Mmmm... I've been reading about this story in several Canadian newspapers and watching different news shows from different allegiances and in both official languages (Globe and Mail, Toronto Star, La Presse, CBC, CTV, so on) and they're all pretty much saying the same thing Stewart is saying. So go ahead and tell us, please, what's REALLY going on. I'm dying to know.

"This stuff just does not happen"

Wake up. Spend 2 minutes looking for reports by the Toronto Star, CBC and the Globe and Mail and you'll realize it does. An issue in Canada is that if you wish to protect yourself, and use a gun, chances are better that the victim will suffer the wrath of Canadian justice.

Have a look -

Man stabbed to death exiting shower during home invasion, Toronto police say - The Globe and Mail, Published Friday, Apr. 26 2013, 8:32 AM EDT


Police seek 3 suspects after home invasion in Oakville - The Canadian Press, June 9th, 2013

Tot duct-taped to pole during home invasion, Brian Kelly, Sault Star, May 17, 2013

Toronto family terrorized by brutal home invasion - CBC, Feb 26



... and my favourite...

Why can't Canadians defend themselves in their own homes? - Abubakir Kasim, Nov 6, 2012

It happens in Canada dude. Take a look around.

>> ^Sagemind:

The Globe and Mail:
http://
www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/toronto/student-cites-freedom-of-speech-after-suspension-for-online-videos/article2043954/
Oh, and here is his FB Page: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Jack-Christie/128772053860187


Oh for fuck's sake with the erroneous "Freedom of Speech" bullshit. Schools ain't the government passing laws.

If freedom of speech worked that way, the media would be filled with every crack pot and borderline psycho who had a personal axe to gri... ok, that's a bad analogy, but FoS still doesn't protect him.

The Globe and Mail:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/toronto/student-cites-freedom-of-speech-after-suspension-for-online-videos/article2043954/

Oh, and here is his FB Page: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Jack-Christie/128772053860187

EDIT: Quote system broke.

@hpqp

Totally agree with you about the definitions being different, but in this interview on The Globe and Mail he seems to be saying that he means "determine" and not "analyze."

Imagine how our view of the human condition would change if we ever found a cure for racism, xenophobia and other forms of bigotry. What if there were perfectly safe ways to increase feelings of compassion and altruism? I think interventions of this sort – pharmacological and otherwise – are probably in our future. Neuro-imaging technology could also change our lives profoundly. We will probably develop reliable lie detectors, so that when the truth really matters, it will be impossible for a person to lie. This will change politics and diplomacy rather profoundly. There is no telling how developments of this kind could put pressure on popular beliefs.

It sounds like he's advocating a world where science has determined without a doubt "the answer" to moral questions and the state is forcefully re-educating those whose actions are determined not to be "maximizing well-being." I have no trouble with science analyzing moral questions, but I have a big problem with someone claiming that the results of some experiments should determine our individual choices--or even remove our individual choice entirely.

I would never pay that much for the Globe and Mail...

Or any other newspaper that doesn't come with a computer disk for displaying cool graphics! Yeesh..

If they can rewrite science textbooks, we can rewrite the bible.

"On the 4th day, God slept in, drank some coffee, read the Globe and Mail and the New York Times, walked his 2 dogs, watched some Oprah, then had a nap..."

There is insufficient evidence to justify your point of a black eye however small, nor do I believe this has anything to do with social based health care.

Especially given the overall tone of the People article, a better article looking at this case is in the Globe and Mail http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20090320.RICHARDSONCHRONO20/TPStory/

You seemed to be looking for something that isn't there to begin with.

Cheers, good call.

When I first found a copy of that video it was dead - yay.

In reply to this comment by lullaby_lune:
Hey, thanks for posting those Globe and Mail reports!
I put up the Intro (on methodology, etc) and thought I'd point it out.
http://www.videosift.com/video/Talking-to-the-Taliban

Hey, thanks for posting those Globe and Mail reports!
I put up the Intro (on methodology, etc) and thought I'd point it out.
http://www.videosift.com/video/Talking-to-the-Taliban

Ahhh. This kind of vocal outrage at a political function that's usually so stuffy is refreshing to see! There is hope yet.

Get used to it guys + gals, and don't despair. This is the way it's supposed to work. You rock the boat and all the comfy people start trying to push you out.

It's really starting to creep me out how the media engine is straining against RP. Just today there was an article in the Globe and Mail (Cdn) about how RP supporters are mostly "internet crazies". Wow.

Don't give up!

Here is a recent story from the Globe and Mail about this clip.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070907.wshock0908/BNStory/Front/

"Fedquip, Go Fuck yourself" This is the messege I received in my inbox not too long ago. From a videosifter. And this morning I wake up and that user is going through each of my posts, voting them down, adding cute comments like "Cocksucking punk.....burn in your own hell-", I don't believe this is the type of community I joined.

I started videosharing online years ago, before youtube, before videosift. I created a forum called metronews.

It was a great idea but the time was slightly off as I had to deal with personal stuff I couldn't maintain the site.

When I discovered vsocial and used the service as a host to maintain a blog I <a rel="nofollow" href="http://web.archive.org/web/*/<a rel="nofollow" href="http://throwawayyourtv.com">http://throwawayyourtv.com">created called TayTV, check out the history. This hobby was about highlighting clips from documentaries and comedy shows. The simple concept is that on the Internet you have the opportunity to research and learn more about the media that is being presented to you. I enjoy the progression in media we are seeing here on the Internet and believe me videosift plays a major role in the future of people consume media and information.

TayTV was widely successful, the "wall street journal" named me one of the most influential people in social media. The "Globe and mail" did a story on my internet labour, Netscape.com hired me to supply them with video links and more recently AOL News hired me to blog and research online video, yes mlx the description is flattering if you ask me, but I don't think getting a job sifting is a bad thing. I have spoken to Brian about this and he told me that it was great to see sifters turning pro. I am a firm believer that through hard work you can achieve anything and if you want to share video all day, you can do that.

Now TayTV crashed a few months ago and I couldn't maintain it with my new appointments. I didn't want to let my community down by simply closing down the website. I spoke with Brian and James about moving the community to videosift. I have been a sifter since April 2006 and with the recent addition to the collectives to the sift I could combine taytv with the sift. Sifters embraced TayTV and people joined the collective, the sift community enjoyed the labour I was providing as I got voted up into the top 15 in a very short period of time after the collective was built.

And why not, taytv was all about finding interesting videos, I feel I provide more then just a video, I usually add additional links that give the user a more all round experience with the video. The taytv philosophy is more then just "getting votes", the votes here on the sift are not important to me, sharing videos is what I do and coming here my sole goal was to help Brian and James by sifting videos the community here can enjoy.

Now, I love videosift, I am forever thankful that Brian and James took me in and allowed me to continue my TayTV project here in a collective. I have literally thousands of videos I want to share with you all. I honestly believe what I can bring to videosift is nothing but positive.


Ok.. so I uploaded this clip, guilty as charged. It's a fascinating clip from James Burke, very philosophical clip about media. Because a couple sifters don't like me does that mean we have to remove this clip from the sift? I submitted it to the sift because I know this community appreciates James Burke.

I don't upload clips as much as I used to but I have thousands of clips that I have been dying to share with this community and now with vsocial in the mix I can do that. With the blessing of this community I look forward to sharing more.

Now the AOL job is something new to me, but I have been very open and honest about it, I am not a corporate douche trying to push any agenda like some have suggested. They have given me a forum to post video that will reach far and wide and I want to do it with the best of my ability and If I can help out the sift at the same time I will. For example this post made it to the front page AOL News. I found it here on the sift and gave a hat tip link back to bl968 here on the sift. I am not a full time AOL employee, I am under contract to provide video research, I hope I can continue with new opportunities after this one expires.

Anyway, I have been preparing for radical changes in the way that I do research and those changes will be visible in my future sift participation. Being in a position where I present media to a wide audience I want to do so in a unique manner, I don't want to be just a normal blogging pundit I want to make online media interesting and informative for people to watch. And if I learnt anything in the past two years with TayTV is that I have to adapt and evolve to change.

Anyway, ultimately it's not up to me. I love the sift and I want to include the collective in my ongoing experiment with media, I will respect the decisions made by the powers that be. But what I would like the most is the support from my video researcher peers here on the sift to tune this craft.

from the Globe and Mail:

QUEBEC -- Call it poor judgment or just bad taste, Parti Québécois Leader André Boisclair's appearance in a TV parody of Brokeback Mountain is drawing fire from all sides, including members of his own party.

Mr. Boisclair appeared in a comedy sketch to be aired next month on MusiMax channel featuring caricatures of Prime Minister Stephen Harper and U.S. President George W. Bush seen naked from the waist up in a tent.

As the playful Bush character throws cherries at Harper's nipples covered with whipped cream, the real André Boisclair peeps his head through an opening in the tent. "Quebec won't get mixed up in something like that," an awkward Mr. Boisclair says, drawing on his limited talents as an actor to deliver his line.

The parody, based on the critically acclaimed movie about the relationship between two homosexual cowboys, draws attention to Mr. Boisclair's homosexuality, a key element in the sketch's punch line...