en-us https://www.intensedebate.com/users/596982 Comments by canadianviking http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/09/03/your-family-is-being-watched-24-7/#IDComment33201263 I loled at all three above comments. Jolly good show. Sat, 5 Sep 2009 07:28:42 +0000 http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/09/03/your-family-is-being-watched-24-7/#IDComment33201263 http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/08/27/do-you-notice-anything-shrivelling/#IDComment32311864 Hear Hear! Fri, 28 Aug 2009 06:25:27 +0000 http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/08/27/do-you-notice-anything-shrivelling/#IDComment32311864 http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/08/13/we-can’t-talk-about-immigration/#IDComment30906932 "For example, according to a report by Europol, in 2006 only one terrorist attack out of 500 was perpetrated by Islamist terrorists. Directing hysteria only at Islamist terrorism is a bit silly." I really don't think a few cherrybombs by IRA wannabes counts on the same scale as the Madrid train bombings and the London Tube bombings... Sun, 16 Aug 2009 02:22:40 +0000 http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/08/13/we-can’t-talk-about-immigration/#IDComment30906932 http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/07/30/fear-of-a-red-planet-is-just-what-we-need/#IDComment29382276 What we need is for private enterprise to start making advancements in space. The American, Russian and Chinese governments are proceeding at a snail's pace, and the first two are going to be facing hard choices soon about whether to continue funding their space programs, or divert money to putting out the deficit fires on Earth. If we could harness the profit motive for Space exploration, it could usher in a whole new era in the space age, and yield huge advancements in technology. We should remember that the profit motive was what motivated many great explorers like Christopher Columbus and Vasco de Gama. They weren't looking for "The New World", they were looking for a sea route to the East, so that they could make their fortunes trading spices. The most obvious business model for space companies would be tourism. Who wouldn't want to stay in a space hotel or visit the moon themselves? This is just one way of commercializing space, but there are many more out there, just waiting to be exploited by some bold entrepreneur. Its forward looking companies like Virgin Galactic that will take us to the next level in space, not tired government agencies like the ESA and NASA. Tue, 4 Aug 2009 04:23:58 +0000 http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/07/30/fear-of-a-red-planet-is-just-what-we-need/#IDComment29382276 http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/07/21/were-not-the-only-ones-who-are-u-s-centric/#IDComment27908604 Fact 1: Every major western country has a national media content regulator similar to the CRTC, except the US. Fact 2: American shows are the most popular and most successful shows in the world. Coincidence? Tue, 21 Jul 2009 23:31:55 +0000 http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/07/21/were-not-the-only-ones-who-are-u-s-centric/#IDComment27908604 http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/07/16/why-do-you-leave-the-one-you-love/#IDComment27502531 What a mature and adult thing to say. Thanks, Jack Mitchell! Fri, 17 Jul 2009 08:12:09 +0000 http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/07/16/why-do-you-leave-the-one-you-love/#IDComment27502531 http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/07/13/macleans-interview-martin-jacques/#IDComment27499733 Thats an overly simplistic view. Why was the West superior in applying organized violence? Simple: They had better technology. Muskets and locomotives are superior to spears and dogsleds any day. Now, how were they able to acquire said technology? They had a religion and a set of values that fostered a culture of freedom and ideas. And it is from those ideas that advancement, progress, and technology sprung. Sure, it came with organized violence as a side-effect, but the world is undoubtedly a better place today because of it. Fri, 17 Jul 2009 07:09:51 +0000 http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/07/13/macleans-interview-martin-jacques/#IDComment27499733 http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/07/02/champagne-wishes/#IDComment26753251 That he deserves exactly what he got, not a noose. Thu, 9 Jul 2009 04:48:11 +0000 http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/07/02/champagne-wishes/#IDComment26753251 http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/07/02/champagne-wishes/#IDComment26580625 Come on guys, is that ALL you can say? How about responding to some of the points in my comments? I am NOT obsessed with myself. I haven't said a word about myself. We're talking about Champagne here. You can't legitimately call for someone to hang if you can't provide a reason for it thats more compelling than that person's defences. All I see here is: 1: HES A SCUMBAG! or 2: Canadianviking is Champagne! (which I'm not btw) Thats simply not enough reason. Come on, you can come up with something better than that. Wed, 8 Jul 2009 00:53:32 +0000 http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/07/02/champagne-wishes/#IDComment26580625 http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/07/02/champagne-wishes/#IDComment26530554 As for the "I coulda done that" response, well, no you couldn't. Its easy for Monday morning quarterbacks to say what they would have done, its another thing to actually get it done on gameday. If it really were that easy, somebody else would have done it, and Champagne would be out of a job. Evidence for this can be seen in his 10 year tenure with the DND. If it really was as easy as saying 'Hey, lets get new stuff!' you can be sure they wouldn't have needed Champagne around past 1995. In conclusion: Get off your moral high horse. Champagne got what was coming to him, his debt to society is paid. Now leave him alone. Tue, 7 Jul 2009 08:11:35 +0000 http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/07/02/champagne-wishes/#IDComment26530554 http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/07/02/champagne-wishes/#IDComment26530546 I already know what the Degree Nazis like "I know him well" and "Better Reporter" will say: "Anybody could have done what he did." "He's just an idiot who never went to college" "Saying 'lets just get new stuff' is easy. I coulda done that." Accusing someone of lying for claiming to be what they are (a computer engineer) just because they don't have a computer engineering degree is elitist, prejudiced, and stupid. It doesn't matter what your grades were, or how much your tuition cost. All that matters in the workplace is what you can do, and how well you can do it. And obviously, Champagne did a pretty good job. Tue, 7 Jul 2009 08:11:20 +0000 http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/07/02/champagne-wishes/#IDComment26530546 http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/07/02/champagne-wishes/#IDComment26530504 My logic in the above comments is not "weird", its perfectly sound, as I will demonstrate in my next comment: Its all a case of supply and demand. In the cases of nurses and security guards, there is a huge pool of people willing and able to do those jobs. They are paid 5 figure rather than 8 figure salaries because that is the point where supply meets demand. In Champagne's case, the number of people willing and ABLE to do his job was 1. Him. Therefore, the value of his work was VERY high. The stupid thing he did was trying to steal the money he deserved rather than getting it through legitimate means. Tue, 7 Jul 2009 08:10:16 +0000 http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/07/02/champagne-wishes/#IDComment26530504 http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/07/02/champagne-wishes/#IDComment26530496 Proportionately, Champagne is paying 37 times as much per dollar stolen as Madoff. Now, you can say that is not a fair comparison, and you'd be right. Just something to think about, before you get all agitated about the Canadian Justice System. However, there is more to the Madoff comparison than that. Madoff was running a Ponzi scheme, meaning he created no value for anyone. Champagne worked for the DND and he created 1 BILLION dollars of value for the government. Then he stole 10% percent of it. In justice, credit is given for previous good deeds (think plea bargains and giving the loot to charity). Just because the amounts were so huge doesn't mean the same rules don't apply here. Tue, 7 Jul 2009 08:09:58 +0000 http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/07/02/champagne-wishes/#IDComment26530496 http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/07/02/champagne-wishes/#IDComment26530486 In the first place, I'm not Champagne, or Steve Maich. I'm just a guy from the prairies who likes a good debate. This is the internet, so no I can't prove it. You're just gonna have to trust me on this one. I have a lot to write here, so I’m gonna split this up into a few comments… Champagne is a 12 year old kid painting graffiti in an alley compared to Madoff. 70 billion > 100 million Madoff got 150 years, Champagne got 8 70 bil. divided by 100 mil. = 700 times the crime 150 divided by 8 = 19 times the punishment 700 divided by 19 = +/- 37 Tue, 7 Jul 2009 08:09:39 +0000 http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/07/02/champagne-wishes/#IDComment26530486 http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/07/02/champagne-wishes/#IDComment26409313 Maybe I should clarify. Stealing is wrong anyway you slice it, and Champagne got exactly what he deserved. A light prison sentence. I say light because he stole money that should have been his in the first place. If he had used some of his brainpower to ask for a well-deserved raise, or moved to the private sector, he could've gotten all his money legally, and everyone would be happy. Its people like "Get therapy fast" making stupid comments that gets me mad. The government is NOT paying his way. If you add up all the money the government spent prosecuting/jailing/paying etc. Champagne plus all the money he stole, theres still several hundred million dollars left over for the government to use on whatever it pleases. Sun, 5 Jul 2009 20:07:05 +0000 http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/07/02/champagne-wishes/#IDComment26409313 http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/07/02/champagne-wishes/#IDComment26248770 I'm amazed at the posters above. How can you POSSIBLY be angry at Champagne? Take another look at the numbers. This guy made over 1 BILLION dollars for the Canadian Government. Saying that all he deserved in return was an 80,000 dollar a year salary is tantamount to slave labour. Yeah, he stole $100 million, but thats a paltry sum compared to the work he did in the first place. He deserved twice the amount he stole. I think thats why he got such a light sentence. Get off your high horse. Champagne has done more good for Canada than all of you combined ever will. Fri, 3 Jul 2009 20:49:08 +0000 http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/07/02/champagne-wishes/#IDComment26248770