NY Times
"Such is life in the liver wars. At a time when human organs, particularly livers, are in short supply, the skirmish in Iowa provides a window into a national feud over the Clinton administration's plan to require that donated hearts, lungs, livers, kidneys and pancreases go to the sickest patients first, rather than those who live closest to the organ donors. The debate polarized Congress at the end of its last session and is expected to resume when the lawmakers return in January." I took a philosophy class on reason ( I quickly dubbed it "Teaching artists to be reasonable") where we read a couple of pieces by John Harris. He is a master as making perfectly reasonable and compelling arguments for things that would otherwise never agree to. Specifically, the idea of killing one healthly person to service two in need to life-saving organ transplants. It was enlightening and terrifying to see where people's arguments against the practice would break down in to sputters of "yeah...but...but..."
Le Devoir : Le débat référendaire envahit Internet
"De ce lieu d'échanges émerge soudainement une information inédite, une troublante primeur. L'on nous informe qu'Ottawa se propose de refaire le coup des mesures de guerre de 1970. De son centre de crise installé dans la capitale fédérale, le gouvernement Chrétien prétexterait la menace du bogue de l'an 2000 pour proclamer l'application de la Loi des mesures d'urgence et dépêcher 12 000 soldats sur le territoire québécois."
It was only a matter of time
before someone decided to try and beat
adbusters at their own game...