Over a quarter of the world's population are muzzies. If Islam really is how you describe then there would be a much different world. If we are to look at the death figures, our governments are by far the grim reaper.

Insulting the prophet does not carry the death sentence as during his life he was insulted, and worse. These attackers had Islamic precedent to draw from and had they looked it up, would not use the cartoons as justification. I submit to you that there is another reason behind this: http://www.independent.co.uk/v... There is no justification for the murders, but we can grasp to understand the underlying issues.

When picking battles, it usually helps to know context of why things occur the way they do. The Charlie Hebdo attack did not come out of the ether, there is a long historical narrative behind it. This article will help. As usual, these things have less to do with religion and more to do with exercises in power and oppression. http://www.independent.co.uk/v...

If you're talking about healthcare, I see that the way I see libraries, clean water, schools, sewage and public infrastructure--you need it. Notions of free market has nothing to do with it (not that there is a free market in the USA, there never was). Health care is a need. People go through ups and downs in their lives and regardless, they need health care. Mixing up the market with health is a bad move.

You are right, the ISP's are already monitoring everything the user does. The new law in place is simply legitimizing parts of this monitoring. It is only a matter of time before more of it is legitimized. These laws took a while to draft and same goes for this monitoring. So if someone votes for political party A, but party B is in power, records can be accessed to determine whether a representative can invest time and effort in the constituent based on political inclination.

Certainly, the deployment of drones for extrajudicial executions throughout the Muslim world is less barbaric. So is wholesale bombing of the Middle East in order to play whack-a-mole with ISIS/ISIL/whatever. This extremists did not pop out of Middle Earth looking for The Ring, there are decades, no centuries of foreign policy initiatives that let to a radicalized populace who do not even have political say in their own country. Take post 2003 invasion Iraq, a lot of ISIS/ISIL guys are former Baath party members who were denied political involvement hence a significant demographic became outlaws. The "muzzies" do not come to Europe and North America for the burgers and porn, but to flee war torn regions. If they had their choice, they would stay in their respective lands. Need I remind you that France is also a major colonial power that shaped much of the way the Middle East and Africa is today. When you colonize a region, you had better take on the responsibility that comes with it. When your new subjects come to the doorstep of their new ruler, the ruler had better be willing to take on the problems, not just the wealth of the regions. When you oppress and marginalize a people in their own lands, do not be surprised when radical factions arise and lash out. You want to take the wind out of radicals? You don't need a security apparatus, work out why these people are doing the actions they do. Put pressure for a just, not colonialist foreign policy--then you will see radicals disappear.

My understanding is that this monitoring is above and beyond whether a person engages in bittorrent client usage and extends to what sites you visit, what streams you view on-line, Archive.org and even what programs you run on your computer be it free or proprietary. People share information in multiple ways. Perhaps concern over copyright infringement grants the ISP's the authority to view all your activities even more closely. Also, the infrastructure in place at ISP's is above and beyond what you describe and more sophisticated. The Canadian internet providers now have the burden of higher costs (which they pass on the the consumer) to pay for this new monitoring infrastructure. Perhaps what you describe was what was done in the past, but a significant change has occurred. I do not care about downloading movies/music, I already have a significant DVD/CD/vinyl collection, I care about a police state that watches everything everyone does be it anywhere in the world including Canada, USA, and so on. Hollywood is not so powerful as to tell another country to put a massive monitoring infrastructure 'just for them'. The governments at play here are looking for something more.

Republicans care about important things like weapons, mass surveillance, invasions--things that contribute to America's infrastructure, address unemployment, and make it a free and better place to live. What did college every do for anybody? A big waste, just like universal health care. Why should the poor get the same care as those who deserve it? America uses debt to finance important things. Those weapons sitting in silos now that cost billions will do a lot more for America than a college educated citizen ever could. Yeah, I know education only costs a fraction of an invasion, but college is a waste and against American principles, unlike an invasion.

If Canadians were to contact their elected representative to pull the teeth out of a company's ability to prosecute people who shared their DVD's or CD's in private, it would reduce the case for surveillance. However, this infrastructure was there BEFORE the legislation came into place. I do not think Canadians voted for this, nor do I think they pressured their ISP's into doing this. This means the government, in tandem with companies, already had plans for mass spying. Even if the new legislation is declawed, this does not mean the infrastructure is no longer there and warantless acquisition and relaying of private data will not occur. Thus the whole issue of whether people share movies and music in private is moot in the face of the larger threat.

The real issue is that the ISP's are monitoring your network traffic at all. Does anyone not take issue with the fact that the providers know what websites you visit, what you download and what files you share with friends, family, and neighbors. That is the bigger issue. Without a warrant, these companies are pretty much watching and reporting everything you do, even on personal time. That in itself is significant. Sharing movies or music is incidental. These companies also know your personal details, religious/philosophical/political affiliations, your family, sexual preferences and so on. This is dangerous for a company to use and unquestioningly hand over to anyone without a warrant. Since when is it more important if I lend a friend a DVD more important than my privacy? There is a case to be made for running tor relays, advocating for user privacy, corporate accountability (and to keep their seemingly limitless powers in check) as well as government powers in check. This movie/mp3 stuff is beside the point. For those of you with computers in your bedrooms or homes, you now have confirmation that you are not alone and someone is watching and reporting everything you do.

Any day now...a tablet we can run our favorite distro on...I'm on the pumpkin patch with Linus waiting for that day...

Bog corps have a CYA (cover your ass) policy. It has nothing to do with safety. If there is a threat and only one attack is carried out, Sony could be held legally liable for not doing their due diligence. The family of the injured/deceased could sue Sony because there was a threat and Sony ignored it. USA is a nation of litigation, not the betterment of her citizens. But hey, we're in a multinational corporation-run world so the rest of the planet will have to comply. Corporations love to say "it's for your own safety" but that is really one of the biggest lies.

This is just a gunman who happens to be Muslim. A troubled one at that.

Ridley Scott's Alien and Blade Runner are gorgeous, meticulously put-together films. I have no idea why his later films came out so horribly, like Prometheus. About the only director at this time who can instill a sense of wonder is Shane Carruth. Throw him into the mix and it will be good. Don't make the film a special effects fiesta. Some subtle bits here and there. And please, please do not call it "Blade Runner 2". You are begging for a bad film at that point.

Watch Shane Carruth films. The guy has the tiniest budget but makes my favorite sci fi films. So far he has done Primer and Upstream Color. I love them both. He is one (sci fi) director who manages to give me that sense of wonder.