to even bother watching his movies anymore personally, since I know that sprinkled amount all of the truth he says are big chunks of bullshit and I honestly don’t have time you investigate every outrageous claim he might make, I’d rather stick with sources that I know to be somewhat trustworthy, since he has all ready demonstrated himself to be untrustworthy… I have also seen evidence of him taking things out of context ton purpose in order to skew the truth / back up the point he is making much the same as other conspiracy theorists do in their movies. Once and awhile I will check out his radio show for comedy, or because someone links it and actually check out some of the stuff he is talking about. Sometimes it has value…

I do believe that he is dangerous man though, do to all of the influence he holds and because there are a lot of people out there who will automatically take anything he says as the undisputed truth.

PS. The guys voice is like sand paper on the ears, I realize that this is a trivial complaint and has no bearing on the content of what he is saying but his angry thick growling accented voice makes him very hard to listen to continuously, almost torturous.

Some more of Alex Jones and his wacky antics if you have some time to kill:(It really is quite amusing to see how worked up he gets)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LmAiD2k8rNY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8FUHVLHzVA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNjGS-qt6KQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZGFw3hY20lM

http://climatedenial.org/

The TV news reports are like junk food, it’s appealing to our base level nature as animals… but once you get out of that, if you have any inclination to be better than you are, it’s hard to want to get stuck on that again…
inevitably there’s going to be another balloon boy in a couples weeks or a month, and some other guy who “cheated” and is going to be demonized… that is not for the collective society to pass judgement on, not in the case of a celebrity or in the case of a stranger… that’s only between the people involved. No one can know all the details or should care to.

On the plus side the movie was entertaining, and the cast did a fairly good job of duplicating the vibe of the original star trek with a modern spin for the most part, but what I dislike is fact that with one movie JJ. Abram has basically made all other Trek(except Enterprise) irrelevant, since it’s all just a different time line / alternate reality that doesn’t exist any more. Basically he has flushed 40 years of trek down the toilet… the original series, TNG, DS9, Voyager all no longer exist in his version of star trek…Ok I could live with Voyager being no more, since that show had very few redeeming qualities to it for me, but you don’t just throw out the good with the bad. the last two TNG movies were also pretty horrendous too but while those movies may have killed star trek because of the fact that they were so bad, this movie killed star trek in a much more literal fashion. I have a hard time seeing why the people in charge of the star trek franchise, would let Abram develop this into a film… other than the fact that they are just so desperate to revive the franchise, which it probably will in the short term, but looking at the bigger picture this move makes star trek a lot more confusing and convoluted and weakens the franchise.

If you are a non star trek fan you should enjoy it, you might even enjoy it if you are a fan, but this movie lets down a lot of star trek fans like me. Before this movie came out star trek for the most part had maintained continuity over the past 40 years, with only a few small errors here and there that you could turn a blind eye to, but now that continuity is gone.

Also where were the people who acted like temporal police men from the 29th century that travelled back through time to fix any changes to the time line when the whole temporal cold war was going on in the enterprise TV series or when they travelled to 1996 in Voyager? Wouldn’t the death of Kirks dad, and destruction of Vulcan along a sizable part of the federation and kilingon fleets be enough of a change in the time line to warrant them coming back to fix it? It just doesn’t make sense.

Ok that’s enough. I’ve gotten that out of my system now.

Legalize marijuana – It’s not any worse than alcohol, making it legal would reduce the organized crime aspect of it… blah blah blah… Everyone’s heard these arguments, and most people agree with legalizing it.(2 thirds of British Columbians according to a recent survey) The only reason it’s not legal in Canada yet is because of the influence of the US.

Legalize prostitution – All other arguments aside George Carlin said it best: “F***ing is legal, selling is legal, so why isn’t selling f***ing legal?” Prohibiting it is morally wrong and doesn’t make logical sense. To me it’s a civil rights issue. It’s a basic human right over our bodies that we should all have. Besides porn is perfectly legal and it’s the exact same fricking thing! but only with cameras.

Make the circumcision of infants illegal – mutilating a childs genitals should be against the law plain and simple. There is so much information available now about how harmful this is. If a parent decided to cut any other body part off of a child, that child would be removed from the parents custody immediately. So why should the foreskin be any different? It’s not, it’s child abuse. If someone chooses to have the procedure done as an adult, fine… And of coarse female circumcision is a terrible procedure as well, but luckily it is not widely accepted like male circumcision is.

Either allow marriage equality for gay couples who want to get married(and while I’m at it people who are in polyamorous relationships should be able to have their relationships recognized aswell) or get the government out of the business of marriage all together.(they would still issue out licenses for civil unions) – I go back and forth in my mind about what would be the better solution, but honestly it’s not a big deal to me, the important thing is equal rights. I know some people are attached to the word marriage though I’m not & couldn’t care less if I ever get married or not but definitely if the government wants to continue to be in the business of marriage there should be recognition for different types of marriages. Otherwise just leave marriage to the churches and/or have it be a symbolic ceremony with no official meaning.

A few other less impotant things that have been popping into my head lately:
-Keep church and state separate, stop property tax exemptions for churches
-make recycling required by law / make it easier… there also should be laws to reduce wasteful packaging…
-Legislate longer hours for banks(something reasonable like banks have to be open every day including Sunday from 8-8)
-The sky train shoud run all night, expand the transit system

The NDP aren’t perfect and the Greens are a long shot, but given the alternative the choice is easy. Under the NDP the environment will be much more protected, Healthcare and education will be a higher priority, and the rampant privatization and selling off of BC’s resources would be largely halted. I would love to see the greens get a say as well, as their policy ideas are a lot more progressive in a lot of areas than the more mainstream NDP, but unfortunately under our current First Past The Post voting system it will be very hard for them to break through and get seats.(though not impossible, we should not give up hope) This brings me to the other reason why this election is so important, we have a chance to change the whole electoral system for the better by bringing in the new Single Transferable Vote system or STV for short. If STV passes we will have a fairer more democratic electoral system.

Ask yourself this question: Is it fair for a party like the Green Party who get around 10% of the vote to get no seats? Is it fair for a party who gets just over half the votes(like the liberals in 2001) to get 97% of the seats? These are the results that our current first past the post system gives. If STV had been in place during the 96 election it would have even benifited the liberals, as they received a higher vote percentage then the NDP but still lost the election. Under STV the results would more closely reflect the popular vote and People would have a much better chance of electing a representative to their district who shares their values.

It should be in place now as it received 58% support last time, but for some reason they decided put an unnecessarily high requirement of 60% voter support for it to pass. This election lets push it over that 60% mark!

Some good sources for info on STV:
http://www.youtube.com/user/diannesearle
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-4_yuK-K-k
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UhccpzI4lbQ

So please vote tomorrow. Even if you don’t like any of the parties, it’s always better to vote for the lesser of 2(or 3) evils than not vote at all and there is clearly a party here who is a much greater evil than the other two. So with that in mind please vote for either the Greens or NDP tomorrow and please vote yes to STV.

PS If you still don’t know where to vote yet check http://142.36.238.17/voter/edfinder.htm & http://www.elections.bc.ca/docs/map/redis08/Provincial_ED_Map_28x36(web).pdf

I’m rushing to get this out there so my apologies if there are mistakes:

I do not believe that Stephen Harper is an evil man, I simply believe that his ideas are wrong headed and the wrong direction for Canada. He claims to understand the economy, but he does not understand that our environment is directly linked to our economy. Taking a stronger stance on regulating pollution, preserving our natural resources and switching over to greener, more renewable energy now would put Canada in a much better economic position in the future. All the other parties see the environment as a serious issue and have strong targets to reduce green house gasses as well as grow a greener economy, whereas virtually all experts agree that under the conservatives green house gasses will actually continue to increase. Plus, Can we really take a chance with Harper, especially given the current economic unrest?

I do not trust the conservatives on healthcare either. In fact Stephen Harper used to be a part of the National Citizens Coalition, a group who’s goal it was to end public healthcare in Canada. There are many others in the conservative party who I suspect would like to see nothing more than the end of our public healthcare system as we know it. I I think that access to good healthcare should be a right of all Canadians and I’m thankful for great Canadians like Tommy Douglas of the NDP who had the courage to be the first one to bring public universal Healthcare to Canada in the Province of Saskatchewan and later to the rest of Canada; working in a Coalition governemnt with the liberals. Unfortunatley in recent times however we’ve allowed the public system to deteriorate. The conservative party cannot be trusted to protect healthcare.

There are plenty of other reasons why the Conservatives are bad for Canada. Harper is against reforming our drug laws. He’s cut funding to that arts. His policies don’t seem to be geared towards helping the poor and middle class.. On top of that there are many extreme right wing social conservatives in the Conservative party. It is to big of risk that issues such as gay rights, the right to choose, and censorship by the government could be back on the table with a conservative Majority.

Yes the Liberals weren’t perfect when they were in power by any means, but if Stephen Harper had been prime minister back in 03 we would have gone to War in Iraq along side the U.S. Think of what a disaster that would have been. This is just one of the many examples of Stephen Harper’s bad judgement and poor leadership.

Sure it’s looks bleak. It looks like the conservatives will edge out another minority like they have now, but I don’t want this to discourage people from voting. The fact of the matter it is still possible for another party to beat the conservatives in seat count, but even a party with less seats than the conservatives might be able to form government given the right circumstances. If both the liberals and NDP together get a majority of the seats on election day, they could form a coalition and consequently form the government. This scenario has played out before and Liberal-NDP governments have been great for Canada in the past. Just think of how great the combo of the experience of the Liberals combined with the idealism and new energy of the NDP would be for Canada. It is also a possibility that a deal might be struck with the Bloc to prop up a government led by a party other than the conservatives. Though it is not very likely, the greens may even be able to pick up some seats and have some say in a coalition of parties other than the conservatives.

I am not going to insist that you vote strategically, but it is something you might want to factor in a long with all the other reasons for voting for your chosen party on election day. Sites like VoteForEnvironment.ca are a good resource, but it is also important to do your own independent research in order to find out who has the best chance against the Conservatives where you are since sites like this can have a bias(there seems to be some evidence of a bias against the NDP in some of their picks, although for the most parts there choices seem to be credible)

I am going to conclude by saying just get out there and vote tomorrow(Tuesday the 14th), convince your friends to vote, and try your best to convince people who are planning on voting Conservative to change there minds. The stakes are high in this election and a vote for any party other than conservatives will help.

Chris Simpson

Subject: The Carbon Tax LIE.. … excellent Article !!!!! This rumble is now moving across the country and will gain force. Please don’t let this happen any further in Canada . Canada emits only 2% of the world’s supply of Greenhouse Gases and 52% of that comes from the Oil Sands Plants. Automotive emissions are less than 20% of the 48% balance of Canada ‘s 2% of the World Outcome. Do the math, it’s such an insignificant amount, it’s a joke. Our fuel prices are now $6.75 per Gallon, equivalent to $6.00 per gallon U.S. When Canadians realize what a jackpot the politicians can get us into by supporting a Carbon Tax, they will be out to get any politician that supports this cause. Dion, Campbell etc. will regret the day they devised this scheme. Americans are screaming at $4.00 a gallon. Our provincial and federal governments are ripping us off with high taxes on fuel now. This is such a cash cow they don’t want to stop. Stop excessive taxation and giving our money away abroad. We need more support and tax relief for our senior’s and baby boomers now retiring and trying to find a fixed income level they can exist upon after working all their lives and paying heavily into the system. And I am not an Liberal or NDP supporter. I am a Senior and a middle of the road conservative and we will be a majority in Canada for the next 20 years, so politicians, get smart and support us. Do some hard thinking about future and protect our seniors and all the population from the excessive costs we are facing now and in the future with more taxes. Technology will fix the Oil Sands problem as they are working on a fix now to reduce that source in the future. Why hit us with these programs at this time???? Brian Morris, A concerned Sr. and loyal Canadian, Kelowna BC .. Now, a carbon Tax. Politicians have, in the past, used that old bullshit phrase of ‘cutting taxes’ to get you to vote for them. Now, Stephan Dionne, has come up with a new wrinkle on that old lie : Tax your heating oil and anything else you burn to move your food and everything else that you have always had in your life… but, he’ll lower your income taxes. CONSIDER THIS from a one person who has bothered to do the homework: When a politician’s lips move, I know he’s probably lying. Mr. Dion says his carbon tax will be revenue neutral. So, I went online and found a carbon calculator and keyed in the annual energy consumption for our household and learned we produce 17 tons of greenhouse gas. Fully 60% of this usage is for electricity which we use to heat our home. I have already improved insulation in my walls and replaced my windows and doors; use the new ‘twirley’ lights and ensured that my appliances are all Energy Star products. In the past 20 years, these measures reduced my electricity usage from 24,000 Kw Hrs per year to 16,000 Kw Hrs per year last years. What is my reward for this improved efficiency? My power bill is unchanged from what it was 20 years ago. But, my power bill would attract a carbon tax of $104 in year one of Mr. Dion’s plan and $ 416 in year four. My power bill would rise from $166 per month to $210 per month in year four. Since I live on a fixed income consisting of CPP and Old Age Security, my income tax bill runs at less than $200 per year. So, for my household, Mr. Dion’s ‘revenue neutral’ carbon tax will cost me $416 per year less income tax reductions of about $10 per year. Revenue neutral? In a pig’s eye! This is a tax on seniors living on fixed incomes. Well, Mr. Dion, you haven’t got a snowball’s chance in hell of ever getting my vote. I hope everyone else takes five minutes to run the same calculations I did and vote to send this joker to the political boneyard. Jon C. Coates – 70 Ridgevalley Rd. – Halifax, N.S. – B3P 2J9 DON’T BUY INTO THE CARBON TAX ! DON’T BELIEVE ANY POLITICIAN FROM ANY PARTY! Remember when they brought in the National Income Tax. They promised that it would remain in effect only until all of Canada ‘s World War One Debt was repaid. Fooled us good. Debt was repaid, but the tax never came off and will be with us for all eternity. How about this Lie, Trudeau imposed a 5% tax on every litre of Gas in order to establish a National Oil Company called Petro Canada . He swore that this tax would come off as soon as Petro Canada was up and running. And so it came to pass, Petro Canada was established, It was sold to private hands, the enormous cash windfall was frittered away AND HIS 5% (plus, plus) still adorns our pumps to this very day. Now how is this for a con job? Take our BC Premier Campbell, PULEEZE. He truly believes that most British Columbians are brain dead. You will keep paying a yearly escalating carbon tax at the pump and you receive a reduction in your provincial Income Tax. The new Political Buzz Word is ‘Revenue Neutral Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha. Should this not be called what it truly is. ‘RECYCLING YOUR MONEY’ Just Think Folks, Another Bureaucracy eating up our hard earned cash to administer a losers dream. And Remember, once a government gets addicted to a Tax Grab, and you let them get away with it, You have handed them a Carte Blanche ticket to impose new taxes, to keep raising existing ones and use it to buy your votes to boot. If we condone all this, then Premier Cambell is right in assuming that we are all BRAIN DEAD… B.Painton PASS THIS ON TO EVERYONE IN CANADA .  

and my response:

The conservatives care so little about the environment that they have not even made a token effort to reduce the environmental impact of their campaign as the Liberals and NDP have by buying carbon offsets.

There are other reasons not to vote conservatives ofcoarse such as: their retrograde social policy, their lack of enthusiasm for protecting the public healthcare system, their disdain for arts and culture etc… but I am going to focus on the environmental issue here in response to the letter.

So assuming that your numbers are correct(I am having a hard time trying to verify them and there is no source given in your letter)

We may only contribute 2% of the world’s greenhouse gasses but it is misleading to simply leave it at that. The population of Canada is roughly 33 million compared to a total world population of roughly 6.6 billion(or 6600 million). So for a country with 0.5% of the world population we contribute 2% of the world’s green house gasses. In fact Canada is actually the 3rd worst per capita polluter in the world. Although some developing countries, such as India and China are among the biggest polluters overall, the per capita emissions of those countries are up to 20 times less than those in Canada.

The 20% figure you gave for auto emissions also should not be downplayed. 20% is a very significant number. Although, in the research I am doing now I have found that: “Overall, the transportation sector accounted for one-third of Canada’s greenhouse gas emissions and 37% of the growth in “energy-related emissions sources since 1990.” (source: http://www.canada.com/theprovince/features/gogreen/story.html?id=f0a6ae1b-d5e8-4c5f-879e-2301c468557f)

News flash!: Fuel prices are going to continue to go up whether we tax it or not. This is out of our control in the long run. There is simply not enough oil to last forever. That’s why we need more incentives to switch to greener energy now. We need to get the oil companies to clean up after themselves(I read somewhere that only about 2% percent of the damage done to the environment from oil sands in Alberta is actually cleaned up) We need to be more cautious when cutting down trees and destroying natural habitats which help to clean our air. We need to invest in greener technolgy. We need to do alot more than what we are doing now. Canada is one of the world bigest polutors and user of energy. We need to show the rest of the world that we are serious about confronting this issue and set an example for other countries to follow.

If you really can’t support the carbon tax than vote NDP as they have a strong environmental plan without the carbon tax and Layton and the NDP have consistently been the strongest voice for the environment in parliament over the years. The Liberals are now shifting their focus more to the environment in this election also. The Greens are gaining in strength as well. So what you have in this election are three parties who are confronting this issue head on and one dinosaur party stuck in the past who is still trying to deny that it is a real issue at all.

If you really care about the future vote anything but Conservative. Vote: NDP, vote Green, or vote Liberal. And if your riding is in danger of being won by a Conservative than I strongly suggest that you encourage everyone you know to get out and vote against the conservatives. In Mission for example where i used to live and many of you still live it is a very close battle between the NDP and the Conservatives and the Conservatives just barely won the last couple of times. In another close election battle the NDP could take it this time. My new riding in Vancouver luckily isn’t in jeopardy of being taken by the conservatives, and although I wish i could vote in another riding to make my vote really count agaisnt the Conservatives I will still be voting and taking a stand against them as best I can.

Lets all work together on this one. Talk to your friends about the issues and encourage them to get out and vote and amek a difference. If we could get a Liberal, NDP or Green majority or a coalition of these parties in power: a Liberal & NDP(& Green if they can win some seats) majority we would be a lot better off than with a Conservative majority. The solution is to work together in attacking the conservatives. Lets try to chip away at their numbers. Lets make sure that they get defeated riding by riding so that the more progressive minded parties will hold the balance of power in the house after the next election.

Chris Simpson

“Harper abandoned Canada’s Kyoto targets and tabled three failed “clean air” plans of his own—each one exposed for ensuring more climate-changing pollution for years to come, and more breaks for big polluters. He cut spending on energy conservation programs but renewed a $1.4-billion annual subsidy for companies developing the polluting tar sands —then added $50-billion in corporate tax giveaways that disproportionately go to oil companies. The tar sands development that he subsidizes is a looming disaster: related pollution is causing acid rain in Saskatchewan and beyond; toxic tailing ponds visible from space are seeping into rivers; and Harper’s plan would let tar sands-based greenhouse gas emissions double by 2020. He opposed the global consensus to protect the sea floor from bottom trawling; developed no plan to protect 99% of species at risk; developed no standards for safe drinking water; and allowed healthy lakes to be used as dumping grounds for toxic mining waste.”
(source: ndp.ca)

“Prime Minister Harper’s short-sighted, undemocratic and big oil-driven policy on climate change is damaging the world and destroying our image as a good country. We’re supposed to be the nice guys, who try to do the right thing in the world. “
(source: librarianactivist.org/2007/12/11/petition-against-harpers-ludicrous-environmental-policy/)

“In February 2006, Harper was sworn in as prime minister with a minority government. At the time, all opposition parties supported meeting Canada’s Kyoto obligations. So the Harper government’s position is baffling, and troubling. The Conservatives have nothing to lose by taking leadership on this issue… the scientific evidence mounts. According to the Nobel prize-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, we can be 90 per cent certain that human activity is responsible for global warming. If we aren’t galvanized into action with a 90 per cent certainty, must we demand 100 per cent certainty? Each year, without complaint or question, we pay for insurance against theft, fire and accidents that are far less than 90 per cent certain. Each year, Canadians spend more than $15 billion for defense against threats far less than 90 per cent likely to happen…
What we are witnessing is a fundamental failure of leadership. We now have had a government that has dismantled what little the previous government put in place to reduce emissions, and has all but abandoned any attempt to make serious inroads on our rising emissions. “
-David Suzuki

This movie looks like it’s going to be awsome!

I heard Bill Maher make a funny comment recently about her time as mayor. It went something like “Her 3 am phone call was about a moose getting into the garbage”

Her lack of experience ofcoarse is not the only reason she would make a bad president. Her and her ilk want to take away choice and take away freedom for women, homosexuals, non christians, the terminally ill etc… They want to legislate morality based on their interpretation of the bible. They want to corrupt education and teach creationism in science classes. They don’t approve of abortion yet they don’t want to teach about safe sex and insist on abstinence-only education, something which actually leads to more disease, and more teen pregnancy… the list goes on and on. These are some very scary people who could do some serious damage to the country if given another 4 years. Think of what they could do to the supreme court.

I love this song. It’s so gosh darn catchy, and it breaks boundries(as much as a bubble gum packeged pop product can). Plus it makes religious fundies and uptight people cry.

I guess since I’m admitting to liking pop music, here are a couple of other songs i like:

I just want to get my thoughts out for this review and I don’t want to take the time to write it out formally. So sorry if it’s hard to read at all

*SPOILER ALERT*

First some of the positives

Great cast(especially Keith Ledger as the joker was phenomenal)
Some damn fine action sequences
Score, costume design, cinematography etc etc were all good

I’m going to spend more time talking about the negative stuff, not because i think the negatives outweigh the positives necessarily, but because i have read a lot of reviews all ready which focus on the positives and don’t seem to take a serious look at the negatives.

The main problem I had with the movie:
Horrible editing and not enough character development. Now I can be pretty lenient when it comes to super hero movies(they are after all fantasy and not some Oscar worthy drama) and there are so many horrible ones out there that it can kind of set the bar low. But since it’s not just any super hero movie, and it’s a Batman movie(the quintessential super hero) expectations were high. So I probably let the problems slip for the first bit, because i really wanted to enjoy the movie and let it live up to hype, but the moment when it really falls a part for me is when the joker is at the party with all of Gotham’s finest holding them all hostage. Batman jumps out of the window to save his lady love(Rachel) and once he does it just jumps to the next scene with Bruce Wayne back at Wayne enterprises with everything resolved and the joker on the loose again. It never explains why joker just left, how he got away or why Batman didn’t just go back inside and kick his ass. Now I don’t know about anyone else but that really offended me that they would make such a huge editing mistake. It was like B level film editing. But the problems don’t stop there unfortunately. There are many parts likes this where it seems to jump to the next scene of the film too quickly without explaining how the last scene was resolved. Another example is when Two Face is in the car with a Mob boss he is about to kill. He shoots the driver and the car is shown flipping over with the top side being crushed. Presumably the mob boss and his driver are dead yet in the next scene with Two Face he is shown without any injury(other than the burns which turned him into two face obviously) It never explains how two face made it out of the totaled wreck alive.

Another part I couldn’t figure out is why Bruce Wayne went as himself and not Batman to try and stop the shooting during the Mayor’s speach. Was it because Batman doesn’t come out in the day? or was Bruce Wayne afraid of Batman being seen. I doubt it. Since when has Batman ever had problems sneaking into somewhere without being seen? And the tied up police men never asked, “hey why is Bruce Wayne rescuing us? how did he find us in the apartment?” etc etc. It just leaves too many questions up in the air. But don’t spend too much time trying to figure out the answers to those questions, because the movie will all ready be 5 more scenes ahead of you and there will be 5 more things that don’t make sense for you to figure out. This is how a lot of the movie goes unfortunately.I’ve pointed out a few of the holes i spotted after seeing the movie only once, but it probably wouldn’t be difficult to come up with more. I realize that they are trying to make the film fast paced, but unfortunately it forfeits important plot and character development because of this to the point where it becomes just one scene after another giving you a sort of numb feeling inside. Gordon’s death is cut so short for example that if you were to blink you would miss it.

The last thing I will mention is that the whole transformation of Harvey Dent wasn’t believable for me at all. The abduction of Gorden’s family seemed just pointless to me. I kept thinking are you stupid: the joker killed Rachel not Gorden, was your brain damaged in the eplosion as well? Now i think it could have worked mind you if they had taken more time to develop Harvey’s resentment towards Gorden. But hey they managed to fit a few more explosions in there at the expense of good story telling.

P.S. As someone who took film scoring in school, I believe I can say that the scoring was pretty well done. But I’m a little disapointed that they didn’t bring back the Batman theme from the first 4 movies and the animated series by Danny Elfman. its was such a great theme, and made you think of Batman every time you heard it. I realize that they are trying to distance themselves from the 1st four films, but they seem to have thrown a couple of great ideas out along with the bad. Oh yea, I’ve never understood why people keep making a big deal about the nipples either. Not that I care either way.

So in conclusion its a good movie like I said and Keith Ledger’s performance alone makes it worth seeing again in my mind. And I deffinitely do need to see it again i think in order to judge it better. But its not the best Super Hero movie for me personally. I still say Iron Man is better because on top of being a fun movie it’s a lot more balanced between action and story. Batman Begins is also a lot more well rounded than it’s sequel.

Here’s a clip from his last HBO special.  I thought it oddly appropriate.  He’s still as relevant as relevant today as ever. 

http://www.straight.com/article-150165/nudity-new-normal?rotator=1

http://richarddawkins.net/article,2478,Sexpelled-No-Intercourse-Allowed,RichardDawkinsnet

“Anticipating success with their feature film Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed, Producers Mark Mathis, Logan Craft and Walt Ruloff have already leaked a teaser trailer for the film’s sequel. Their “teach the controversy” slogan seemed to work well in getting the general public to believe that Intelligent Design is a viable alternative scientific theory to Evolution, so the team has moved on to promoting other theories that they feel are being suppressed by the scientific community. Sexpelled: No Intercourse Allowed tells of how Sex Theory has thrived unchallenged in the ivory towers of academia, as the explanation for how new babies are created. Proponents of Stork Theory claim that “Big Sex” has been suppressing their claim that babies are delivered by storks. Furthermore, Stork Theory proponents warn of the serious moral dangers posed by teaching children that sex has a function. They point out that evil dictators such as Hitler, Stalin and Mao all believed in Sex Theory, and they may have even had sex themselves.

Unlike the original Stork Theory, the modern, sophisticated “Avian Transportation Theory” (ATT) merely points out that there are gaps in the orthodox Sex Theory, and that current sonogram imaging is unreliable. Moreover ATT does not specify that babies are necessarily brought by storks but by “large birds unspecified” (although many individual ATT theorists PRIVATELY believe it is a stork).”

and since you need to know a little bit about the movie to get the joke:

http://www.expelledexposed.com

Apparently the film is an attack on athiests and the secular science community more than anything else lumping them in with nazis.

LOL. their ideas aren’t “tolerated” in the scientific community because they are non scientific. ID advocates just look for gaps in our knowledge and fill them in with god, but with no scientific evidence/explanation given.

There’s plenty more hilarity on you tube if you guys need a laugh.

I love Richards comparison to Stork theory. Both ID and stork theory are non scientific. Kindof puts the ID people in their place. He also did a great job of imitating the sleazy shooting of the movie.