@RedSky

while i agree with you that this was most certainly a scripted interview,and one of the reasons i did not tag it "news",let us be clear and concise that this is a practice that most politicians,or heads of state engage in for most press conferences/interviews.

but that is where our agreement ends.

to downplay americas role in the overthrow of mossadeqh as to little more than a nuisance,with little actual affect on iranian politics,is not entirely accurate.while those elements existed,it was eisenhowers TPAJAX project which was specifically directed to inflame the already tense relationship between the royalists and the PM mossadeqh.

chalmers johnson and john perkins wrote at length and great detail in regards to this situation.

i will concede that i agree to a point (but only to a point),that american foreign policy is about reciprocation,but i find your analysis to be far too simplistic.when there is an over abundance of evidence that american foreign policy is not some benevolent spreading-freedom and democracy for the masses but rather colonialization by way of exploitation,indebtness and ultimately military might.

see:smedley butler
see:IMF and WTO
see:john perkins-confessions of an economic hitman

america is in the business of empire.this is about business and profit and the military is used as the hammer to keep those countries in line.

quid pro quo.

i am no fan of putin.he is ruthless and his domestic policies have caused immense suffering with the under class,but i have to respect his abilities as a politician.the man knows how to work a room.

As someone who had to give himself shots for years, it's important to note that they'll hurt a LOT less if you don't tense up your muscles. Keep em loose and you'll barely feel it.

I call improper use of the future tense.

This isn't some hypothetical "we're heading towards being relics" situation, it already happened a LONG time ago.

Hang on, there are EIGHTY men in a century?

Well, that's just ruined... actually I'm not sure what it's ruined, but it's ruined something.

Also, am I the only one who thinks it's kinda weird that he's talking in the present tense?

I sounded like an asshole ! I was an asshole. SOrry sift, my bad.


Todays word is :

mis·in·ter·pret
ˌmisinˈtərprət/
verb
verb: misinterpret; 3rd person present: misinterprets; past tense: misinterpreted; past participle: misinterpreted; gerund or present participle: misinterpreting

interpret (something or someone) wrongly.

I had never heard of that before -- pretty cool idea although I've got enough storage available and a fast enough connection that just downloading in advance works fine.

Since you use the present tense "is", I assume that one of the forks is still active? Wikipedia says the original was taken down "under MPAA pressure" (imagine that -- strongarm tactics from the MPAA!).

Three good reasons to aim [an attack at] an opponent's sword: gain a tactical advantage (e.g. position, or momentum of either blade), gauge a reaction (e.g. is your opponent tense or over-reactive), or wear out your opponent.

Number of the films shown that do so for those reasons: surprisingly high, by my count... maybe 10-15%.

Nice montage, but I'm off to find a one of swordfights that are both artistic and realistic. There are so many good fights out there.

I live in the city, but my Dad lives out at Mt Barker and my sister lives near Tea Tree Gully and she had some tense moments recently.
I feel it needs stressing that these guys and gals are not professionals, but volunteers. They have lives and jobs like anyone else and every summer they come out to save lives and homes. Absolute champions.

hehe..i had received more than few private messages urging me to change the tense.i really thought i had tried and it didnt fit..buuuuut..i was worng.

stay awesome brotherman!

so i changed the title cuz:whining
but i thought i had tried the correct tense and it did not fit,turns out i just suck.

Some would argue 1868... But the courts didn't even begin seeing it that way until 1971. If you're talking about the ERA then I think you have your tense wrong. Don't go yammering about Scalia either. He's a fossilized troll, little more.

People aren't sick of women wanting to be treated with some respect. They are sick of it being elevated above all other issues for transparent political reasons. It's a "get out the base" strategy just like race baiting is for the right. Hyperbolic concern over cat calling falls squarely in the politics of fear and division. "Don't go outside or the evil men (read: your republican husbands) will make you feel uncomfortable." I'd like to think the democratic leadership could move past that.

It's hard to say from the angle of the video, but it looked like he was going to walk away, then a cop called out something and he moved back towards the officers. At that moment someone opens fire. You only hear like one or two shots and then suddenly all the police are firing.

Just based on this video, I would guess that the shooting was ruled as justified because he walked towards the officers (although it's unclear if that was because the officers ordered him to do so). My guess is everyone is tense, and when the first shot is fired everyone kind of just piles on and opens fire too.

It's a tough situation. It really looked to me like the cops were trying to de-escalate before things got out of hand. They called the dog back and some of them lowered their weapons and moved out of a firing stance. I think it was the fact that the guy moved erratically (suddenly stepping back two or three steps like he was going to leave and then suddenly moving back towards the cops a couple of steps) that caused them to open fire.

Dunno, this doesn't look like an open and shut abuse case to me. He had a knife, he wasn't acting in a rational manner, and he moved towards the cops. Legally, they were within their rights to shoot (if I'm perceiving the situation correctly).

Now, should they all have just backed off? I dunno. If they back up too far he could make a run for it and possibly reach an innocent bystander before they could catch up.

Should they use a taser? Again, I dunno. The range on those things isn't great, meaning someone would have had to get close to the knife-wielding dude. And if you don't get a precise hit, then knife-wielding dude is not only in range to counter-attack, but is probably royally pissed as well.

Tough situation. I feel for the family. It's unfortunate it went down like it did. I don't see how the cops could have won here. Sending the dog in to take him down seems inhumane to both him and the dog. Trying to down him with rubber bullets or beanbag shotgun rounds could have severely injured and killed him and probably weren't available to the officers anyway.

Damn shame.

(Also, amazed this video hasn't sparked a snuff debate in discussions yet. This isn't a news video of the event, it's the raw footage of a man being gunned down. I'll leave it to others to decide if that's against Sift guidelines or not).

In the past tense, I'd agree but not today. For starters, First Nation people have 100% full Canadian citizenship and the only distinctions made based on a persons treaty status compared to a non-treaty neighbour in any Canadian city is additional rights and benefits that are potentially available to the treaty person. That is to say, First Nations people have all the full rights of everyone else in Canada, and in some situations bonuses as well.

That said, living conditions on Native Reserves in Canada are abysmal. The municipality I live in is just vastly better off than the nearby native reserves. Better access to education, policing, fire protection and health care. If that weren't bad enough, average family incomes in my municipality more than double those of neighbouring native reserve communities.

That abysmal divide in conditions though is NOT an example of we as Canadians treating First Nations terribly. If you take per capita taxes collected from community and take away per capita government dollars put back in, my community still gives more to the government than it gets back. The neighbouring reserves with far worse conditions receive far more money from the government than they pay it back. Systemically, the Canadian government is economically favouring the neighbouring reserves.

That begs the question why are conditions there so abysmal, and I can't claim to fully understand it myself. The components I DO know are at work though are many:
1.Reserves are NOT fit into government the same way as municipalities are. While my municipality is under Provincial jurisdiction, reserves are parallel with the provinces and fall directly under the federal government. The idea is reserves deserve greater autonomy to respect First Nations unique status and treaty obligations. In practice though, IMO they lose out. My community has education and health care handled by the province, which great benefits those kind of items. Reserves are responsible for those things on their own.
2. Reserves create segregation. The idea is again respecting treaty agreements and protecting First Nations culture from being overwhelmed and assimilated. In practice, that isolation is crippling the communities rather than helping them.
3. Historic abuses against previous generations of First Nations people at the hands of government get passed down to the next generation. This is amplified by the segregation on reserves.
4. Absence of accountability. The same transparency rules that apply to my municipality and all other municipalities nation wide do not apply on reserves. If my mayor spends millions of city dollars paying him or his family to do almost nothing it is more traceable than if a chief on a reserve did the same thing. Again, the idea is provide greater autonomy and not 'force' white beuracracy on First Nations, but the effect is to make it harder for them to hold their own leaders to account.

That's hardly a comprehensive list, but I think it highlights a lot of ways in which the current generation of Canadians running the country are very conscience of treating First Nations well and just failing at it through mutual mistakes. Any efforts to convert the failed reserve systems to municipality status will by fought the most by the very people living in the failed reserves. I wish knew how to move things forward to a better place, but the root is nothing as simple as 'treat First Nations better'.

"loved?"

why did you use past tense?

I can't believe I watched all of that. Rather tense and good fun!