text:
CanadaVOTES: Liberal incumbent Susan Kadis running in Thornhill

September 27, 2008

On October 14, 2008, Canadians will be heading to the polls for the federal election. Liberal candidate Susan Kadis is standing for re-election in the riding of Thornhill.

During the recently disbanded session of Parliament, Mrs. Kadis was the Official Opposition Critic for National Revenue. She served as a member of the Caucus Committee on Economic Prosperity and a member of the Standing Committee on Health. She was elected as Chair of the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) Liberal Caucus. The former publisher of The Thornhill Times community newspaper, she has served as a school trustee and City Councillor. She has served on the Canadian Breast Cancer Foundation's Board of Directors, being a survivor herself.

Wikinews contacted Susan, to talk about the issues facing Canadians, and what they and their party would do to address them. Wikinews is in the process of contacting every candidate, in every riding across the country, no matter their political stripe. All interviews are conducted over e-mail, and interviews are published unedited, allowing candidates to impart their full message to our readers, uninterrupted.

The incumbent in the riding, Kadis faces three challengers: former broadcaster Peter Kent (Conservative), Norbert Koehl (Green), and Simon Strelchik (NDP). The riding of Thornhill includes the part of the City of Vaughan that is east of Highway 400 and south of Rutherford Road, and the part of the Town of Markham west of Highway 404. The previous MP in the riding was also Liberal, Elinor Caplan, who was the Canadian Minister of Citizenship and Immigration and later Minister of National Revenue.

For more information, visit the campaign's official website, listed below.

Interview
Why did you choose to run for office?
 * As a life-long grassroots community leader, I entered politics to make a difference and improve the lives of others. I am a person of integrity and accountability, and I stand for giving a voice to the issues our community cares deeply about. Thornhill residents know they can rely on me to stand up, speak out, not sit idly by, and get results as proven by my record of service.

 * I continue to be very dedicated to the ensure that Thornhill residents continue to thrive and prosper. Theres a lot at stake in this election. We have a great action plan that will secure our future.

 * I will fight to ensure that we have a strong economy, cleaner environment, which will result in a prosperous and sustainable Thornhill and Canada.

Are you satisfied with your time as MP?
 * Over the last four years Ive and had the privilege to help thousands of residents in Thornhill. Knowing the positive impact I have

made, I am eager to continue to do more. Our community continues to inspire me to improve the lives of Thornhill residents and all Canadians.

What would be the biggest highlights of the roughly two years since the last election?

 * I had the opportunity to travel across the country to consult Canadians about security needs for at-risk communities, and to develop a policy to strengthen the safety of Canadians. This inclusive and comprehensive Liberal plan, which is part of our commitment in our platform, would not only benefit residents of Thornhill but all Canadians. I introduced a private members bill to establish a national holocaust monument in the nations capital to honour the victims and survivors, and to teach next generations about the consequences of state sanctioned genocide.

The biggest disappointment?

 * As someone who has served on the Industry Committee and an Ontario MP, I was very disappointed to see Minister Harper and Flaherty attack Ontario and suggest that Ontario is the last place to invest. Thornhill residents who are worried about losing their jobs need a new Liberal government that is prepared to be a real partner especially in these challenging times. I will always stand up for Thornhill and Ontario.

'''As you campaign around your riding, it's likely that some issues are mentioned more often by voters, than other issues. What would you say are the three hottest topics this election, in your riding?'''

 * Economy
 * Environment
 * Health care

What would you and your party do to address these issues?

 * "Richer, Fairer, Greener," the Liberal Party of Canada's fully-costed, fiscally-responsible platform, lays out a progressive, inclusive vision to make Canada a stronger country for the next generation. Fiscal discipline is part of the Liberal DNA. We were the party that turned a huge deficit into eight years of surpluses, and we will continue to put fiscal responsibility first. A Liberal government will never put Canada into deficit.

We are committed to balanced budgets, which is why all the commitments in this platform are set within a prudent fiscal framework that includes a contingency reserve of $3 billion a year to be applied to the debt if it's not used a prudent measure irresponsibly abandoned by the Conservative government.

 * The cornerstone of the Liberal platform is the Green Shift plan. This innovative and forward-thinking plan will cut income taxes, put a price on pollution, fight poverty and position Canada to be a leader in the 21st-century global economy.

 * Richer, Fairer, Greener Includes: An Action Plan for the 21st Century A Greener Canada to fight the Climate Change Crisis, Clean Air, Safeguarding our Water, Protecting our Health from Toxic Substances, Protecting Our Natural Heritage, Empowering Canadians

 * A Fairer Canada Includes: The 30-50 Plan, Investing in Our Children, Health Care, Womens Equality, Immigration: Welcoming New Canadians, EI Changes, A New Relationship with Canada's First Nations, Inuit and Metis, Minority Language Rights, A Safer Canada, Respectful Federalism

 * Canada and the World Includes: Climate Change and Global Security, Diplomacy: Projecting Canadian Values Abroad, Development: Sharing Canadian Hope and Vision with the World, Stronger Relationships, Trade, Defence, Arctic Sovereignty.

Are there any misconceptions about you, your leader, or your party and platform?
 * Stéphane Dion is a man of personal conviction, who has a bold and visionary action plan for Canadas future. This is evident by the comprehensive Liberal platform that will address a struggling economy, job creation, improve our environment and the health of Thorhhill residents and all Canadians.

'''There are more ways than ever to get your message out, from the traditional campaign fliers and lawn signs, to new media like websites, Facebook, and YouTube. The tried-and-true routes get the message out to the masses much easier, but digital alternatives are much more measurable in how many are seeing or interacting with your campaign. What seems to be the most effective, from your experience?'''
 * The most effective way to get our message out is to speak directly with Thornhill residents to understand the issues they are facing. Over the last several weeks I have had the privilege of speaking with thousands of individuals about how a Liberal government will improve their lives.


text:
Talk:CanadaVOTES: Liberal Andrew Lang running in Toronto—Danforth

RAW TEXT
Download the original attachment

Your name: Andrew Lang

Political party: Liberal

Riding: Toronto-Danforth

New candidates: Why are you running for political office, why at the

federal level, why this party, and why in this riding?

I was brought up in the glow of the Trudeau government, and came to believe in Canada as a country of equality, of economic prosperity, and of deep commitment to community and to the world.

The country that I see Stephen Harper trying to direct us towards takes us away from that Canada. Only a Liberal government can replace Stephen Harper’s Conservatives and restore the Canada that my father, Otto Lang, and my step-father, Donald Macdonald, worked so hard to build.

My wife and I live in this riding. I care deeply about what happens to it. And I think it’s time for us a Toronto-Danforth Member of Parliament who puts this riding at the top of their priority list.

New candidates: Previous to this campaign, have you been politically

involved? How will you apply your previous work/volunteer/life

experience to serving your constituents?

I have been fortunate enough to spend time working in the office of Dalton McGuinty and running the constituency office for the Hon. Bill Graham in the riding of Toronto-Centre. Working for Bill in particular inspired me to understand the powerful impact that a political representative can have on a community - and that’s the kind of representative I hope to be for this community.

I am also proud to follow in the footsteps of my father, the Hon. Otto Lang, and my step-father, the Hon. Donald McDonald. These are two men who put themselves before their countries time and time again, and who I hope to emulate as the Member of Parliament for Toronto-Danforth.

As you campaign around your riding, it's likely that some issues are

mentioned more often by voters, than other issues. What would you say

are the three hottest topics this election, in your riding? What would

you and your party do to address these issues?

1. The economy. Jim Flaherty and the Conservatives have led Canada to its worst economic performance since 1991. Canadians need a government that is going to stick by them and work with them every day to find long-term solutions A Liberal government will invest in partnership with Canadians by cutting taxes for families, investing in the manufacturing sector and building strong, green, jobs. 2. The environment. The Liberal Green Shift plan will cut income taxes, put a price on pollution, fight poverty and position Canada to be a leader in the 21st century sustainable global economy. We will cut taxes on those things we all want more of such as income, investment and innovation, and we will shift those taxes to what we all want less of: pollution, greenhouse gas emissions and waste. It’s an extremely simple, and extremely powerful proposal. 3. Local representation. The people of Toronto-Danforth are ready for a Member of Parliament that puts this riding at the top of their priority lists – one that lives here, and will work hard for the people of this community.

Is there any misconceptions about you, your leader, or your party and platform?

The Conservatives have spent a lot of money and energy trying to paint a picture of Stephane Dion that is simply not accurate. Stephane Dion is a man of great integrity, great strength and great vision for our country. He’s a man who has done great work for our country, time and time again. I look forward to seeing him elected Prime Minister, and to working with him in the House of Commons.

There's a more ways than ever to get your message out, from the

traditional campaign fliers and lawn signs, to new media like

websites, Facebook, and YouTube. The tried-and-true routes get the

message out to the masses much easier, but digital alternatives are

much more measurable in how many are seeing or interacting with your

campaign. What seems to be the most effective, from your experience?

There is simply nothing more effective than walking the streets, knocking on doors and meeting people in the riding. No new technology can replace that, and it never will.

But we want to reach as many people as possible in as many ways as possible. So new media certainly plays an important role. On our campaign, we use YouTube, we use Facebook, we use the web to get out to as many people as possible. And we use online tools to communicate with supporters, donors and volunteers on a regular basis.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
CanadaVOTES: Liberal Andrew Lang running in Toronto—Danforth

September 27, 2008

On October 14, 2008, Canadians will be heading to the polls for the federal election. Liberal candidate Andrew Lang is standing for election in the riding of Toronto—Danforth.

Raised with Liberal values, Andrew attended his first Liberal rally at age 6. He has worked 18 elections since that introduction to the political sphere, but this is his first time as a candidate. A University of Toronto graduate (and player for the Varsity Blues), his career highlights include managing Bill Graham's constituency office. (A now-retired MP, Graham's career included serving as Minister of National Defence and Minister of Foreign Affairs, as well as interim Leader of the Liberals and Leader of the Opposition.) He is currently with the Ontario Chiropractic Association.

Wikinews contacted Andrew, to talk about the issues facing Canadians, and what they and their party would do to address them. Wikinews is in the process of contacting every candidate, in every riding across the country, no matter their political stripe. All interviews are conducted over e-mail, and interviews are published unedited, allowing candidates to impart their full message to our readers, uninterrupted.

The incumbent in this riding is National Democratic Party (NDP) leader Jack Layton. Other than Lang, trying for the riding are Sharon Howarth (Green), and Christina Perreault (Conservative). Minor party candidates Marie Crawford (Animal Alliance Environment Voters Party of Canada), Marcell Rodden (Marxist-Leninist), and Bahman Yazdanfar (Canadian Action Party) are also running, as is independent John Richardson. The riding has existed federally since 1979, and has the seat has been occupied by Bob Rae (NDP, 1979–1982), Lynn McDonald (NDP, 1982–1988), Dennis Mills (Liberal, 1988–2004), and Layton (NDP, 2004 to present).

For more information, visit the campaign's official website, listed below.

Interview
Why are you running for political office, why at the federal level, why this party, and why in this riding?
 * I was brought up in the glow of the Trudeau government, and came to believe in Canada as a country of equality, of economic prosperity, and of deep commitment to community and to the world.

 * The country that I see Stephen Harper trying to direct us towards takes us away from that Canada. Only a Liberal government can replace Stephen Harper’s Conservatives and restore the Canada that my father, Otto Lang, and my step-father, Donald Macdonald, worked so hard to build.

 * My wife and I live in this riding. I care deeply about what happens to it. And I think it’s time for us a Toronto-Danforth Member of Parliament who puts this riding at the top of their priority list.

'''Previous to this campaign, have you been politically involved? How will you apply your previous work/volunteer/life experience to serving your constituents?'''
 * I have been fortunate enough to spend time working in the office of Dalton McGuinty and running the constituency office for the Hon. Bill Graham in the riding of Toronto-Centre. Working for Bill in particular inspired me to understand the powerful impact that a political representative can have on a community - and that’s the kind of representative I hope to be for this community.

 * I am also proud to follow in the footsteps of my father, the Hon. Otto Lang, and my step-father, the Hon. Donald McDonald. These are two men who put themselves before their countries time and time again, and who I hope to emulate as the Member of Parliament for Toronto-Danforth.

'''As you campaign around your riding, it's likely that some issues are mentioned more often by voters, than other issues. What would you say are the three hottest topics this election, in your riding? What would you and your party do to address these issues?'''
 * The economy. Jim Flaherty and the Conservatives have led Canada to its worst economic performance since 1991. Canadians need a government that is going to stick by them and work with them every day to find long-term solutions  A Liberal government will invest in partnership with Canadians by cutting taxes for families, investing in the manufacturing sector and building strong, green, jobs.
 * The environment. The Liberal Green Shift plan will cut income taxes, put a price on pollution, fight poverty and position Canada to be a leader in the 21st century sustainable global economy. We will cut taxes on those things we all want more of such as income, investment and innovation, and we will shift those taxes to what we all want less of: pollution, greenhouse gas emissions and waste.  It’s an extremely simple, and extremely powerful proposal.
 * Local representation. The people of Toronto-Danforth are ready for a Member of Parliament that puts this riding at the top of their priority lists – one that lives here, and will work hard for the people of this community.

Is there any misconceptions about you, your leader, or your party and platform?
 * The Conservatives have spent a lot of money and energy trying to paint a picture of Stéphane Dion that is simply not accurate. Stéphane Dion is a man of great integrity, great strength and great vision for our country.   He’s a man who has done great work for our country, time and time again.  I look forward to seeing him elected Prime Minister, and to working with him in the House of Commons.

'''There's a more ways than ever to get your message out, from the traditional campaign fliers and lawn signs, to new media like websites, Facebook, and YouTube. The tried-and-true routes get the message out to the masses much easier, but digital alternatives are much more measurable in how many are seeing or interacting with your campaign. What seems to be the most effective, from your experience?'''
 * There is simply nothing more effective than walking the streets, knocking on doors and meeting people in the riding. No new technology can replace that, and it never will.

 * But we want to reach as many people as possible in as many ways as possible. So new media certainly plays an important role.  On our campaign, we use YouTube, we use Facebook, we use the web to get out to as many people as possible.  And we use online tools to communicate with supporters, donors and volunteers on a regular basis.


text: User:Chantessy

title: User:Chantessy


text: User talk:Chantessy

title: User talk:Chantessy


text:
Comments:Interim report blames ice for British Airways 777 crash in London

How does U-2, SR avoid this problem? - Different fuel? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.49.5.165 (talk) 21:29, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

 * well, if you notice, at the bottom of the page it says that this was an unexpected and previously unknown problem. It wasn't something they'd seen before. Future designs will have to take this into account. Gopher65talk 18:53, 26 September 2008 (UTC)


text:
More worries of further contamination of food from China

September 26, 2008 The World Health Organization (WHO) is warning that more food imported from China may be contaminated with melamine, a chemical used in the manufacturing of plastics. Melamine, although nontoxic in very small amounts, can cause severe kidney problems in large doses.

Guanshengyuan, a Chinese company that makes children's candy, has stopped selling its popular brand White Rabbit, which is sold nationally in China, after tests confirmed the presence of melamine. Bright foods owns the candy company. Earlier their powdered milk was found to contain melamine which sickened over 53,000 people and was responsible for the deaths of at least four infant children. Guanshengyuan has stopped exporting their goods to the nearly 50 companies overseas that buy them.

Melamine has also been found in Hong Kong in baby cereal and vegetable formula made by Heinz. It has also been found in wasabi crackers which are manufactured by the Chinese company, Silang House.

Another Chinese food company called Marudai Food Co. has also halted the sales of several items such as meat buns, cream buns and corn crepes made with cream over fears that melamine laced powered milk has contaminated their products. So far there have been no reports of any illnesses associated with Marudai Foods.

Further items recalled or other products that feared to be contaminated with melamine are Mr. Browns Instant Coffee and tea products, along with their powdered milk.

The first report of contamination came last week when the Chinese health ministry confirmed that the companies responsible for producing the milk were trying to repair their damaged public image by increasing output using melamine. The Chinese Health Ministry has stated that most of the tainted milk was produced by Shijiazhuang Sanlu Group Co.

The WHO says that women with infants should consider breast feeding for the time being on infants aged at least six months, until the contaminated milk can be removed from the consumption chain.

"WHO recommends that all infants should be fed exclusively with breast milk for the first six months of life. No other liquid or food, not even water, is needed during this period. Thereafter, infants should receive adequate and safe complementary foods while breastfeeding continues up to two years of age and beyond," said the WHO in a statement on their website.

In 2007, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) confirmed the presence of melamine in pet food that was imported from China. Samples indicated that wheat gluten, used as an ingredient in the pet food, was contaminated with the chemical. As a result of the contamination, the FDA said some of the contaminated gluten entered the human food chain. At least 45 people ate contaminated pork which was traced to pigs from a farm in California. The pigs had eaten feed that had been contaminated. There were no reports of deaths or illnesses.


text:
Talk:Controversial Florida attorney Jack Thompson disbarred

Controversial
One little thing that is bothering me. Do people think that the characterization of Thompson as "controversial" is fair? I think so, but that may be my POV slipping in. JoshuaZ (talk) 19:18, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I think it's fair. If you said "nutjob" (which is what he deserves), then it wouldn't be NPoV. Controversial just means that many people disagree with him, which is provably the case. Gopher65talk 19:20, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
 * He is very controversial. He's sent porn to judges, walked out of court, tried to get games blocked from release, and otherwise generally been... crazy.  His craziness is what got his disbarred.  But... since we can't call him "fucking insane" in the article, controversial is fairly NPOV.  Alot of people don't like what he's done - that makes him... controversial. -- Shakata Ga Nai  ^_^ 20:37, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

"most recent media attention"
What about Bully? --66.67.187.203 22:33, 27 September 2008 (UTC)


text:
Somalian pirates capture military ship, weapons, tanks

September 26, 2008

Somalian pirates captured a Ukrainian military ship containing weapons, tanks, and ammunition on Thursday. The weapons seized ranged from grenade launchers to 33 Soviet tanks, the Ukrainian defense ministry told the press. 17 multi-national crewmen were also captured.

The "Faina" was making a delivery to the Kenyan government, which is a Western ally against terrorism.

The ship had taken a detour to avoid the pirate-controlled Somalian coast, which is notorious for holding ships and cargo ransom. Experts expect the pirates to ransom off the tanks, because they don't have the ability to remove or use them.

The Russian navy deployed a warship on Friday to assist Somalia in securing the coastline and re-secure the ship. According to Vladimir Vysotsky, the head of the Russian Navy, "Russian ships will not be involved in any international operations," as "they will do this job on their own."

US military spokesman Bryan Whitman reported that the US is monitoring the events closely, because of the type of cargo captured.

Canada, meanwhile, has been assisting the UN by escorting aid ships to the war-torn area since August. Canadian officials announced they would be continuing escorts for another four weeks, to the relief of about 2.4 million Somalians receiving the aid.


text:
User talk:Powerzilla

Welcome
, welcome to Wikinews! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

Our key policies - if you read anything, read these! Here are some pointers to help you get to know Wikinews: There are always things to do on Wikinews: By the way, you can sign your name on Talk pages using four tildes ( ~~~~ ), which produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, you can ask them at the water cooler or to anyone on the Welcommittee, or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 19:47, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Neutral point of view - tell every side to a story in a fair and balanced way
 * Cite sources - everything in a Wikinews article must be sourced
 * Introduction - overview of the site
 * Writing an article - how to write and publish a complete article
 * Content guide - what's suitable for Wikinews
 * Style guide - how articles should look before publishing
 * Reviewing articles - how articles pass through editorial review
 * Contents - the contents page.
 * Existing articles need expanding and checking for spelling and mistakes
 * The front page lead articles often need updating
 * Developing stories need finishing and publishing
 * Discussions need your input
 * Audio Wikinews could always use more contributors
 * And of course, stories need writing!

title: User talk:Powerzilla


text:
Comments:Controversial Florida attorney Jack Thompson disbarred

Great! Serves him right for trying to abuse power. 207.108.15.11 20:12, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Greatest threat to the First Amendment
Now that ol'Jack is down the other threats to Free Speech need to be disbarred or otherwise incapacitated.--141.157.41.122 20:40, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm a gamer
And I'm definitely going to do a toast to the Florida Supreme Court in the morning! Betterwatchit (talk) 20:16, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

For once
My State did something right.--66.229.17.181 21:41, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Duct tape
I have a roll of the Air Force issue stuff (called hundred-mile-an-hour tape) reserved for gift-wrapping this bozo and slapping enough stamps on him to ship him to the nearest penitentiary. Just pass the sentence! --Brian McNeil / talk 23:14, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

JACK THOMPSON GOT DISBARRED!!!
BWHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHA OH MY GOD HAHAHAHAHA HAHAHEHEHAGHAGH OH MY GOD ARE YOU KIDDING? THIS IS AWESOME HEHEHEHEHAHA YES! YEAH! --70.101.87.246 15:50, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

It has to be said...
Pwned. Thunderhead 01:51, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

(I know this is late)

"YES!!! YES!!!"

-Bison, the Street Fighter Show- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.39.115.229 (talk) 13:57, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Jack Thompson got what was coming to him. The idiot filed numerous frivolous lawsuits and tied up the legal system. Thompson is just an idiot trying to get attention. I bet he even plays games like grand theft auto. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.62.240.2 (talk) 02:45, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

tomsinz a doosh

Jack Thompson disbarred
Jack Thompson is an American hero. His fight against the traffic of obscene or violent materials and their makers has cost him his job, as the media lobby has convinced the courts of the "legality" of pornography and murder simulators in the possession of 12-year-olds is "art" and that it is protected by the 1st Amendment. Thompson said during his crusade against the hardcore pornography of 2 Live Crew that "any industry that sends the message that women can be sexually abused will be drawn and quartered". While leftist feminists focused on the use of terms like "freshman" as sexist, Thompson realized that what 2 Live Crew was doing was dangerous and harmful, especially in the hands of the children it was being marketed to. In addition to 2 Live Crew, Thompson has also sent the careers of many violent video game makers "back in the toilet were they started". Kudos to him. He is a martyr for common decency.

-- angryamerican09, 0945h, 5/11/2009 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Zipcedric (talk • contribs) 14:44, 5 November 2009

Allow me to rephrase that. While he said and did some questionable things, he was couragious in that he targeted violent and obscene entertainers without worrying what the gaming or music industries would think, and I find it hard to believe that this disbarrment is unrelated to that. If I weren't so lazy, I'd adjust that comment I posted above a bit. =angryamerican09 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.215.8.198 (talk • contribs) 03:57, 27 September 2010

 * Uh, no. He's an arrogant buffoon trying to impose his Neanderthal world-view on an unreceptive and uncaring public. If he hates modern culture, modern technology, and the like, I suggest he buy a one-way ticket to the Afghan-Pakistan border and take up residence in the same cave as Osama Bin Laden. --Brian McNeil / talk 16:05, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

--I'm with angryamerican09, jack Thompson is a fool. his one personal view does not mean that he can just sue everyone ho thinks opposes his view. that is simply ignorance. this guy deserved every slap on his wrist he got and then some. he should have been charged with something along the lines of making a mockery of the judicial system, because i can remember a conversation i had on an ON LINE VIOLENT VIDEO GAME with a Canadian where his closing statement before he left was, "go sue someone like Jack Thompson you ignorant american". this born again Christian fool made a bad name not just for him but for everyone in america. and as for suing the 2-live crew, i think in jacks "honor" i'm gonna sue every country singer and band for making me feel depressed. and every hardcore song for making me wanna kill jack Thompson and every rap band for making bad tv shows about how they were made. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.241.188.121 (talk) 01:59, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Finally
I've been trying to find out if this raving lunatic was bared and he was! I'm so happy. he was abusing his privilege as a lawyer and truly is a lunatic. suing everyone he sees for the most stupid reasons imaginable. and now he is nobody. he never belonged in a court room all he did was target people he didn't like. Who does that? Jack your nobody and you mean nothing i hope you read this you jerk. and i hope you find a hobby like under water breathing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.241.188.121 (talk) 01:50, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

YES NOW THAT'S REAL JUSTICE!!!!
Jack Thompson is an example of what's wrong with this puritanical society...I own some of the Video games he was trying to get rid of....I enjoy them very much...does that make me want to do half the crap he says they purportedly cause??? NO NO NO!!!!! I'm glad to see REAL JUSTICE was done by the disbarment!

Angie70


text:
Talk:Somalian pirates capture military ship, weapons, tanks

other minimal article should be axed due to this one being published soon. --72.65.122.199 20:15, 26 September 2008 (UTC)


text: Template:Under review

title: Template:Under review


text:
Comments:Somalian pirates capture military ship, weapons, tanks

So their were no escorts? --66.229.17.181 21:39, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I was thinking that you'd expect a ship full of military cargo to be able to defend itself from pirates..... Fephisto (talk) 12:44, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Pirates with Tanks?
A lethal combination. -Supergodzilla2090 (talk) 23:25, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Global Warming!
I certainly hope that this helps with the problem of global warming, given that there seems to be an influx of pirates and piratey activity.

May we all be touched by his noodly appendage! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.139.169.189 (talk) 16:06, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Any further updates?
The last update regarding this incident was over a month ago. Anyone know how this stand-off turned out? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.17.26.4 (talk) 19:15, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Why don't they move these ships in a close convoy with military escorts? I'm not a military expert but it sure makes sence to have strenght in numbers. Pat

 * They still have the ship, 204. They released a Greek ship today, MV Genius, that was captured the same day as the Favina. Blood Red Sandman  (Talk)   (Contribs) 22:48, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Trolling suspected. Vladimir Vysotsky was a famous Russian poet. Seriously doubt there's a "name brother" that's head of the Russian Navy.


text:
Talk:More worries of further contamination of food from China

Just to be silly
The caption on the picture is confusing. It shows a plastic food bowl, said to be "containing melamine" but the dish is empty. --Brian McNeil / talk 23:26, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

 * That's because melanine is used in the manufacture of plastics. 218.95.47.71 09:42, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I know that, some other plastic item would be more appropriate, or a clearer caption. --Brian McNeil / talk 09:45, 27 September 2008 (UTC)


text:
User talk:Billygrahamhappybirthday

Hello and a piece of advice
Hello. Thank you for visiting Wikinews. However, we don't appreciate the kind of edits you've made so far. Continued perpetration of vandalism from your part will result in a block without further warning. We hope that you will decide to contribute for the benefit of the project in which case the following pages will give you an overview of how Wikinews operates.

Our key policies - if you read anything, read these! Here a few pointers to help you get to know Wikinews: There are always things to do on Wikinews: By the way, you can sign your name on Talk pages using four tildes ( ~~~~ ), which produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, you can ask them at the water cooler or to anyone on the Welcommittee, or ask me on my Talk page.
 * Neutral point of view - tell every side to a story in a fair and balanced way
 * Cite sources - everything in a Wikinews article must be sourced
 * Introduction - overview of the site
 * Writing an article - how to write and publish a complete article
 * Content guide - what's suitable for Wikinews
 * Contents - the contents page.
 * Newsroom - The community portal
 * Existing articles need expanding and checking for spelling and mistakes
 * The front page lead articles often need updating
 * Developing stories need finishing and publishing
 * Discussions need your input
 * And of course, stories need writing!

(Warning for: []) Gopher65talk 22:11, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Warn for Vandalism
(Warning for: []) Gopher65talk 22:11, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

title: User talk:Billygrahamhappybirthday


text:
User:Supergodzilla2090

I help around with the Wikipedia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Supergodzilla2090

title: User:Supergodzilla2090


text:
User:Powerzilla

See me on Wikipedia.

title: User:Powerzilla


text:
Talk:Hawthorn wins 2008 AFL Grand Final

RockerballAustralia notes
Goals - Behinds - Total 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5-3-33 6-12-48 9-18-72 11-23-89 5-2-32 8-3-51 14-5-89 18-7-115 1st Goals Lonergan Bateman

--RockerballAustralia (talk) 05:52, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Editiorial Notes
Thanks, this is my first major article I'm taking on, so please help as needed. -- DizzyStar (talk) 02:09, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Work will be co-ordinated in IRC (#wikinews on Freenode)
 * DizzyStar will watch the telecast on TV - this counts as Original Reproting (IRC consensus)
 * Please only update the score at intervals and at major lead changes
 * The play summary should only be updated at intervals
 * Please do not bias the article to either Geelong or Hawthorn's side

3AW
3AW is the radio station I'm listening to for the game. --RockerballAustralia (talk) 05:53, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Watching telecast on Channel 7. -- DizzyStar (talk) 06:03, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Issues
--Brian McNeil / talk 09:58, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 1) Is the photo (which is on the front page) of one of the teams in the match?
 * 2) AFL is used in the opening paragraph, this should never happen - acronyms must be introduced.
 * Just in case the image aint good enough, I am going to upload another one I have had released into PD from Flickr. -- DizzyStar (talk) 01:51, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

title: Talk:Hawthorn wins 2008 AFL Grand Final


text:
McCain and Obama face off in U.S. presidential candidate debate

September 28, 2008

The two major party presidential candidates in the US, Democrat Barack Obama and Republican John McCain, faced each other yesterday in the first TV debate. Despite that McCain had asked to postpone the debate, both were present at the University of Mississippi. The debate, which was moderated by PBS' Jim Lehrer, was planned to be focused on foreign policy, however due to concerns about the US financial crisis, the debate began focused on economy.

McCain repeatedly referred to his experience, drawing on stories from the past. Often, he joked of his age and at one point seemed to mock his opponent. Obama spoke of mistakes and repeatedly laid out detailed plans.

The debate was widely seen as a draw. A CBS poll conducted after the debate on independent voters found that 38% felt it was a draw, 40% felt Obama had won, and 22% thought that McCain had won. Voters and analysts agreed that Obama had won on the economy, but that McCain had done better on foreign policy issues, which were the focus of the debate. However, Obama had a more substantial lead on the economy than McCain did on foreign policy.

The McCain campaign faced some ridicule prior to the debate, after airing an internet ad declaring McCain had won the debate hours before it had started.

Financial & bailout plans
The candidates were asked where they stood on the country's financial plans.

Obama put forward four proposals for helping the economy. First, to "make sure that we've got oversight over this whole [bailout] process". Second, to "make sure that taxpayers, when they are putting their money at risk, have the possibility of getting that money back and gains". Third, to "make sure that none of that money is going to pad CEO bank accounts or to promote golden parachutes". And lastly, "make sure that we're helping homeowners, because the root problem here has to do with the foreclosures that are taking place all across the country".

He then went on to say, "we also have to recognize that this is a final verdict on eight years of failed economic policies promoted by George Bush, supported by Senator McCain, a theory that basically says that we can shred regulations and consumer protections and give more and more to the most, and somehow prosperity will trickle down". Lehrer then turned to McCain, giving him two minutes as well.

McCain, on the other hand, stressed the urgency of the crisis and the partisanship present in Washington before going on. "This package has transparency in it. It has to have accountability and oversight. It has to have options for loans to failing businesses, rather than the government taking over those loans. We have to -- it has to have a package with a number of other essential elements to it," he told viewers, pausing to briefly mention energy and jobs before Lehrer stopped him.

Lehrer asked the two to come back to his question and urging them to speak to each other, first turning to Senator Obama.

"We haven't seen the language yet," Obama began, speaking to Lehrer and not McCain. "And I do think that there's constructive work being done out there", he said, before noting he was optimistic a plan would come together. "The question, I think, that we have to ask ourselves is, how did we get into this situation in the first place?"

He continued, stressing his foresight on the issues two years ago, before Lehrer turned to McCain, asking if he planned to vote for the bailout plan.

McCain stammered that he hoped so. Lehrer asked again, and McCain replied, "Sure. But -- but let me -- let me point out, I also warned about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and warned about corporate greed and excess, and CEO pay, and all that. A lot of us saw this train wreck coming."

McCain then continued, giving a story about former US President Dwight Eisenhower, who "on the night before the Normandy invasion, went into his room, and he wrote out two letter". Eisenhower, he said, had taken accountability for his actions.

"As president of the United States, people are going to be held accountable in my administration. And I promise you that that will happen."

Obama then agreed with McCain, adding that more accountability was needed but not just when there's a panic. "There are folks out there who've been struggling before this crisis took place," Obama continued, "and that's why it's so important, as we solve this short-term problem, that we look at some of the underlying issues that have led to wages and incomes for ordinary Americans to go down, the -- a health care system that is broken, energy policies that are not working, because, you know, 10 days ago, John said that the fundamentals of the economy are sound".

Obama was asked to say it to McCain. Obama replied, "I do not think that they are". Lehrer asked him to say it more directly to McCain, and Obama laughed, repeating himself to McCain.

McCain joked about his age, saying, "Are you afraid I couldn't hear him?"

Obama said that he and McCain disagreed fundamentally and that he wanted accountability "not just when there's a crisis for folks who have power and influence and can hire lobbyists, but for the nurse, the teacher, the police officer, who, frankly, at the end of each month, they've got a little financial crisis going on. They're having to take out extra debt just to make their mortgage payments". Tax policies, he said, were a good example.

McCain disagreed. "No, I -- look, we've got to fix the system. We've got fundamental problems in the system. And Main Street is paying a penalty for the excesses and greed in Washington, D.C., and on Wall Street. So there's no doubt that we have a long way to go. And, obviously, stricter interpretation and consolidation of the various regulatory agencies that weren't doing their job, that has brought on this crisis".

Fundamental differences
Lehrer went on to the next question, asking if there were fundamental differences between the approaches of the two.

McCain began by saying he wanted to lower "completely out of control" spending. He promised as president to "veto every single spending bill" He then attacked Senator Obama's use of earmarks, citing it as a fundamental difference.

Senator Obama agreed that earmarks were being abused, but not that it was a large problem. "Earmarks account for $18 billion in last year's budget. Senator McCain is proposing -- and this is a fundamental difference between us -- $300 billion in tax cuts to some of the wealthiest corporations and individuals in the country, $300 billion. Now, $18 billion is important; $300 billion is really important." He then attacked McCain's tax plans, saying, "you would have CEOs of Fortune 500 companies getting an average of $700,000 in reduced taxes, while leaving 100 million Americans out".

He then stressed his focus on the middle class, saying, "We've got to grow the economy from the bottom up. What I've called for is a tax cut for 95 percent of working families, 95 percent".

McCain was called on.

"Now, Senator Obama didn't mention that, along with his tax cuts, he is also proposing some $800 billion in new spending on new programs," McCain said, attacking his opponent. He also said that Obama had only suspended pork barrel spending after he started running for president.

"What I do is I close corporate loopholes," Obama objected, "stop providing tax cuts to corporations that are shipping jobs overseas so that we're giving tax breaks to companies that are investing here in the United States. I make sure that we have a health care system that allows for everyone to have basic coverage".

He then turned to McCain, asking him to look at his tax policies, which he said were ignoring the middle class and a continuation of Bush policies.

Lehrer asked McCain to respond directly to Obama's attack on his tax policies.

"Well -- well, let me give you an example of what Senator Obama finds objectionable, the business tax," McCain began. He then explained the reasoning behind his business tax cuts, saying that companies would want to start in countries where they would pay less taxes. "I want to cut that business tax. I want to cut it so that businesses will remain in -- in the United States of America and create jobs".

Obama explained that his tax cuts would affect 95% of taxpayers, then replied, "Now, John mentioned the fact that business taxes on paper are high in this country, and he's absolutely right. Here's the problem: There are so many loopholes that have been written into the tax code, oftentimes with support of Senator McCain, that we actually see our businesses pay effectively one of the lowest tax rates in the world".

McCain, he said, opposed closing loopholes but just wanted to add more tax breaks on top of that.

He went on, attacking McCain's health credit idea, saying that McCain wanted to tax health credits. "Your employer now has to pay taxes on the health care that you're getting from your employer. And if you end up losing your health care from your employer, you've got to go out on the open market and try to buy it".

McCain responded with an example of Obama voting for tax breaks of oil companies.

Obama cut in, "John, you want to give oil companies another $4 billion", he pointed out.

McCain shot back, attacking Obama's earmark spending and tax policies. "Who's the person who has believed that the best thing for America is -- is to have a tax system that is fundamentally fair?", he said, referring to himself. "And I've fought to simplify it, and I have proposals to simplify it".

He then accused Obama of voting "to increase taxes on people who make as low as $42,000 a year". Obama repeated several times that McCain's accusations were untrue.

McCain then accused him of giving tax cuts to oil companies, which Obama once again said was untrue. "The fact of the matter is, is that I was opposed to those tax breaks, tried to strip them out,"he said. "We've got an emergency bill on the Senate floor right now that contains some good stuff, some stuff you want, including drilling off-shore, but you're opposed to it because it would strip away those tax breaks that have gone to oil companies."

Post-financial crisis plans
Lehrer then broke in, stopping the argument. He switched to a new question, asking what priorities and goals for the country the candidates would give up as a result of the financial crisis.

He allowed Obama to answer the question first, who said many things would have to be delayed but not forgotten. He then began to list what he felt the country had to have to continue to compete.

"We have to have energy independence," he said, "so I've put forward a plan to make sure that, in 10 years' time, we have freed ourselves from dependence on Middle Eastern oil by increasing production at home, but most importantly by starting to invest in alternative energy, solar, wind, biodiesel".

He continued, saying that the health care system had to be fixed because it was bankrupting families.

"We've got to make sure that we're competing in education," he continued. "We've got to make sure that our children are keeping pace in math and in science." He also mentioned making sure college was still affordable.

He also stressed making sure the country was still stable structurally, "to make sure that we can compete in this global economy".

Lehrer then turned to McCain, asking him to present his ideas.

"Look, we, no matter what, we've got to cut spending", McCain began and reminded the audience that he "saved the taxpayers $6.8 billion by fighting a contract that was negotiated between Boeing and DOD that was completely wrong".

Lehrer broke in, asking if it was correct that neither of them had any major changes to implement after the financial crisis.

Obama replied that many things would have to be delayed and put aside, and that investments had to be made. He then agreed with McCain that cuts had to be made. "We right now give $15 billion every year as subsidies to private insurers under the Medicare system. Doesn't work any better through the private insurers. They just skim off $15 billion. That was a give away and part of the reason is because lobbyists are able to shape how Medicare work".

McCain then made a suggestion. "How about a spending freeze on everything but defense, veteran affairs and entitlement programs". Lehrer repeated "spending freeze?" and McCain went on, "I think we ought to seriously consider with the exceptions the caring of veterans, national defense and several other vital issues".

Obama disagreed with McCain's idea, saying it was "using a hatchet". Some vital programs, he said, were seriously underfunded. "I went to increase early childhood education and the notion that we should freeze that when there may be, for example, this Medicare subsidy doesn't make sense".

The two candidates began to argue more directly.

"We have to have," McCain argued, "wind, tide, solar, natural gas, flex fuel cars and all that but we also have to have offshore drilling and we also have to have nuclear power".

He accused Obama of opposing storing nuclear fuel.

Lehrer interrupted the two with another question, asking how the financial crisis would affect how they ran the country.

Obama replied first. "There's no doubt it will affect our budgets. There is no doubt about it". He went on to stress that it was a critical time and the country's long term priorities had to be sorted out.

McCain replied by criticizing Obama's health care plans. "I want the families to make decisions between themselves and their doctors. Not the federal government," he said, then called for lower spending.

He went on to speak about the national debt and stressing the importance of low taxes.

Obama went on the offensive, attacking McCain's record of voting. "John, it's been your president who you said you agreed with 90 percent of the time who presided over this increase in spending", he said, accusing him of voting for an "orgy of spending".

McCain countered that he had opposed Bush "on spending, on climate change, on torture of prisoner, on - on Guantanamo Bay. On a -- on the way that the Iraq War was conducted". He called himself a maverick, and referred to his running mate as a maverick as well.

Lessons of Iraq
Lehrer asked the two what the lessons of Iraq were.

McCain answered first, stressing that the war in Iraq was going well. "I think the lessons of Iraq are very clear," he answered, "that you cannot have a failed strategy that will then cause you to nearly lose a conflict".

He went on to praise the efforts in Iraq, saying the strategy was successful and the US was winning. "And we will come home with victory and with honor. And that withdrawal is the result of every counterinsurgency that succeeds", and continued that Iraq would make a stable ally.

Lehrer asked Obama how he saw the lessons of Iraq, who began by questioning the fundamentals of the war and whether the US should have gone in the first place.

"We took our eye off [bin Laden]. And not to mention that we are still spending $10 billion a month, when they have a $79 billion surplus, at a time when we are in great distress here at home, and we just talked about the fact that our budget is way overstretched and we are borrowing money from overseas to try to finance just some of the basic functions of our government".

The lesson, he said, was to "never hesitate to use military force", but to use it wisely.

McCain was asked if he agreed on the lesson, though he did not comment on a lesson learned. Obama, he said, had been wrong about the surge.

The two opponents then began arguing, as Lehrman tried to mediate them.

McCain felt it was remarkable that "Senator Obama is the chairperson of a committee that oversights NATO that's in Afghanistan. To this day, he has never had a hearing".

"The issues of Afghanistan," Obama responded, "the issues of Iraq, critical issues like that, don't go through my subcommittee because they're done as a committee as a whole".

He then began to attack McCain's optimism. "You said that we were going to be greeted as liberators. You were wrong. You said that there was no history of violence between Shiite and Sunni. And you were wrong".

McCain responded to the criticism by telling a story of when he spoke to troops who were re-enlisting. "And you know what they said to us? They said, let us win. They said, let us win. We don't want our kids coming back here. And this strategy, and this general, they are winning. Senator Obama refuses to acknowledge that we are winning in Iraq".

McCain repeatedly accused Obama of opposing funding to troops.

Obama responded by speaking to Lehrer, to explain why he had voted against funding troops. "Senator McCain opposed funding for troops in legislation that had a timetable, because he didn't believe in a timetable. I opposed funding a mission that had no timetable, and was open- ended, giving a blank check to George Bush. We had a difference on the timetable".

"Admiral Mullen suggests that Senator Obama's plan is dangerous for America," McCain cut in once Obama had finished.

Obama said it was not the case, that the wording was "a precipitous withdrawal would be dangerous".

McCain then argued that Iraq, and not Afghanistan, was the central battle ground against terrorism. He also attacked Obama's surprise that the surge had worked.

Troops in Afghanistan
Lehrer switched to a new question. "Do you think more troops -- more U.S. troops should be sent to Afghanistan, how many, and when?"

Obama mentioned he had been saying more troops in Afghanistan were needed for over a year. He argued that no Al-Qaeda were present in Iraq before the invasion, and the people there had nothing to do with 9/11.

He then went on to list a three part plan beginning with pressuring the Afghani government to work for it's people and control it's poppy trade. He also pressed the need to stop giving money to Pakistan.

McCain responded by saying Iraq had to be stabilized and that he would not make the mistake of leaving Iraq the way it is.

"If you're going to aim a gun at somebody," he said, "you'd better be prepared to pull the trigger".

Obama responded by arguing that if the Pakistani government would not take care of terrorists in it's borders, action had to be taken. He then commented on past US policies with Pakistan, saying that the US support of Musharraf had alienated the Pakistani people.

"And as a consequence, we lost legitimacy in Pakistan. We spent $10 billion. And in the meantime, they weren't going after al Qaeda, and they are more powerful now than at any time since we began the war in Afghanistan. That's going to change when I'm president of the United States", he finished.

McCain quickly replied that Pakistan was a failed state at the time. He then went on to talk about his voting record. "I have a record of being involved in these national security issues, which involve the highest responsibility and the toughest decisions that any president can make, and that is to send our young men and women into harm's way".

Obama argued that Afghanistan could not be muddled through, and that problems were being caused by not focusing on Al-Qaeda. As he finished, Lehrer attempted to announce a new question, but McCain quickly attacked Obama, saying his plans would have a "calamitous effect" on national security and the region.

Iran
Lehrer directed his next question towards McCain, asking about his thoughts on Iran and it's threat to the US.

McCain's reading of the threat in Iran was "if Iran acquires nuclear weapons, it is an existential threat to the State of Israel and to other countries in the region". He stressed the need to avoid another Holocaust, and the need for a league of democracies to battle Iran. "I am convinced that together, we can, with the French, with the British, with the Germans and other countries, democracies around the world, we can affect Iranian behavior".

Obama went next, focusing on the Iraq war's effect on Iran. Iraq, he said, was Iran's "mortal enemy" and had kept Iran from becoming a threat. "That was cleared away. And what we've seen over the last several years is Iran's influence grow. They have funded Hezbollah, they have funded Hamas, they have gone from zero centrifuges to 4,000 centrifuges to develop a nuclear weapon".

He then went on to say that refusing to use diplomacy with hostile nations has only made matters worse and isolated the US.

Diplomacy
Lehrer turned to McCain, asking him how he felt about diplomacy as a solution.

McCain hurried through his response, attacking Obama on his willingness to meet with hostile leaders without preconditions. People like Ahmadinejad, he said, would have their ideas legitimized if a President met with them.

Obama responded by pointing out that Ahmadinejad was only a minor leader. Meeting leaders without preconditions, he said, "doesn't mean that you invite them over for tea one day". He then turned to attacking McCain, who he said "would not meet potentially with the prime minister of Spain, because he -- you know, he wasn't sure whether they were aligned with us. I mean, Spain? Spain is a NATO ally".

McCain retorted that he was not yet President so it would be out of place. The two then began to argue over the comments of Dr. Kissinger's stance on meeting foreign leaders.

McCain argued that meeting with and legitimizing ideas was dangerous and naive, and said it was a fundamental difference of opinion.

Obama accused McCain of misrepresentation, stressing that he would not speak without low level talks and preparations.

McCain responded by mocking Obama. "So let me get this right. We sit down with Ahmadinejad, and he says, 'We're going to wipe Israel off the face of the Earth,' and we say, 'No, you're not'? Oh, please".

Relationship with Russia
The two started arguing among each other, as Lehrer attempted to interject, finally succeeding with a new question. He turned to Obama, asking how he saw the relationship with Russia and it's potential.

Obama began spelling out his opinion, stating that he felt the US approach to Russia had to be evaluated. He then continued that the US has to press for a unified alliance and for Russia to remove itself from other nations, adding that the US had to "explain to the Russians that you cannot be a 21st-century superpower, or power, and act like a 20th-century dictatorship".

He went on, stressing the importance of diplomacy and affirming relationships, and inviting Russian-influenced countries into NATO. "Now, we also can't return to a Cold War posture with respect to Russia. It's important that we recognize there are going to be some areas of common interest. One is nuclear proliferation".

McCain responded by attacking Obama's reaction to the Russian-Georgian conflict, criticizing his initial comment that both sides should show restraint, calling it naive. "He doesn't understand that Russia committed serious aggression against Georgia. And Russia has now become a nation fueled by petro-dollars that is basically a KGB apparatchik-run government".

Lehrer asked Obama if there were any major differences between the two's opinion on Russia, who answered that he and McCain had similar opinions on Russia. He then stressed foresight in dealing with Russia, as well as reducing dependence on foreign oil through alternative energy.

Alternative energy
"Over 26 years, Senator McCain voted 23 times against alternative energy, like solar, and wind, and biodiesel," he mentioned.

The two began to argue over alternative energy. As Lehrer began announcing the next question, McCain interjected. "No one from Arizona is against solar. And Senator Obama says he's for nuclear, but he's against reprocessing and he's against storing So," he continued, as Obama objected, "it's hard to get there from here. And off-shore drilling is also something that is very important and it is a bridge".

McCain continued, as Obama interrupted to correct him, saying that he had voted for storing nuclear waste safely.

The two began interrupting each other, each trying to get a word in, before Lehrer stopped them and moved on.

Likelihood of another 9/11
"What do you think the likelihood is that there would be another 9/11-type attack on the continental United States?" asked Lehrer.

McCain said that America was far safer since 9/11, which he claimed a hand in. He went on to stress better intelligence and technology in keeping America safe, but that he felt the US was far safer.

Lehrer then turned to Obama.

Obama disagreed slightly, saying America was safer in some ways, but "we still have a long way to go". He also felt that the US was not focusing enough on Al-Qaeda and fighting in Iraq was not making the US safer.

McCain accused Senator Obama of not understanding that "if we fail in Iraq, it encourages al Qaeda. They would establish a base in Iraq".

Lehrer asked if Obama agreed.

Obama argued that the sole focus was currently Iraq, but that "in the meantime, bin Laden is still out there. He is not captured. He is not killed". He noted that $10 billion was spent in Iraq every month, instead of going to healthcare. He argued that veterans were not getting the benefits they deserved, and that the next president's strategies had to be broader.

McCain responded by attacking Obama saying he didn't think Obama had the knowledge or experience to be President.

Obama then said that the job of the next President would be to repair America's image and economy.

McCain concluded by citing his POW experience. "Jim, when I came home from prison, I saw our veterans being very badly treated, and it made me sad. And I embarked on an effort to resolve the POW-MIA issue, which we did in a bipartisan fashion, and then I worked on normalization of relations between our two countries so that our veterans could come all the way home".

"And that ends this debate tonight," finished Jim Lehrer.


text:
User talk:Nico89abc

Please, go ahead :) --Poisonous (talk) 03:53, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

title: User talk:Nico89abc


text: Comments:2008 AFL Grand Final

title: Comments:2008 AFL Grand Final


text:
Talk:McCain and Obama face off in U.S. presidential candidate debate

I'd really like some help on this one guys! :( No idea how to do this kind of thing, but laying down the writing so others can go in and fix it up. Here's my idea.

Let's have a section for each question, which a brief summary underneath it. Then maybe cut in with comments by analysts (once I or someone else gets to that point) next to the words they're commenting on. --Poisonous (talk) 04:04, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I'm done. I'm tired of being yelled at in irc over it being too encyclopedic before it's done. Nevermind that it's a work in progress and I was planning on adding commentary, summary, background, etc, and have been working on this for a while. I'll let someone else take it over, I'm done with it. --Poisonous (talk) 05:43, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

 * I think it is fantastic. Why bother watching the debate (Which I can assure you, I will _never_ do)? I can read this, I can skip to exactly the section I am interested in, and then go on with things. -- Shakata Ga Nai  ^_^ 06:27, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Meh, Shaka encouraged me to keep working. Will need help of others to clean it up and make it a news report. I added some debate analysis (surprisingly couldn't find much, but more will come. Here's what needs to be done
 * better intro and report to start with :(
 * summaries under sections
 * condense most quotes, and better
 * more background information

--Poisonous (talk) 09:15, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

It's a little hard to read
Hello. I think it's too much text. Maybe it would be better if it was a summary of the most important words from them. Another idea might be to mark under bold text. I don't want to do it because my English is not good enough to write a news article. Cheers, --Nico89abc (talk) 22:08, 27 September 2008 (UTC)


text:
User:Matthewcl375~enwikinews

Hello, and welcome to my user page!

I have just become a member of wikinews and i have been a member of wikipedia for a long time.

I am interested in the news and in journalism so i thought that wikinews would be a good place to show off my reporting...

My Work
Seventeen killed in Syrian car bomb blast - 27/09/08

title: User:Matthewcl375~enwikinews


text:
Seventeen killed in Syrian car bomb blast

September 27, 2008 Seventeen people have been killed and a further fourteen injured today in a car bomb blast in the Syrian capital Damascus.

A Syrian television station said that the area has been cordoned off by the Damascus police force. The area where the bomb went off was Mahlak Street which is close to a security post on the road leading to the international airport and also close to a shrine which was popular with Iranian, Iraqi and Lebanese pilgrims.

According to the television station that told the news, the car was packed with 200kg of plastic explosives. Car bomb attacks are rare in this area, the station claims.

This blast has been the first since the assassination of Imad Moughniyah, the military commander of the Hezbollah Islamist group in February this year. A senior security officer was also killed at a beach resort near the port of Tartous under mysterious circumstances. Several explosions blamed on Sunni Muslim militants opposed to Syria's secular government have also taken place over the last few years.


text:
Talk:Seventeen killed in Syrian car bomb blast

Today is when? Article is missing the date template that is by default provided.

Source is BBC News Online. That extra word means that the link to Wikipedia goes to the right article.

Format for all dates is 'MonthName Daynumber, Year' with full four digits for the year. This applies in the date and source templates. This means that at some point in the future the information can be processed - e.g. to create statistics on how many articles use sources more than a couple of days old.

Numbers of 20 or under should be spelled out as words per the style guide. (I will fix the title). --Brian McNeil / talk 08:46, 27 September 2008 (UTC) - I have read your comments and made some adjustments to the article - could it please be reviewed again? --Matthewcl375 (talk) 09:05, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I have made some changes and added the review template. --Brian McNeil / talk 09:16, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Peer review #2
Thanks very much for editing this article - it is my first story on Wikinews. The reason for its length was the lack of information available for it. Is there any way it can be made front page news? --Matthewcl375 (talk) 09:43, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
 * It is on the front page. Try refreshing the page. Anonymous101talk 09:48, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I see it on the front page under the September 27 section. You may need to click the refresh link to see it. It isn't ready to go up as a lead because it doesn't have a picture and has an outstanding task (the merge from the later started article). --Brian McNeil / talk 09:50, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Results of merge
Please document action taken in merging information from the listed merge source article and its sources. When there is consensus that the merge is complete the newer article may be turned into a redirect to this one. --Brian McNeil / talk 09:52, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

 * How do i merge the two articles? --Matthewcl375 (talk) 09:59, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Information in the other article should be reviewed and incorporated into this one. This may mean you need to copy the sources from the other one as well and add them to this article.
 * You're generally done when the other article doesn't tell you anything that isn't in this one. --Brian McNeil / talk 10:02, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

The other article basically contains the same information as this one does - would there be any point in merging them? --Matthewcl375 (talk) 10:15, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

I have now updated this article so that both articles contain the same content. What will be done with the other article? --Matthewcl375 (talk) 10:19, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Approving Changes
Could someone please 'sight' the draft and publish it as the stable version? I am not sure how to do this. Thanks --Matthewcl375 (talk) 10:50, 27 September 2008 (UTC)


text:
Comments:McCain and Obama face off in U.S. presidential candidate debate

=Who won the debate? Did the debate change your opinions on either of the candidates or the issues?=

 * I already made up my mind, but i find this debate good but i notice it was a big "no u" and "i agree". --KDP3 (talk) 04:13, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Thoughts on McCain
Senator McCain seemed hellbent on attacking Senator Obama. While some of what was justified, most of what he said was completely fallacious. I don't know who I support (I'm a moderate who is split on the issues), but so far, Obama seems like more of a serious politician. -- Poe Joe (talk) 05:07, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

 * Yeah, but he thought the surge was a great idea, AND IT WAS! Therefore, all criticism is invalid. I now refer to him as John "The Surge" McCain. I also liked how he brought up that "Obama has the most liberal voting record of any US senator". He's running under the Liberal ticket, why is this surprising? --Smackdat (talk) 12:21, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

They kicked themselves in the groin
McCain did make at least one serious mistake, and Obama did too by not pointing it out. McCain said he wanted to freeze all spending but defense and veteran benefits. HELLO? Does anyone see how ridiculous that is? Yes, McCain, let's let our schools, communications, and everything else fall apart while YOU as a veteran continue to get benefits with your multiple houses, while we continue to fund our biggest, most expensive, and most pointless project ever--the Iraq War. --Poisonous (talk) 06:41, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Obama on presentation, McCain on substance. Give me substance over presentation any day of the week. Perception (presentation) is 90% of reality, but I need 100% of reality, as we all live in 100% of reality. Those who don't are either in denial or mentally distressed. So, I need substance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.187.100.148 (talk) 12:37, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Did you want to start a Flame War poisonous? Anyway being an economist, I don't believe the ENTIRE nation could fall apart while ONLY McCain being the ONLY veteran; thus you are saying McCain was SOLELY responsible for the defense of our nation. Also I don't think the Iraq war is the biggest, most expensive, nor the most pointless project ever. In spite of the Iraq War, welfare is the most expensive. The government also specializes in pointless so qualifying something as MOST pointless seems absurd to being with. Somehow you think that without the government, the USA would fall apart. Fortunately for Americans, you are wrong. McCain is most assuredly not right in thinking that freezing the budget is going to fix spending problems, but there is no reason to assume that doing so is going to create anarchy. 24.252.6.212 20:02, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure why you felt the need to target my comment and claim a flame war, as I was simply putting my own opinion. Not sure why you felt the need to misrepresent it, either. You also assume a lot, my friend. But alas, this is the internet, and everyone is looking for a fight. Your comment about him being the only veteran doesn't even make sense. All I was saying that it was funny that he, as a veteran, wanted to keep benefits for himself but not spend on anyone else's troubles. Military spending, btw, takes up the bulk of our budget. It wastes lives and money, seeing as Iraq didn't attack us. Your "the government..." comment doesn't even make sense, so I won't bother. And no, I don't think that government is needed. That's a nice little assumption of yours--I'm fairly anarchist, so yea. It's just ridiculous to spend all of our money on "defense" when more important things that cost less are being ignored. --Poisonous (talk) 20:29, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

For some reason, when I was done watching the debate, I had an image of McCain wrestling a barrel full of pork. --204.81.230.204 16:19, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

IT WAS A TIE
I'm an Obama suupporter. I watched the debates just to see if i think that either side could convince somone to vote for them, I did not see that from Mcain on Obama, so i'm calling it a tie. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.194.251.3 (talk) 13:48, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

"That's not true" ... "doesn't understand"
The catch phrases were clear.

Obama often said "That's not true" several times regarding what McCain was saying. That's the polite way of saying "That's a lie". Obama is only defensive when he is caught;

McCain often said "[my opponent] doesn't understand". McCain seems to have been trying to illustrate himself as older and wiser, and this young lying pup standing next to him just doesn't understand.

Based on these two statements, that really carried through the entire presentation, I would say that Obama lost the debate. He was able to point out inaccuracy in the information coming from McCain, while McCain was only able to suggest that his opinion is better. —Preceding unsigned comment added by A thought (talk • contribs) 14:21, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

both candidates are wrong about the bailout
This bailout does not have to be funded with our money because the chinese will sell all of their treasury bills once the deal is done so our financial system will really collapse. It is time to nationalize all of our foreign debt.```` —Preceding unsigned comment added by Grate white s (talk • contribs) 20:14, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Why hasn't there been a bailout of this magnitude proposed for American manufacturing? Over the past 15 years or so a substantial amount of American manufacturers downsized/outsourced, and even more went out of business. I think that the current failed economic sinks should be allowed to go out of business, and we should be focusing on rebuilding our economic sources like we would with a global war. Sparky1 (talk) 20:38, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

$800 billion in new spending?
True or not, there had to be some reason for Senator McCain to to blurt out this figure. I would like to know what his reasoning was, whether or not it was faulty. If there was no reasoning, Senator McCain might as well have blurted out: "This past March Senator Obama went on a nationwide killing spree".

As a side note, new spending is just a part of a financial plan, and in order to see the full picture we would have to also know the following:

 * How much of the old spending would be retained
 * Which of the old programs would be cut/retained
 * How much tax revenue would be obtained
 * How this new tax revenue is different from the old tax revenue both in amount and method of collection
 * What are the overall short term and long term affects of the total spending and tax revenue on the economy Sparky1 (talk) 20:18, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
 * From the way they both responded to the question during the debate, I don't think either of them have concrete plans. Yet they're both thoroughly convinced that the other's plan is terrible. --204.81.230.204 16:16, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

McCain vs. Obama: What's the difference?
I saw the whole debate, and I thought it was pretty predictable. Neither candidate said anything particularly weird and I already had a pretty good idea about their positions on foreign policy. If I hadn't seen it, I wouldn't have missed much.

Both candidates, of course, want to bail out the failing corporations. Obama says he'll get us out of Iraq, but I really don't trust him to do so. (At least on McCain's watch, I know what to expect.)

It was pretty obvious that there's no fundamental difference in how the McCain and Obama would deal with Iran. Both think it would be unacceptable for Iran to have nukes. Both want to impose sanctions on Iran. Both would ultimately be open to going to war with Iran. The only detail where there's any real difference is that Obama would be willing to talk with Ahmadinejad whereas McCain wouldn't.

Later on, Obama admitted that he and McCain had similar opinions about the recent events in the Caucasus. Both of them think this is raw aggression by Russia against Georgia. Neither of them are willing to accept that Abkhazia and South Ossetia are independent countries, plain and simple, and have been so since the beginning of the 1990s. I personally think that Russia was wrong to get involved in Georgia's war against South Ossetia, but I recognize that Russia did so simply because South Ossetia was its ally, and I wish McCain and/or Obama would realize this too.

71.96.128.236 22:08, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Do you prefer red ants or black ants? --Brian McNeil / talk 22:20, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

 * watching both mccain and obama on tv everyday, i am thoroughly convinced that mccain has the better deal to become the next president of america. i tried to convince myself before that obama might be the answer to america's boring exposure to issues on dying economy, unsuccessful war struggles but at the end i realized that he could only worsen the situation. surely, mccain could better handle the job and has in himself a combination of patriotism and love for country unsurmountable...i had heard and seen enough, mccain will make it!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cookie coy (talk • contribs) 13:05, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

McCain vs. Obama
McCain is an indignant military man, who still lets his memories control over him. Clearly, Obama does not have as much experience as McCain on this point but hardly any predecessors had prior to their post. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.151.183.67 (talk) 10:53, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

nopers
nope it's ow he debated —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nawman (talk • contribs) 16:16, 5 November 2008 (UTC)


text:
Comments:Hawthorn wins 2008 AFL Grand Final

Australian Rules Football is the most action filled of all the football codes and very entertaining to watch and exhilarating to play. This Grand Final with 100,012 spectators and much of Australia watching on TV, whilst not one of the best ever, had some episodes of great skill and speed of ball movement and many courageous tackles. The sport is no longer confined to Australia with over 40,000 participants outside Australia in many countries - see www.worldfootynews.com


text:
Wikinews:Bots/Archive

All requests can be added to the current archive.

title: Wikinews:Bots/Archive


text: User:DizzyStar/Cricket 08-09

title: User:DizzyStar/Cricket 08-09