carpediem

lilchick, To say U2 does not have a unique voice. Care to share who he sounds like. Because his voice is very unique in my opinion and I think many U2 fans would tell you the same. And you don't have to be a U2 fan to know that his voice is not sounding like anyone else's. Sometimes a unique voice gets allot of negative attention. Or should I say many people who will say they can't stand their music. That happens with singers who have unique voices. They know very well they are not going to amuse everyone in the world. Isn't it funny how Bono, Chris and Dylan all get that same attention. People who can't stand their music, and those same people who say they can't sing. What I notice about Bono's voice is the fact he changes pitches allot more then Chris Martin. Not to mention Bono and The Edge who sometimes sing together, blow away any duet in Coldplay. I mean I'm just speaking facts here. Based on status in the music industry. Coldplay will have their turn someday I'm sure. And there will be another Coldplay coming up behind them trying to claim their spot. That's just the way it goes. NOW to be very honest. I think having the conversation of which band is better, should not really be relevant. Both bands exist and their pleasing an audience. Their doing what they love. We all know who we like and who we don't. Some like both bands, some just like the one. I'm a fan of both. I mostly only think in terms as who is best when people start asking the question. Let's just like what we like, listen to what we like and don't argue if someone doesn't. It is pointless. :-) Just LOVE the MUSIC. How would we evolved without it, right? ;) Kevin

Ra-d, Thanks for the response. As for my favorite U2 album, it would have to be Joshua Tree. That album is amazing. And I think Bono and his band are just genius. Same as Coldplay their newest album is in my own personal opinion their best. Kevin

Bands like U2 or Coldplay would not exist as they do if it wasn't for must artist before them. Maybe they would exist with a different style from a different influence, which would give us a different sound and lyrics. But if you look deeply into music before them. They are very much a link in a chain that started back with Woody Guthrie, Bob Dylan and other folk and country singers. Some of you may be to young and won't recall much of the music before U2 and Coldplay. But some of you older people out there may recall Woody Guthrie or Bob Dylan. The link I clearly see is Woody Guthrie, Bob Dylan, U2 and now Coldplay being the new part of that chain. Interesting enough some of U2 albums were produced by the same producer as some of Bob Dylan's albums. A Canadian music producer out of Montreal by the name of Daniel Lanois. Every U2 fan or Coldplay fan has to face the fact that they were influenced by music before their fame. And if they take the time to listen and learn about those old artist that influenced them. You will learn allot about life and why you are interested in these bands in the first place. Kevin

Bono and Chris Martin have both admited that Bob Dylan was an influence in their music. Which is very obvious when you hear the similarities of "changes in voice" and how sound goes along with the lyrics. Also poetry is used. Music history is showing that this style of sound and lyrics all come from Woody Guthrie and other folk and country singers. Maybe some people will say they like Coldplay but not U2, or say they don't like Bob Dylan or U2, but they like Coldplay. That is expected. The sound may be different, however, there is a similarity in how sound is used with lyrics. Read Woody Guthrie's quote down below. I find this quote to be very interesting. "I hate a song that makes you think that you are no good … I am out to fight those songs to my very last breath of air and my last drop of blood. I am out to sing songs that will prove to you that this is your world and that if it’s hit you pretty hard and knocked you for a dozen loops, no matter how hard it’s run you down, and rolled over you, no matter what colour, what size you are, how you are built, I am out to sing the songs that will make you take pride in yourself and your work.---Woody Guthrie"

Yah same here :-) Kevin

Bob Dylan - No Direction Home Does anyone have an article, or source of where I could find where Chris Martin admits his music was influenced by Bob Dylan. I'm almost sure that I read it somewhere before. May have been The Rolling Stone, but could be wrong. If he did influence him. And you believe it did. I recommend you watch "Bob Dylan - No Direction Home". I think even Bono had also admited that Bob Dylan influenced their music. For Bono it was especially the voice, but its clear his lyrics have to be influenced by Bob Dylan. What a documentary. Kevin

Where would that be?

sure go ahead. I thought this was it. but sure.

Is Bob Dylan Mystical........... I have a feeling I'm going to get some responses that are not very friendly towards Bob Dylan. I know some people can't stand his music. Some unexplained thing how one likes or dislikes a song. But anyways yah I expect some negative responses. But is there anyone who could agree with me? Or at least see maybe the possibility. Of Bob Dylan being mystical. I think Chris Martin had said similiar things about his music. Although I could be mistaken. I guess I could give you the link to an interview on CBS that aired back on December 4, 2004. Let me know what you think. I find his answers very deep. Article of interview below. Link and text. LINK: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/12/02/60minutes/main658799.shtml (CBS) This segment originally aired Dec. 5, 2004. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- There is no living musician who has been more influential than Bob Dylan. Over a 43-year career, his distinctive twang and poetic lyrics have produced some of the most memorable songs ever written. In the '60s, his songs of protest and turmoil spoke to an entire generation. While his life has been the subject of endless interpretation, Dylan has been largely silent. At 63, he wrote a memoir called "Chronicles, Volume One." Correspondent Ed Bradley got to sit down with this music legend in his first television interview in nearly 20 years. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dylan is mysterious, elusive, fascinating – just like his music. Over more than four decades, Dylan has produced 500 songs and more than 40 albums. Does he ever look back at the music he's written with surprise? "I used to. I don't do that anymore. I don't know how I got to write those songs. Those early songs were almost magically written," says Dylan, who quotes from his 1964 classic, "It's Alright, Ma." "Try to sit down and write something like that. There's a magic to that, and it's not Siegfried and Roy kind of magic, you know? It's a different kind of a penetrating magic. And, you know, I did it. I did it at one time." Does he think he can do it again today? No, says Dylan. "You can't do something forever," he says. "I did it once, and I can do other things now. But, I can't do that." Dylan has been writing music since he was a teenager in the remote town of Hibbing, Minn. He was the eldest of two sons of Abraham and Beatty Zimmerman. How was his childhood? "I really didn't consider myself happy or unhappy," says Dylan. "I always knew that there was something out there that I needed to get to. And it wasn't where I was at that particular moment." In his book, Dylan writes that he came alive at 19, when he moved to Greenwich Village in New York City – which at the time was the frenetic center of the '60s counterculture. Within months, Dylan had signed a recording contract with Columbia Records. "You refer to New York as the capital of the world. But when you told your father that, he thought that it was a joke," says Bradley. "Did your parents approve of you being a singer-songwriter? Going to New York?" "No. They wouldn't have wanted that for me. But my parents never went anywhere," says Dylan. "My father probably thought the capital of the world was wherever he was at the time. It couldn't possibly be anyplace else. Where he and his wife were in their own home, that, for them, was the capital of the world." So what made Dylan different? What pushed him out there? "I listened to the radio a lot. I hung out in the record stores. And I slam-banged around on the guitar and played the piano and learned songs from a world which didn't exist around me," says Dylan. He says that he knew even then that he was destined to become a music legend. "I was heading for the fantastic lights," he writes. "Destiny was looking right at me and nobody else." What does the word "destiny" mean to Dylan? "It's a feeling you have that you know something about yourself - nobody else does - the picture you have in your mind of what you're about will come true," says Dylan. "It's kind of a thing you kind of have to keep to your own self, because it's a fragile feeling. And if you put it out there, somebody will kill it. So, it’s best to keep that all inside." When Bradley asked Dylan why he changed his name from Robert Zimmerman, he said that was destiny, too. "Some people – you're born, you know, the wrong names, wrong parents. I mean, that happens," says Dylan. "You call yourself what you want to call yourself. This is the land of the free." -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dylan created a world inspired by old folk music, with piercing and poetic lyrics, in songs such as "A Hard Rain’s A-Gonna Fall." These were songs that reflected the tension and unrest of the civil rights and anti-war movements of the '60s. It was an explosive mixture that turned Dylan, by 25, into a cultural and political icon - playing to sold-out concert halls around the world, and followed by people wherever he went. Dylan was called the voice of his generation – and was actually referred to as a prophet, a messiah. Yet Dylan says he saw himself simply as a musician: "You feel like an impostor when someone thinks you're something and you're not." What was the image that people had of him? And what was the reality? "The image of me was certainly not a songwriter or a singer," says Dylan. "It was more like some kind of a threat to society in some kind of way." What was the toughest part for him personally? "It was like being in an Edgar Allan Poe story. And you're just not that person everybody thinks you are, though they call you that all the time," says Dylan. "'You're the prophet. You're the savior.' I never wanted to be a prophet or savior. Elvis maybe. I could easily see myself becoming him. But prophet? No." He may not have seen himself as the voice of the '60s generation, but his songs were viewed as anthems that sparked a moment. "My stuff were songs, you know? They weren't sermons," says Dylan. "If you examine the songs, I don't believe you're gonna find anything in there that says that I'm a spokesman for anybody or anything really." "But they saw it," says Bradley. "They must not have heard the songs," says Dylan. "It's ironic, that the way that people viewed you was just the polar opposite of the way you viewed yourself," says Bradley. "Isn't that something," says Dylan. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dylan did almost anything to shatter the lofty image many people had of him. He writes that he intentionally made bad records, and once poured whiskey over his head in public. He also writes that, as a stunt, he went to Israel and made a point of having his picture taken at the Wailing Wall wearing a skullcap. When he went to Israel, he writes that the newspapers changed him overnight into a Zionist. How did this help?

I didn't mean to get political either. But I just feel the people behind all 9/11, would love if we continue to reflect on this without asking questions. The questions have to be asked. Its 4 years and many of the same questions are never answered. And this Republican party continue to gives lies. They started with the took of labeling anyone who oppose them was anti-american, now their using this strategy that anyone who oppose them are Liberal and evil. Its basically some of the same techniques Liberals have used for decades towards them. So what do you expect. These people died because of evil. If the U.S had no connection to this evil in their business dealings. Then maybe I would not direct so many questions towards the U.S governments. If this was an attack on the U.S by let's say a country like Norway. Then maybe I would be very suspicious of the act. I mean I know that is a weird example. But anyways the point is, the attack came from a friend in economics and wealth. Does one have to be naive to think that the relationship between the two countries has to be looked at with some suspicious even today 4 years later. I guess in the end, the truth will die like all other events in American history. Heck, Assassinations never get solved either. Kevin

The strongest memory from that day for me, is screaming at the TV like I could maybe control what was happening in some way. I didn't know how else to react as I watched evil from the comfort of my home. I just didn't know. Kevin

lilchick, Where is bin ladden? Well there's one of those questions I was talking about. The type of question in a matter of a thought, I'm considered anti-american or Liberal. These people who do this, don't even take more then one thought from their narrow mind to understand what I'm asking. That's narrow minds for you. A label is easier then thinking. It's the "small mind" that is to lazy to think more then one thought when faced with a discussion. They only use the pre-set thoughts for a particular argument- Liberal, Anti-American, Evil, Communist, Anti-Christ and Witches. Why do you think its so hard to communicate. Many people from different ideologies are guilty of this though. Not just conservatives ;) I don't blame them for their responses for this first question of where Bin ladden is. That is more a conspiarcy theory type of question. But other questions I have which I could share with you. Those are all questions that I think reveal something without even having an answer. Yah check them out. Now the actual question "Where is Bin Ladden" is not exactly a high intelligent question to think of, its actually quite a simple question. Especially when your asking a question that someone may end up just saying "well if we knew where he was we would have caught him by now". Someone might have said that here. But don't worry (likchick), I beat them to it. I didn't mean it in a sarcastic way, like maybe someone would have. But the fact is the question has some weight, the weight of the truth, of whether someone in the U.S actually holds the answer to that question in his head. Holding it there for a cause. Who really knows. I'm not saying I personally believe someone does. But the question is still o.k to ask. Maybe the answer is nobody knows where he is. Oh well still have other questions like below. I think this question only brings with it additional questions. Like the media role of the Hunt for Bin Ladden. An American can blame blame the media for not asking these questions. Like why isn't Fox nor CNN in afghanistan asking these soldiers questions.See what they think about their role there. Don't just show one officers view either. Give a whole group of them a public interview. All the cameras they had for the American movie called "Iraq invastion", where are these cameras for Afghanistan now. Would you agree every American wants to see the capture of Bin Ladden? Why isn't the entertainment media picking up on that audience demand? Imagine this CNN or Fox can run a show called "The Hunt For Bin Ladden" stay tuned. Just like the movies they played "Shock and Awe" or "Project Iraq". Its ironic that these reporters took such a risk in Iraq, being in the battle. I believe some of them were also in Afghanistan for the initial invasion there. But now we still see more in Iraq (while its still a huge risk) coming from the bombings there. In Afghanistan we see little reporting, even though there is less of a risk there. Where are those reporters who should be interested in the capture of Bin Ladden. At the same time they could feel safer. Maybe these high risk reporters are getting more then a journalist wage. Could it be government bonuses LoL. But to expand on that question. I'm still confused as to why Saddam got more military might longterm then what Bin Ladden got in Afghanistan. From the reports I've read, (can't remember exact figures) they say there is still allot less military in Afghanistan then in Iraq. Allot less then what they need to really be able to find Bin Ladden. One can ask exactly how much time it would have took if they spent all their time in Afghanistan to find Bin Ladden. And if they had caught him at the same time span as when they caught Saddam. Americans and Eruopeans could have been much safer knowing they had Bin Ladden. He would have been a bigger step to security, if they caught him. Even with Saddam still in power, it is fact now they know he posed no threats to America. Unless you've been watching fox that is, you may not believe this. But even a Fox news brain could agree that they should have done more military might in the search for Bin Ladden. More troops covering quicker and faster with amazing American technology. Especially if you learnt American military capability from Fox, you probably think the U.S won vietnam and Iraq. They see something me and you can't. They see innocent lives as a win. Yah never understood that either. So yah your questions still stands, and its an intelligent question. "Where is bin ladden?" GOD BLESS ALL THOSE WHO DIED with a blessing for us all to see the dark light of the powers that surround us. Kevin

4 years since the event. Yet we still live in that time. 3000 people deid, but will not be forgoten. All of us see the event differently from eachother. And the truth is buried inside the politics. Sad 3000 people have to be dead because of governments and religion politicking. Always the same powers bringing evil, creating war and devastation. They repeat history, instead of learning from it. I remember where I was on 9/11. I was about to lay a dry cloth on a car, when my boss came in and told me the news. I immediately put the radio on. I remember every moment while it sunk in. My first thought was it was no mistake of pilots flying plans into the WTC. I knew there was something more to this. As I watched the footage of the plans flying into the WTC, I pulled both my fist forward, and sceamed at the TV screen. I couldn't understand the evil behind the act. It also awoken something in me. It awoken this side of me, that started asking questions. Deeper questions. Questions that now make me a Liberal every time I ask them. Even music artist have asked similiar questions. and they as well get labeled as Liberal. I'm starting to wonder if questions is evil to the people who hold power. Anyways I'm blabbing on here, my apologies. Those people died because of politicking. And those people died with no one taking blame or responsibility. Some argue and say the Republicans did admit some blame, and that they did take responsibilty. But i for one don't believe blaming the mistake on "intelligence" information, or bombing another country is what it means to admit blame, or take responsibility. They could have publicly admited they directly made mistakes while leading, and they could have resigned for those mistakes. The fundamentals of a leader, is one that will admit fault. Not blame it on other factors around them. A leader realises everything around them is their responsibility. All the organizations that may have failed on 9/11, was under the leadership of the Republican party. Kevin

The Conscience Test by Sean Landau (06 Sept, 2005) Personal morality in a time of change This year is shaping up to be what social theorists call a "vortex year," when unprecedented events jolt people out of their comfort zones and denial systems. http://www.cannabisculture.com/articles/4506.html .

lilchick, Your probably right there, however, being the opposition to what nick is saying. You have to ask yourself if your guilty of this 'closed mind' approach yourself. I'm sure nick believes what he is saying just as much as you. And when your having a debate, the only way a person will open up their mind to another idea. Is if you find common ground. Finding common ground is the key. I think that is why I find myself torn between being a conservative and a Liberal. Because if you actually try to understand the conservative side, beyond your emotions, beyond just what we are told, read it from a conservative perspective, and you will find they are not all nuts. If the other person your debating is not going to take the first step to finding common ground. You take the first step. If that doesn't open them up a little from their narrow mind, then just move on. Trust me when I say you will debate many different conservatives, some who will never find common ground with you. But the same could be said about Liberals. Some people are just so stuck in this world of theirs, that even denying they followed a lie is yard for them to reveal. If only people realized admiting to a mistake they did, makes them look much more human, and they get much more respect that way. In closing. Find common ground when debating. You will be surprised as to how much more you can learn, that you didn't know before, and you also then realize that the person your debating, is not much different then you in some aspects of his/her life. If your Liberal, Conservatives may be your enemy in your mind. Or the other way around. If that is the case then rule number one is understand your so called "enemy". This is a rule that was learnt from the Vietnam war. When the old U.S administration met with the Vietnamese government for the first time since the Vietnam war. They learnt that the entire war could have been prevented if they communicated better, and tried to understand what was really going on out there. Now of course just a debate is not as serious as the Vietnam war, but its still serious enough for Liberals and Conservatives to start understanding eachother. Instead of the environment Fox news is bringing on which is pinning a war between Liberal and Conservative. That isn't going to solve anything. To bad this so called educated man O'Reilly can't see beyond his own ego. Mrcool, Thanks for the kind words. I enjoy your post probably just as much. Its always nice to see post with substance. You do a good job at not steeping to the usual Conservative level I observe over the years. The ones that get so defensive, and start throwing label after label to try and win the debate. Many Liberals have this level of communicating too, so their no better. Kevin

Isn't it confusing. You know when two people have a conversation about Clinton and Bush. Or just any topic in politics. You can see how much both of you believe in what your saying. So exactly what is the truth? Could it be you are both sharing nothing but your opinion, and would never admit to it. I mean yous probably truly believe deep down what your saying. But where is the truth, who is right or wrong? Could both of you be right in some ways, yet wrong in others. Usually when you open up your mind to one another, this helps in communicating. You two are having a disagreement that has no end to it. It was clear in the first post by the both of you, that you believed what you believed. The rest now is just blah, blah, blah. Nothing you both say hasn't been heard. Ironically there is a flood of information out there that you can come up with, that will make both of you sound right. I mean that is the law of information. It just gets created as we go along by both sides. Where is the truth? Well that is buried. Your on a need to know basis. Because all the information is so made up by different people, the truth always gets lost between reality and people's minds as they lay out the information on paper, music, tv or books. Yah all those forms that play a role in how we think. I'll share my OPINION. As much as it scares me that the U.S may one day take over Canada, or that the Christian right will bring on another war. I still think that the Bush and his people's plans will bring America down to where it looses its identity. They see everything they do as a National interest. But at the same time they forget everything they do is making it harder on the country. Unemployment do to companies going for cheap labour over seas. Did you also know there is more American companies being bought out by European countries, then the other way around? Yep good old United States of Europe, or in other words European Union. Why would they be able to freely be able to start buying out American companies? Well because of trade agreements the Republican party so strongly support. While still telling the American people they have their interest infront of their decision making. I think Kerry was the candidate that promised to fix this problem. That's not to say I would have believed him if I lived there though. The European Union has even been able to block two American companies from merging. What? the European Union had this much power over American politicians and lobbyist? Yep. Now that's just the European Union. What about China? Even China has started to invest in American companies. Now while all this looks good to the Conservative, investements coming in. In the end there is allot of negative to this. Corporations lobby allot of policies, and if American companies are becoming China owned, or European Union owned. Isn't their interest going to play a role in American politics in the future to come? You bet. I guess this may prove to be positive for the American people. Because European companies may start looking for socialism type ways to run their companies in the U.S. What free healthcare maybe through taxes? Interesting enough, a little off topic, but Toyota just recently decided to choose Ontario, Canada to build their auto plant, rather then build in the United States. Because it was cheaper here, and the production from Canadian auto makers was much more efficient. Something to do with the employees here being under better conditions. Oh and the fact they didn't have to pay health care to employees. Imagine Canada atracting foreign investements, when the Conservatives tell us that won't happen. I remember reading a book about this, where the author actually pointed out how the European Union power and influence in the U.S, may even attract more Liberalism in that country. Even American companies have changed the way they made certain products, regulation wise, just to be able to tap into the European market. Isn't it ironic the American companies have to change regulations that protect people in the European market. What does that mean, the American people aren't as protected with what is sold to them? Kevin

Here's another observation you can look for. Now don't get me wrong in this post, I'm not against American military and law enforcement. But just take a close look at how often that station will show all the good the military does and law enforcement. The station shows very little about volunteer organizations that are helping out, it shows mostly the military and law enforcement. Throughout the show they praise the military and law enforcement more then anythin else. Try to see if you can pick up how this station tries to influence audiences to be patriotic of the country. Similiar political strategy Hitler used. People wondered how he got people to do what they did. Some people alive today had asked, why they did what they did. Hitler brainwashed the public. There was a quote from Hitler that went something like this "what good thing for rulers, that men do not think". Now some may say what is wrong with promoting the military and law enforcement. I agree, what is wrong with that. Well the only hidden problem is the motive that station has with that strategy. Well in my opinion Fox news is like the same slanted media other countries had in the middle east. The stations the U.S forccely down because of it being slanted towards the governments initiatives. I think Fox news is honestly out to brain wash the American people (and now Canada unfortunately). But one may say well who else is there to turn too politically. Well no matter where you are, your in trouble, because this type of media slant has being going on for a long time. Just most countries were ruled by liberal governments. Well at least U.S, Europe and Canada has been. But now the Conservatives going to use the tactics these Liberals have been using all this time. TV shows, Movies, Music, Radio is their brain washing tool. Think about it. Technology advertising controled by the Conservatives, you wouldn't see any movies depicting an end of the world like the science people tell us, like a meteor, global warming or the sun destroying earth. With them you will be able to learn the bible through movies produced by a new Hollywood, completely revamped to be Conservative slanted. Think about documentaries that talk about poverty or crime. Well those would be out the door too. Those are problems that don't exist in their minds. Well at least they just ignore it, because their strong belivers in the end of the world. The sooner that happens, the sooner they get what they wish for. Go to heaven after the rapture. They believe this, but they want you to believe this too. And I'm not saying I don't believe it yet myself. I'm still soul searching myself. I may die a reborn Christian for all I know. I really don't know. But the point is just sort of a warning theory of mine. Take it or leave it. But try watching for this on your own. Watch Fox news and disect it for every word. The signs are there. Fox is a Christian connection to the public. A reach they never had, because they never thought it was religiously moral to use techonology in this way. They just finally decided it was o.k, fear that they are dying out, because peope have swayed towards believing in other gods. Some gods that even claim to exist as long as their culture has been around. Kevin

O'Reilly talks like this all the time. He even said once France was going bankrupt because of the freeze of trade they did with France. He quoted a magazine that turns out didn't even exist. He had this guest on there that even said Canada had sent troops to Vietnam War when the U.S sent troops (Not true). This same girl who and I quote "Canada is lucky the U.S allows them to exist on the same continent". Sadly they even had a Canadian girl from B.C who was on there, apparently she is the female Canadian version of Bill O'Reilly. She speaks so much hatred for this country. She would like if Canada just disapeared. Kevin

And here's a website which will put a smile on those faces of people who dislike or hate Canada. And it will put a frown on those faced of people who like or love Canada. Introduction Is the 49th parallel an unmalleable line, set for all time to be the divider between two parallel worlds? Just why do the United States stop at an arbitrary line? Are we destined to be one nation under two political entities? Is what differentiates our two countries greater than what we share in common? As Europe unites, will North America stagnate and fall behind, squabbling over trivial differences? Are Canadians and Americans really so different? Would Canada stand to gain or lose in being part of a larger group of united States? Would the United States gain or lose from a United North America without borders? Here at United North America, we attempt to answer such questions, work to promote stronger integration between the United States and Canada, and dispel unwarranted stereotypes. On the following pages you will see facts, ideas and commentaries on what such a peaceful Union would bring about. http://www.unitednorthamerica.org/ MY THOUGHTS.......... The people behind this are so damn arrogant. Because for one they suggest Canada becoming the U.S. Um who say's we can't just be Canada? Do they even bring the idea forward on the site? NOPE. Plus they try to compare this idea of United North America as being similiar to what the European Union did. But that is a comparison that you could not use, but they seem to think you could. For one European Union was created as a new fresh start into something big. Something that will bring a new flag, new currency. This United North America is suggesting Canada adopts the American dollar, and using the American flag. See the arrogance coming through? If their going to use the European Union as an example, they should be promoting new currency, new flag. This is a true Union. To just have Canada becoming the United States of America, is not a union but a take over of a country. I think there is a better chance Canadians joining the European Union, before joining the United States of America. Kevin

I know some here will be disapointed I started another political thread. Forgive me I ask :wink3: How about if I say "I like COLDPLAY" so this way at least their mention in this post ;) Below is yet some more B.S that Bill O'Reilly likes to spill to the Fox audience. I truly think he is trying to pin Americans against Canadians. They claim we don't like Americans. Yet its them that creates that reality, a reality that only they believe to be real. But far from real. Letter to Bill O'Reilly 07/09/2005 Bill O’Reilly Further to your comments made on last night's television show expressing disappointment with Canada for merely sending two helicopters and a 35 man rescue team please be aware of the following before condemning your neighbour to the North. Yours truly Rob McGowan Politics Canada Canada has deployed three Canadian Forces ships and one Canadian Coast Guard ship to the affected region to support relief efforts. The ships will work with the 2nd Fleet, U.S. Navy. Nearly 1,000 Canadian military personnel set out from Halifax port yesterday on a mission to bring aid to those people caught in the worst natural disaster ever to befall the United States. The crews include engineers, communications experts and construction units. The Canadians, who are taking four helicopters, motorized rafts, inflatable boats and a sea truck that can drive through the high fetid water covering New Orleans, believe their primary role may be to move relief goods from warehouses and hangars to the areas where people need them. U.S. Ambassador David Wilkins "Canada has come to our aid early and eagerly," U.S. ambassador David Wilkins said yesterday in a remarkable open letter. "Thank you Canada for giving us your very best — your treasure, your talent and your time. You were there for us in the wake of 9/11. You're here for us now." Canada's Air Force is sending two CH-146 Griffon helicopters to assist the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) in covering the Boston Search and Rescue (SAR) area of responsibility. Elite rescuers from Vancouver who saved 119 lives in St. Bernard near New Orleans were that community's first real sign of relief, days before U.S. rescuers moved in. More Canadian military aid is on standby, including field hospitals. Air Canada was the first foreign air carrier to land in the city, bringing bottled water and transporting flood victims to safety. Premiers and mayors have offered hydro teams, paramedics, police, firefighters and equipment. Canadian universities are opening their doors to American students affected by Hurricane Katrina. The schools said they will admit undergraduates who were enrolled at Louisiana and Mississippi universities that have been closed indefinitely by flood damage. Canadian government officials also said they would start dispatching 35 divers Sunday to help with the massive rescue effort. One of the divers! tasks would be to inspect levees. Canadian Red Cross. !!In the coming weeks we will send at least 100 volunteers to the region, then more as required. It is the most effective way that we can help our counterparts in the US,!! Shropshire said. The Canadian Red Cross does not recruit new volunteers for this type of mission, but relies on its existing pool of people who have experience responding to disasters in Canada. Canadian auto parts manufacturer Magna International will bus more than 400 people from the devastated U.S. Gulf Coast to its facilities in Florida, where a spokesman said they can stay until November. Canada is pledging its support through the International Energy Agency (IEA) in response to oil supply shortages in the U.S. Canada will contribute about 91,000 barrels of crude oil per day to the IEA's effort. Public Health Agency of Canada officials have been in contact with their counterparts at Health and Human Services (HHS) in the United States to offer National Emergency Stockpile System (NESS) supplies to assist in the relief efforts. A Canadian Forces aircraft has been made available to transport Canadian Red Cross personnel to Texas. Our Embassy in Washington is organizing a benefit for relief assistance of the hurricane Katrina. http://www.canadawebpages.com/pc-editorial.asp?Key=1737= And here's another interesting fact ............. A specialized urban search and rescue team based out of Vancouver was requested by the state of Lousianna and dispatched to help, only problem was the Dept. of Homeland Security denied them entry. http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/8/31/235829/261

Well firstly its the American voters. Now I understand the majority technically didn't vote Mr. Bush in. But you could still lay some blame on those who didn't vote. Now you have to deal with the Conservatives saying that low voter turnout was because people are just happy with who is leading, meaning Bush. So that's why they don't go out and vote. Of course I disagree with that, because I think its more to do with voters "fed up". If people were truly happy with the present leader, they would have voted to make sure he go re-elected. Not the other way around. The key to democracy is to bring back trust in the voting system. I believe there are millions in the U.S who would agree with the Liberal thing to do. Like NOT spending millions of dollars to replace aging parts on satelites in space, and put the million dollars towards the millions of people starving to death. We may all live in different countries. But if you think millions of people starving in another country doesn't some how affect us here in the west. Your WRONG. We are all in this together. Its to bad so many Christians have disagreed with me on this. So hard to understand them sometimes. Unless your talking to a Liberal Christian, which they do exist. Now regarding the fact that Bush appointes these guys. Do you think Bush wakes up in the morning and say's this is the guy for the job, I'm going to appoint him. He doesn't. The elite all have to agree with him, and I doubt he even is the one that thinks of these people to do the job. So I think that answers your question. Kevin

I have to disagree somewhat with bart. I would consider his posts partially true. Where he goes wrong is by attacking just President Bush. Maybe he does deserve it. But the problem is by bashing Bush we sway away from the deeper roots to all the problems his party brings to the world. I wish people would stop focusing on President Bush the puppet. Did you know that when you see him on TV, look really close and you will see the strings attached to his body, and his script is prepared for him by a professional who doesn't understand the meaning of keeping it real. Now of course the first part is a joke, but the script part isn't. If someone wants to really express their views about Bush, they should be focusing on the party he represents. Research that party. Some of you may even be attracted to the party platform, and you don't know it yet. But at least you will be making a informed decisions, no matter how irrational it may seem to me, considering I would never agree with the Republican party policies. I would like to also say that some of what Bart say's in his post, could be argued whether it is fact or not. I'm not totally convinced of all that information about Bush. Some of it I believe is just hype. But I do believe some of it is fact. The hype clouds over the facts, which makes communicating difficult. In closing. Stop going after the one guy. Go after the people pulling those strings. That's your target. If you do some research about the people around President Bush. You will be even more frustrated and angered. Kevin

Check out this link Manhn. You may like this one. I know I'm going to pick this book up. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_Politics

That's easy. Armagedon movie depicted an end that science has said could happen one day. Did you see any guy in a white beard coming down, or Jesus coming down during Armagedon? That's why I said in my previous post Conservatives and the religious right would have us watching more films that depict a religious end. Sort of a religious education through TV shows and films. That's what they wish for. Which is why Liberal is being labeled as evil. Actually I understand that one of the main recurring clips on "That 70's show" is all of them sitting around a table, with a cloud of smoke blowing up everynow and then. I don't think that smoke is from candles. Plus Red's comments on that show, I could see the Christians screaming at the TV screen. Good point. The question is would a show like W&G even make it to the TV screen if there was religious influence. Take music as an example. Liberal ideologies appears to dominate the music industry. You get the odd Christian rock band coming out, but not becoming near as big as Liberal bands like Green Day. Boy would those Republicans like to shut that band up. Watch that show again to refresh. You will notice even some of the scripts in there sound Liberal minded. Good point. But wouldn't you agree there is more of it then the 80's or 90's. I mean overall our television is Liberal. Even hollywood I agree has a Liberal slant. I'm not saying its a bad thing though. Considering the real definition of Liberal is a positive thing. Because its core ideology promotes more individual freedoms then what the conservative core ideology promotes. Kevin

Something that wasn't mention yet. And since the topic is U.S oil interest. Why not discuss the fact that Iraq and Venezuela leaders had both started to move to convert Oil to the euro. A move that would have impacted the American economy. Which is probably why we hear Anne Coulter saying every country that didn't go to war with them were enemies to the U.S. Because we didn't see a threat to the American economy as a means to go to war. Even if the down-hill spiral of the American economy affected Canada, as it probably would have. It still isn't a means to go to war. So mrcool, maybe they waren't literally going to take ownership of the Iraq oil. They wanted a degree of control to prevent Iraq ever converting oil prices to the Euro. This is a control they now have over any elected leader of Iraq, however, I think its just a matter of time that the new leader of Iraq will become an enemy again to the U.S. Peace will only come in the middle east when the U.S minds their own business at home, finds more to the economy then just oil industry. Now to be somewhat off topic for my next few paragraphs. Which is a response to (Manhn). To make myself clear, I see conservative/Republican as the religious right. Because when dealing with civil law, or human rights, they will base it on the bible or religious influence. Since Religion is a threat to Liberty, and this Republican party has taken Liberty away. Sounds like a natural union going on there between church and state in the U.S. I agree about the differences between Liberal and Conservatives in the U.S compare to other countries. In the U.S one could agree or disagree that there is a major clashing of ideologies in the U.S. That is sort of spreading all over the world. One ideology is religious traditional values. And the other is non religious traditional values. One wants religious order in society through civil law - Conservative. The other wants more individual freedoms in society through civil law - Liberal. If you take a close look at the arguments from the right, that there is a Liberal slant in media and content on TV and radio. There is some truth to that. Actually I would say its completely true. Just look at TV shows like "That 70's Show" or "Will and Grace", and movies like "Armagedon" or "Dazed and Confused". Personally, even I'm left with a bad taste in my mouth to the amount of gay content on the TV today, however, I won't say it should be off the air. I don't mind the content regarding marijuana use. If the religious right influence the Republicans, and then take over the media, TV and radio content. Could we see the end of anything that promotes any Liberal progress? You for sure wouldn't see movies like "Armagedon". The religious influence on Conservatism, would want more "Rapture" type shows. They would want more shows depicting the Religious end to the world, rather then a science based end to the world. What about shows like "Quantum Leap" that many of you may have remembered being played in the west here, or "Doctor Who" which was a hit in Canada in the 80's. Now its coming back. Would these physics or sci-fi type movies and shows ever make it to our televisions if its controled by the right? I doubt it. The Chrisitians think any physics should be deleted completely out of schools, because they say its 100% theory. While they say the Bible should be put back into schools because it is fact. Now one may try to dispute whether the bible is fact. But that isn't the point. The point is schools should have both physics and religion in schools. And great minds could think for themselves. Why should there be a Liberal or Conservative slant in the educational system. Why not have both all through school. To be honest I think the only solution to it all would be if we all became deaf mutes and blind. Then they would have no way of getting to our minds. We could just see the world through ourselves for once. ;) Kevin P.S....I'm a fan of reading books from both sides. When you understand both sides, you realize that they are both nuts, trying to control us. Although Liberal may seem like a freedom style ideology. They still promote allot of government control, which is close to communist ideologies. The Conservative, well their nuts because they think religion could control everyones life like in the dark ages. They want to repeat mistakes all over again.