I thought EMI was a record company. could I be enlightened on the other meaning? or is the intent merely to block out all EMI artists' music while listening to your iPod? That could prove interesting...

If a Canadian says he had to "deke out of a meeting," it means he avoided the meeting.

Can I "deke" out of having to read hackneyed Canadian-isms? Fuck. If I ever use that phrase, please, pause for a moment, get a heavy object and beat me with it.

Hey, Tay, maybe all you need to appreciate the iPod is some Shakti Stones. The review says "The effect of the first few Shakti products was not as apparent as when the effect became compounded. Each built on the others' ability to eliminate EMI in the component on or under which it was placed. Music became more relaxed, with greater clarity. Space and ambience increased."

How do they work, you ask? "By addressing the problems of electromagnetic interference (EMI), the Shakti Stone uses ferrous and non-ferrous materials and quartz crystal oscillators in combination with a low-level magnetic field to absorb EMI energy and dissipate that energy as heat." (Never mind that the sentence makes no scientific sense, it's a non sequitur to boot!) And only $199.99 USD.

The unofficial and unconfirmed 2005 Coachella lineup is as follows:

April 30
David Bowie
Nine Inch Nails
Coldplay
PJ Harvey
Interpol
The Faint
Franz Ferdinand
Polyphonic Spree
Boards of Canada
TV On the Radio
Yeah Yeah Yeahs
Squarepusher
Clinic
French Kicks
Secret Machines
Phoenix
Beep Beep
Dogs Die In Hot Cars
Death From Above 1979
The Helio Sequence

May 1
R.E.M.
Tears For Fears
Wilco
Bright Eyes
Jimmy Eat World
Mos Def
Badly Drawn Boy
The Streets
Cake
The Shins
Sleater-Kinney
Rilo Kiley
Radio 4
Doves
Iron and Wine
The Arcade Fire
Moving Units


Bear in mind this has not been confirmed by any official sources... though it's looking likely that this is the leaked tentative list.

in case my next to most recent post didn't make it clear, I don't condone (or do) ecoterrorism.
I just wanted to make that undoubtedly clear. 'cause man, the things you can get going in peoples' heads...

sorry, it seems to be alison rant day.

but check this site out,Americans are co-opting Canadians' image over seas. straight from CNN to you.

Part of the "Go Canadian" package

I agree with you Paras, I just thought I'd get some opinions on it...

I don't think ecoterrorism is something that should be condoned... but I also think that sometimes it's a last resort when every other avenue of discourse is locked down on you when you try... but only if you try... like the fights for democracy and access to resources in other countries (not that I know particulary much, which could put some holes in my argument) - when they have no other means to get their point across, they resort to protests and violence, it's not a first-resort, it's only something to think about when all other alternatives have been exhausted.

As a local example of something that could lead to ecoterrorism, but definitely isn't there right now: the Cheviot Mine - now going through yet again (to become a mine) - and the appeal process that's been repeatedly delayed against the appellants, starting in the summer (like June, I think), and for every month since... maybe we'll see some transparent (ha!) judical processes in January, but maybe it'll be delayed again... meanwhile the road that is being contested just continues to be built, habitat lost, and who knows, maybe even some of the mines are being dug. What other recourse do we have? public protests have done nothing... letter writing campaigns ditto. I'm not going to go out and sugar gas tanks or something else of that ilk, but I'd expect that someone will be sooner or later. What other avenue of discourse is there? Scientists have spoken about the damages... but the coal company just bought out the local reservations' interests, and the province isn't exactly anti-industry... I mean, hell, DFO should be in there, but they aren't answering the calls. And Anne McLellan isn't listening either.

It just pisses me off. What else is there to do sometimes? Did you know that Edmonton's north east sits on some of the most prime farmland in the world? and it's all been sold to developers to be turned into subdivisons eventually. It's got a unique micro climate and hugely fertile soils. It's also one of the only places in North America where potatoes can be grown entirely disease free and isolated from possible disease contamination... awesomely important in the commercial sale of potatoes and seed stock to growers, greenhouses and backyard gardeners (which is a very lucrative market). but it's all destined to become pavement, stucco and vinyl siding. Sure, twenty years ago, we could've done something, but now? What is there? no development company's going to listen when the price of realestate is so high... though they are trying to change things... it just moves so slow, and often not in the favour of conservation.

I guess there's just not enough proactive work being done, and to much reaction. Still, proactivity only happens when your interests are taken into consideration from the outset, and they're really not. hmm... bitter? yes.

Beck, here's that page from Web Design Group. They have a complete HTML 4.0 Reference and a guide to Cascading Style Sheets, which allows you to make your display uniform and easily mutable.

"Is there such a thing as sportsmanship when it comes to advertising?" A Slate article about NetZero ads which directly parody AOL ads. The ad's are posted here for your viewing pleasure.

is ecoterrorism a hate crime?

In the strictest sense, I don't believe so. It's not prejudicial against a group, but an action (or, series of actions, I guess.)

But, to answer a question with a question, does it have to be labelled as a hate crime before 'ecoterrorists' realize it's horribly idiotic? You're not going to win any friends, nor convince anyone that you're right, by resorting to such tactics. Apart from fuelling the idea that protecting the environment is a radical idea, when it should be mainstream, they only serve to hurt those who they should be trying to win over.

The bottom line is that the forester, the contractor, and the oilpatch worker are not motivated by a singular need to destroy the environment; they want to put food on the table. Alienating the common person (and that's who they are, despite the job they do) is no way to convince them that you're right. Moreover, if 'ecoterrorists' are so principled, resorting to "I hurt them because they hurt the environment" is a pretty lousy way to show it. Fighting an economic war, with boycotts, lobbying, and legislation, is fine; companies respond to pressures to their pocketbooks. Fighting a physical war, against the regular person trying to earn a living, is foolish and counterproductive.

Just as the companies who exploit the environment sacrifice long term pain for short term gain, so too do 'ecoterrorists.'

oh yeah, Alison, sorry for not getting back to you yesterday- by the time i read your message i was already at work. yeah don't worry about the Control Room tape- i've already extracted the quotation i need, but thanks

thom yorke getting chocolate poured over him

more celebs getting fair-trade stuff poured on them... It's an interesting ad campaign if you ask me. showing waste of the very materials you're talking about being wasted and contributing to the destruction of people's livelihoods...

and maybe I'm one of a select few who wouldn't mind a chocolate-covered Thom Yorke showing up at my door... :) but the rest of the images are equally interesting in their absurdity to prove a point and fight for the cause. more info at oxfam and make trade fair

for example... mmm coffee!