The thumbnail image for this video has been updated - thumbnail added by lucky760.

The thumbnail image for this video has been updated - thumbnail added by Mandtis.

I think I'll play this song right now on my guitar with the sound dampener turned off....

On this amp. I'd play it on my 65 watt crate but I think that would be, way too loud.

http://www.guitarcenter.com/Roland-Cube-20X-Amp-With-COSM-104136494-i1169243.gc?source=4WFRWXX&CAWELAID=439922567

This story is actually from 2007 - It happened at the North America Leaders' Summit, in Montebello, Quebec. Here is the story about the police infiltration: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2007/08/23/police-montebello.html

Here is another angle of this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HkwazCJG0vc

On another note, as a citizen of Toronto, I tried to really give the police the benefit of the doubt on this. Even though I disagreed with the amount spent on the G20 security, and the general turmoil that occurred to the businesses in the G20 fenced area. I know in most cases police are there for the good of the people (though I'm sure some will disagree).

While I can understand the crack down they did on the second day (Sunday June 27th), due to what happened on Saturday, unfortunately that came at the expense of our civil liberties. They completely squashed on many liberties that we have in exchange for security. On a very fundamental level, that is just WRONG.

Here is a good overview of what I mean. Here is a video of someone getting arrested for "Public Works Protection Act" a few days before the G20: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TD3lF0ZSgb8

The chief of police declared that "If you go 5 meters away from the fence, you are required to submit to police questioning under this act". As you can see in the above video, police are enacting this order. While this is a vague law, it actually holds true in courts, and many thought they made an exception for the G20. It turns out, this wasn't the case.

After the G20, and when pushed about this, the chief actually says this rule was never actually in place. Yet it is obvious in the video above, that officers were ordered to follow this rule. Here is an article about it: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/toronto/police-admit-no-five-metre-rule-existed-on-security-fence-law/article1622864/

This of course goes way above and beyond what happened on Sunday at Queen and Spadina, where hundreds were detained for no reason at all, and I'd even say illegally.

Here is a copy of the Charter of rights in Canada: http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/1.html

Basically legal rights from 7) right down to even 12) were stomped all over this weekend. While there were some people that were in the wrong, the methods the police used were also wrong. Detaining and arresting 1000 in order to capture a 100 is not right.

So you just don't buy it, based on your personal experience, right? You're generalizing trends based just on what you've seen and what you've experienced in your own home. This is a logical fallacy based on converse accident. You even say in your second statement, "First of all, maybe my house is different..." So right there you're admitting that your situation may be the exception rather than the rule. And it most certainly is.

First of all, the gender wage gap exists:

1. Women’s Earnings Fall; U.S. Census Bureau Finds Rising Gender Wage Gap
2. Statistics Canada: Average earnings by sex and work pattern
3. Statistics Norway: Gender Gap
4. Swedish National Mediation Office: Report examines gender pay gap

And there are more studies where those came from.

Secondly, in most cases (but certainly not all), women do more child rearing and housekeeping in two-income households. (I know this isn't the '50s. I never said it was, nor even came close to implying it. If it were the '50s then most households would be single-income.)

1. Time Crunch for Female Scientists: They Do More Housework Than Men
2. Working women do more chores than men
3. Women Do More Housework, Men Less Upon Marriage
4. Single women 'do less housework'
5. Married women unite! Husbands do less housework

And so on.

Equality has not been reached yet for most women in most careers and in most households. The video above tells a small part of this story, in an incisive manner. Though some may suggest that it is, it is not sexist to point out sexism, just like it's not racist to point out racism. To live in denial of the facts does not help solve the problem.
>> ^Sagemind:

I was hoping not to get into the whole gender argument but I have to chime in.
First of all, maybe my home is different but...
Yes, I find this comparison way off.
When my kids were babies, I took just as much care of them as my wife and sometimes more so.
I was the one who got up in the night with them, even when my wife was on maturity leave.
I changed the diapers most of the time.
I was working low paying jobs while my wife made a good union wage.
At one point, It was I who had to quit my job to be home with them while my wife worked.
I do almost all of the cooking.
Until my current job, my wife's income almost doubled mine
I could go on and on but the point is, many of my friends are the same. The 50s roles of mom and dad don't exist any more. Life has become a two income home for most of us and many cases, we work extra jobs on the side just to make ends meet. (3.5 income home). In most homes I know, the dads are very active in raising the children and keeping the house clean etc.
I understand this "Men with higher incomes world exists, I've just never seen it. I see many wives and woman in general out there in the work force making the same wage as the men. I know of many men out there that can't get a decent job that pays above poverty level and many more women out there with good union paying jobs. Yes, I've seen some women out there that don't work and stay with the children - out of choice - My wife hates working (as do we all), and would rather be at home full-time with the kids.
Life just doesn't work that way - we have to pay bills in a world where 2, 3 and four income households are becoming the norm. If in some fantastic world, I managed to double my wage and bring home enough money so my wife could quit working and be at home full time, wouldn't that skew the statistics? I would be that man who made more money than the woman, and she would be that woman who (choosing not to work) made less money.
But it doesn't matter, I don't live in a world where a single income can pay for a family of four.
We both work, We both volunteer, We both look after the kids and we both look after domestic chores. We both have the capability to make the full paycheck. I'd say we both have the same privileges of status.
Out of the fist ten friends that come to mind, the wife make more money (or equal amounts) in seven of those families.
In one, the wife doesn't work due to depression and stays home with the kids.
One works part time - and stays home with the kids by choice
And one just makes less money because of the choice of job she chooses.
So, for the average family, I just don't buy it. Maybe it used to be true but in today's world, if one spouse makes less money, it's because they made a choice at some point to either take a lower paying job or didn't train for better.
While there are many excuses, we are way past the days where we can blame domestic life as an excuse to hold women back. Just as there are many excuses as to why some men are the same.

>> ^kronosposeidon:
^Maybe you haven't heard, but women still do the majority of child rearing and housekeeping in 2-income homes.
And the score indicates that women make less money not because of their additional responsibilities at home, but because of sexism. Maybe you also haven't heard, but women make significantly less money than their male peers.

>> ^therealblankman:
In BC right now there's a Human Rights Tribunal hearing into an incident at a restaurant, which was holding a comedy night several years ago. A lesbian couple walked in and the comedian gave them a hard time for coming late and made a comment about Dykes. Here's a link to the story.
http://www.vancouversun.com/technology/Lawyer+representing+comedian+walks+human+rights+hearing/2740470/story.html
Seriously, as someone who really fundamentally believes in the freedom of ideas and speech, I'm really shocked that this even has a hearing. We in Canada have no Constitutionally protected freedom of speech- like those in the US do. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms can be read here... http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/.
Pullman is absolutely right- nobody should have the right to go through life un-offended.


Actually, Supreme Court already ruled it was free speech. The tribunal is just ignoring that. Both sides seem to be lying up a storm though.

Just an FYI though, Americans have less Freedom of Speech than Canadians. They have corporate law stomping their mouths closed too.

In BC right now there's a Human Rights Tribunal hearing into an incident at a restaurant, which was holding a comedy night several years ago. A lesbian couple walked in and the comedian gave them a hard time for coming late and made a comment about Dykes. Here's a link to the story.
http://www.vancouversun.com/technology/Lawyer+representing+comedian+walks+human+rights+hearing/2740470/story.html

Seriously, as someone who really fundamentally believes in the freedom of ideas and speech, I'm really shocked that this even has a hearing. We in Canada have no Constitutionally protected freedom of speech- like those in the US do. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms can be read here... http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/.

Pullman is absolutely right- nobody should have the right to go through life un-offended.

READ AND LEARN THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS, THEY WON'T TEACH THESE TO YOU IN SCHOOL ANYMORE!!!!

Bill of Rights

US Constitution

Universal Declaration of Human Rights

The Federalist Papers

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms

>> ^fjules:
Oh common, everyone knows that nothing will happen to net neutrality. Why? Ok, let's pretend some companies switch over to "not neutral" internet. Guess what happens? One company remains "neutral" and EVERYONE switches to that company making the other ones go bankrupt. Not exactly rocket science, is it?


This is already happening in Canada. The biggest providers (rogers and bell), have both decided to implement traffic shaping and deep packing scanning in order to stop or severely hinder torrent transfers. They were allowed to do this without even disclosing anything, and in fact, rogers went so far as to not tell anyone they were doing this for years. The government has finally made it a requirement that the major service providers disclose their "traffic management practices" a little more clearly so that more of this stuff doesn't happen. While this doesn't do anything except force ISPs to admit they are doing it, at least it's a start, and these practices are being noticed.

CRTC on ISP traffic management

In all seriousness what the hell has our country come to when Seth Macfarlane is the speaker at a Harvard ceremony?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gc-yl_8ywiU << even he is surprised he's there.
The list of prestigious people who have spoken there includes Thorton Wilder, Ralph Waldo Emerson, John F. Kennedy, and the list goes on and on and then there is Seth Macfarlane. w.e

I've said it before, I'll said it again. The current version of America's healthcare plan is 100% screwed up, too much government overhead in the wrong area, with the wrong people looking after it. It should never, ever be a "federal" program with that much overhead.

This is Canada's Health Act, at the Federal level. Nothing huge, nothing fancy, nothing showy. Simply states that all Canadians get it, and it's upto the province(s) and territories to fund it, and if they can't fund all of it, then the money comes from the general revenue fund, and how that money is paid out, and the terms for it.

Until that monstrosity of a bill dies, and you get something reasonable. It will continue to fail, because the US like Canada are built on the same system of power sharing. Weak federal, strong state/provincial governments.

Wow. I am very interested in gravity theory, but I could not watch this more than a third of the way through..

To me, this comes across like an argument about evolution between Creation Scientists and Intelligent Design advocates.. Most of this video is just different ways of misunderstanding gravity theory. As has been mentioned before, the concept of a black hole does not depend on the physics of a singularity.

I cannot find the video of the observed orbits of stars near the black hole at the center of the Milky Way, but this site has an animation of their orbits. This direct "dynamical evidence" goes along with the 30+ years of other evidence from radio, X-ray, gamma-ray, IR, etc.
http://www.mpe.mpg.de/ir/GC/index.php

don't even pretend that conservatives are any less guilty of that "living document" shit. or improper taxation.

Conservatives are closer to the mark than liberals when it comes to the Constitution. FDR warped things probably beyond repair.

or that the legal process for detainees has anything to do with compassion for armed scumbags. maybe this'll make sense to you if you hear it from a republican instead. please note that my description was written well before anyone actually admitted we waterboarded anyone.

The Supremes are a bunch of clowns who recently decided a state cannot put a child rapist to death for his crime. However, in the prison yard, child rapists are killed by other inmates. So prison inmates have a better moral compass than the activist morons in black robes who have undermined the Constitution by legislating law from the bench instead of interpreting it.

The new Soopreme standard that terrorist animals are entitled to protection under the GC is a fabrication with no precedent. Terrorists seeking to destroy a society deserve no quarter from anyone and should consider themselves doomed toys if captured.

The left is presently more fascist than the right and both have ignored the Constitution almost from their origins. Welcome to human nature and the ego.