Craig Read

Reagan was far from stupid. This is the liberal media at work. Some good books on Ron are out now - including Reagan's Letters - a great insight into just how smart he was. He understood economics, the role of monetary and fiscal policy and knew the Soviet Union was going to implode. He also had a firm belief in the American vision of freedom, accountability and limited government. He instituted and rationalised supply side economics when every academic nitwit was preening and preaching Keynesianism - an utter failure if one analyses macro economic history. Keynes was wrong. Too bad the magicians at Universities don't teach kids the real world. Supply side economics is the best and only way to stimulate jobs and investment and raise living standards. Tax, spend, patronage, waste and fraud are hardly the hallmarks of successful societies. Any Rep President that wins wars, revitalises the economy, is not caught getting BJs in the Oval office, actually loves his wife and does not engage in predatory sexual conduct, does not lie, goes to Church, is not perjured, fights for freedom and actually does what he says he will do is of course an idiot.

Well it is part of the grand socialist plan of societal engineering. Ottawa loves money and power. Co-opt prpgrams are fig leafs for taking money and then keeping it not returning it to the Cities or Prov.'s. Judicial activism and telling us what is marriage is a logical extension of this fiscal control. CBC propaganda is a logical outcome of such ideals. Finance, morality, non state institutions - all of these are under attack.

Spain under Aznar made great strides. I worked in Madrid a few years back and the country was going through many changes. Aznar is unknown in Canada but he is probably the best leader the Spanish have had in modern history. He has reformed in a liberal manner, the economy, society and expectations of Spain. Spain has robust growth, declinding unemployment [when i was there it was 24 % and now it is about 11%], good budget control, and reasonable tax levels. It is opening markets, rebuilding its infrastructure and has some quality universities [iESE is maybe the best MBA school in Europe], and in Madrid and Barcelona a hard working citizenry. EU money has helped but the domestic reforms were more important for Spain's good performance. Asnar has handed over to his Finance Minister who should continue the reforms. Other issues to tackle; corruption, separatism, and as the above posts have already stated, Spain must oppose the Franco-Teutonic domination of Europe. The last thing any EU citizen needs is a socialist empire emanating from Brussels run by the French and monied by the Teutons. Importantly and intelligently Spain is pro-US, and pro-the war on terror. Good job Aznar. May history commend him fully.

Riff, good man, we agree on this at least. Mahatir is a disgrace and the fact that Chretien was so chummy, shaking his hand and cracking jokes makes Canada complicit in anti-semitic racism. For the sake of God Chretien Go....and disappear.

Donor meeting in Madrid on Iraq begins today. Apparently the snotty socialists in Europe think they wield great "soft power." I would say Soft AND Fat. Japan will pledge at least $1.5 billion for next year to rebuild post-Saddam Iraq. The U.S. about $20 billion. EU Member states last week told the Commission, to put up $235 million. EU External Affairs Commissioner Chris Patten calls this pledge "realistic." No Patten, you smarmy little twit - you meant 'Soft and FAT'. The EU last year devoted $6.5 billion to foreign aid. More than a billion of that went to nation-building projects in Europe's Balkan backyard; Serbia alone received $532 million. Before Saddam, the Commission sent $550 million to the Middle East, mostly to places like Morocco, Tunisia, Syria, Algeria and Egypt that could hardly be called flourishing democracies. The pledge scrounged up for Iraq will be smaller than the EU's aid efforts in either Mozambique or Ethiopia, no doubt worthy causes, but hardly the great strategic challenge of our time. The EU and in particular France and Germany are too adolescent to do what is right - instead they want to poke fingers in the US' eye. Welcome the the childishness of Post Modern, Soft and Fat Europe.

Hugo, I would agree, Islam was spread with the sword not with flowers and chocolates. For the Islamic apologists I am still awaiting proof on its peacefulness. I guess one can use the following as proof of its benignity: -PLA -Arafat -Osama Bin Laden -Mahatir the Jew Hater -Hussein -Saud Family -Syria -Chechnya -9-11 -Attacks in India This says nothing of the history of the movement from 632 AD to 2000. Seems like a peaceful group of people to me.

The pograms and holocaust were premised on the fact that in many States or Empires, the Jews were tax collectors, the main merchant class, and main financial intermediaries - in fact notable Jewish families started the first large scale banks. In many empires between say 500 AD and 1900 AD the top class of society disdained work, looked down on merchants and did not work - they were the glittering scum that fed off the cesspool of serf labor and agricultural economies. The Jews were different, preferring trade and profit to protocol, pretty dresses, rank, and hereditary privileges. In such empires as existed in Europe and elsewhere Jewish conspiracies could easily be formed by those who wanted to channel hatred of one's squalor, lack of opportunity and filth towards a group that acted different, talked differently and kept to themselves. Conspiracy theories are nonsense. There are practical reasons why events occur including racism. Hatred of those who achieve is as old as chanting monkeys. In fact even in groups of monkeys there is a strict social order and assumption of roles. Unfortunately for the Jews in the hairless monkey specie ie. humans, they are singled out due to their success. Having said that in working with UJA here in Toronto, i can attest to the fact that the majority of Jews i have met are middle class and below, and many are poor. But let's not allow reality to temper racist hate.

I would agree that Mulroney was rather corrupt and showed a lack of judgement on many issues - Charlottetown and that imbecile Kimbo Campbell are 2 notables. He was a realist, a pragmatist and a convert to Free Trade [before 1988 he was against the idea]. At least Mulroney believes in something. Chretien and many Canadians believe in nothing more than their smarmy sanctimoniousness. Witness Chretien shaking the hands of Mahatir of Malaysia, after said leader slandered the Jews. This is leadership ?

Mulroney gave a speech at Texas A&M last night. It is a great statement about the cowardice of Canada and Cdn. political leaders in the face of Militant Islam and terror. Free riding and sneering are indeed wearisome. Comments on this welcomed. I copied only extracts. ================================= Although the reality of pre-emptive action is new, so was the terrorist strike on America. What is also new is the suggestion that Security Council approval is -- and has been -- a sacrosanct precondition to action against a hostile state. The historical record is to the contrary. In any event, I would never have agreed to subcontract Canada's international security decisions and our national interest to 15 members of the Security Council. This would be a surrender of national sovereignty to which I'd never consent. In fact, a coalition of nations -- including France, Germany and Canada -- mounted a massive air war against Serbia a few years ago without Security Council authorization, under President Clinton's leadership. There was no "imminence" of attack on any allied nation, nor did Serbia represent a threat to anyone outside her own borders. Why the reversal of policy when Iraq was involved, with the same nations piously insisting that Security Council approval had to be obtained before any military action could be initiated -- and that the absence of any such approval had rendered illegitimate any military action against Saddam Hussein? Some Security Council members opposed intervention in Yugoslavia, where many innocent people were dying, on the grounds of national sovereignty. Quite frankly, such invocations of the principle of national sovereignty are as offensive to me as the police declining to stop family violence simply because a man's home is supposed to be his castle. We must recognize that there are certain fundamental rights that all people possess -- and that, sometimes, the international community must act to defend them. This is precisely what happened in Iraq and no amount of Monday morning quarterbacking will change the fact that the U.S.-led coalition acted in defense of the values contained in Security Council Resolution 1441, and the previous 17 resolutions, all of which Saddam had flouted. .......................... Nothing is gained from non-participant allies smirking on the sidelines, whispering "I told you so." The recent Security Council resolution marked a promising beginning, introducing both realism and support into the equation at the council level for the first time since hostilities began. America now greatly needs allies who can re-establish a basis of mutual trust and candor. Not fair-weather friends who are on its side when times are easy but invisible when the great challenges come. True allies must now -- in spite of some legitimate misgivings -- come to the assistance of the U.S.-led alliance by showing cooperation both at the U.N. and in Iraq. After all, the U.S. has come frequently to the assistance of these very same countries in the past, and as Canada's founding prime minister, Sir John A. MacDonald, once said, only partly in jest: "I need friends with me not when they think I'm right but when they think I'm wrong." ..................... In my judgment, the U.S. should instigate and lead a "San Francisco II," a major reform effort to establish new multilateral approaches that respect the principles of the U.N. Charter. It is vital for Europe, for Japan, for Canada and the world as a whole that the U.S. remains fully engaged as the bulwark for multilateralism. Without U.S. engagement, there can be no truly effective multilateral effort. But, without close support and unvarnished counsel from its key allies, the U.S. will inevitably exercise its own will and choose the course of least resistance. ==============

The Driver's License issue is the Dumbocruds attempt to buy political votes from illegals and the Latino's. The fact that is unconstitutional [it contravenes both state and federal law], immoral [why do anything legally if illegal business is ok], unsafe [who knows who these people are and why they are there], never impinges itself on the left-liberal crowd who chase after every voting block with increasing desperation. The Dumbocruds are fast becoming the gravest threat to US national security.

Debo, you are right, there is no gay gene, there is no fat gene, no tall gene, no ugly gene, no missing teeth gene, no humped back genes nor is there one gene for fat noses. As Hugo said, DNA make up is layered - interacting genomes produce physical, mental, behavioural traits and there is not one master gene that controls your sexuality. Homosexuality from the time of Ancient Thebes has been a social-environmentally induced phenomenon and deviancy. It has more to do with a combination of innate and socio-familial-environmental factors than some genetic hard wiring. The main purpose of those advocating genetics as the cause of homosexuality is to rewrite laws, impose a view of the world that is based upon a hedonistic, bacchanalian philosophy where all is equal, pleasure and self love to be elevated and the institutions which have allowed western wealth to accumulate, to be ignored. It has nothing to do with science and everything to do with the creation of a new society. The irony is that those who support gay marriage are so intolerant that if you object, you are named as intolerant and inflexible. As with most left liberal tirades, facts, evidence and rationality never enter into their thinking.

The support that the PLA gets in the world press constantly amazes me. They receive $300 million from the EU alone, to fund their terrorist campaigns, nary a whit of that goes to building institutions of peace and governance, yet i hear constantly about the poor Palestinian people. The best thing that could happen for them is to have Arafat dead, a new leadership and some sensible socio-economic governance. Israel created a modern state from the desert. I don't see the Palestinians doing the same.

Derek good analogy. Maybe the Cdn military could afford a few anteaters. Maybe dat is da Canadian way. When you talk to the average Joe about Islam they usually say it is peaceful and 'read the Koran'. I doubt that any of the media heads or average Joes have read a jot about the Koran or Islam, nor have they traveled or worked there, nor do they talk to people who have fled from there. Islam is a failure because it preaches a vision of the world and society that is rooted in mysticism, sham ceremony, hierarchical control, rejection of reality, and an abhorrence of non believers and their cultures. It rejects outside influences, panders to base and primal nationalism, and instructs the true believers to kill non believers [and receive 72 virgins in heaven]. As Mark Steyn stated, there is a reason why 5 Swedes live in the Arab world and 500.00 Arabs live in Sweden.

The UN supported Hussein in the 90s, made the US pay for the costs of containment, obstructed Gulf War II, pulled out of Baghdad after refusing US protection and having its HQ blown up, and now has just passed a resolution supporting US occupation, after 3 weeks of posturing that the US must immediately hand over control to the Iraqi's. What a circus and group of clowns. I tried reading the last UN resolution. Its language is impossible to decipher. I have NO idea what it is trying to say. I found this Op ed which describes perfectly the problem with the UN process. Any comments? ================================== As a matter of civic education, everyone should have to read a Security Council resolution. Take number 1511 on Iraq, and begin with the obligatory last sentence "DECIDES to remain seized of the matter." The line is both arresting and baffling, and conjures an image of scores of goggle-eyed diplomats caught in a cataleptic fit as a result of wrestling with a knotty foreign policy problem. And it means nothing. Could one imagine the Council declaring that it "DECIDES this is the last time it will debate this tiresome issue"? Very few problems in international relations disappear, and neither, presumably, will the Council and its deliberations. Vapidity has its fascinations. The resolution EXPRESSES condolences to Iraqis on terrorist attacks (sympathy rarely extended to Israelis, but that's another matter), TAKES NOTE of upcoming meetings of the Governing Council in Iraq, APPEALS for strengthened efforts to be benevolent, and EMPHASIZES, REMINDS, REQUESTS and AFFIRMS all manner of good things. However, it spends not one euro, equips no soldier and dispatches no relief worker. The American diplomats who labored hard and skillfully for the resolution -- a real diplomatic triumph, to be sure -- would rightly say that its significance lies less in its wording than in the fact of international support for the U.S. presence in Iraq, and for a course of occupation and reconstruction in line with our wishes. The unanimous votes, however, reflect not so much a change of heart as the rule of the head -- and the hardest part of the head at that. Take Syria's remarkable vote in favor. Was this a sudden effulgence of sympathy for the work of creating democratic institutions in a brother Arab country? Conceivably, but considerably weightier was the experience of having Israeli jets smash a terrorist camp outside Damascus, a demonstration of power made more worrying by the unequivocal American endorsement of diplomacy by high explosive. Syrian leaders woke up and realized that they're surrounded by Israel on one side, two allies of the U.S. on north and south, and American forces to their east. And those forces have, of late, been increasingly pointed on the matter of guerrilla infiltrations into Iraq from the direction of Damascus. =============== So if nation state power is central to the destruction of fascism in Iraq, what exactly does the UN have to offer ???

Whatever. Iraq is in better shape than before. Talk to some people who have been there. Schools opened, more energy than pre Gulf War II, freedom, press, a governing council and the incipient steps to democracy all undertaken. International law [which does not exist] such as it is, favors the US action. Your posts are vapid.

What is troublesome about some of the posts in this thread is that: 1. they assume the US is their enemy 2. they assume the worst intentions in US foreign policy 3. they mistakenly label the US an empire when clearly it is not. Even in Iraq, if for no other reason than costs, the US will clear out when the time is right. 4. they disregard the benefits of US hegemony and focus on some of the ill effects of singular US actions. These assumptions are not balanced nor fair. Canada free loads of the US in many areas. Until Canadians stop freeloading and pull their weight in the world, I find it rather nauseating to listen to people carp about a US empire. Where exactly is this empire ? PR citizens are rather content to have an association with the US. The Philippines is a sovereign state and needs US capital and good relations to build itself up. Iraq needs US expertise, capital and military protection to efface fascism. Do you really expect the UN or the EU to do anything there ? Maybe time to recognise some reality and give the US some credit. No other nation even tries to mix morality and doing the right thing in its foreign policy like the Americans do. The US does not need an empire, through alliances, trade and military projection it can satisfy its economic and political objectives in a world of free nation states. Having an empire is not in the US' best interests.

Israel needs to win its war and depose Arafat [preferably trying him for war crimes or better feeding some bullets into his head]. Syria supported the recent US resolution on having the Yank run Iraq - why ? Because Israel destroyed terrorist training sites 15 km from downtown Damascus. Syria did not back the resolution because the Fascists running it, suddenly converted to liberalism, love of the Jews and a realisation that democracy in Iraq is a good idea. In fact the Syrians are exporting across the Iraqi border scores of terrorists and ne'er do wells. Military power decides the balance of power. Not hugging trees and crying over equality.

Truly Orwellian. The entire concept of deciding that issues which are controversial is the next logical step in governmental mind control. Make that control by the little minds. As Churchill once said we did not get here by being made of sugar. In Man's journey the thought police have always been present - at least in the background. The great victories won in the struggle for knowledge and freedom have always been at the expense of the little minds of the world.

Whatever. That is so lame. Provide evidence to the contrary of the thread's thesis was what i asked and this is the best you can do ? Slander and name calling ? That is sad. Well in that case thread closed, i don't, nor does anyone else have the time to read your drivel. Nova you should seriously get lost somewhere you are truly a none value add. Pell, add something besides nonsense. The arguments presented CAN be refuted if a. you understand the topic and b. can make a coherent argument.

Mod and Ned, you guys are right on the card, the more i read about it, the bigger boondoggle it would be. I read a Post report that it would cost $7 billion - i remember the gun registry was what $2 million in original estimated costs ? Security should start at the beginning of the immigration intake process and in securing our borders with less expensive methods. You guys should lobby Coderre with some of your ideas. Apparently he loves the ID card idea.

Ned i would agree. The kid is a little out of line. In a conflict both sides can point to wrongs - but the premise of the PLA and the Arab League is to eradicate Israel. This philosophy does not flow the other way. The Jews want to be left alone and left to their state. The Arabs on the other hand, instead of building modern societies wage a pointless war against a more advanced and enlightened civilisation. To abet their cause they also use UN refugee camps to find their crusaders [these were suppose to be temporary camps in 1948 !], and the UN process of condemnation via UNHRC, UN SC, and other organs. This use of the UN to keep alive terror makes the UNO in my view an entirely besotten organisation. It is hard to believe that Syria is actually on the UN security council. This alone makes the need for UN reform rather obvious.

Well Mr Left wing apologist name some Right Wing smear campaigns if they so enrage you. I quoted on another post a remark from a former LA Times writer that the 9 day campaign against Arnie is about as low a journalistic crusade as you can find, all the while, they sit on top of another investigation into Davis' conduct - his swearing, cup throwing, tantrum raising abusive episodes that in today's touchy feely world would be considered physical and mental abuse. This is such biased and unworthy reporting that only a Liberal could read the LA Times ever again. Gropegate failed because there are real issues and problems that need resolution in Cali. I am heartened that the voters saw past this nefarious smear campaign.

Clinton was portrayed as brainy, detailed oriented and a policy wonk. He might have been bright, but i really believe he was beholden to the left wing of the party for support. Keep in mind he only won 4 Southern States - Gore won 0. The Democrats have alienated their traditional base and appeal only to the Berkely-Harvard axis. The Axis of post modern intellectualism.

Your post is an embarassment of anti-semiticism full of racial disfigurations and inaccuracies. You are just another bigot. Did you know that 1/3 of Israel's population is non Jewish and that most Jews are secular Jews from not only Israel but around the world ? I wonder why your racist drivel is allowed on this forum. I suggest you go somewhere else to post this nonsense. Israel is a state, has certain elements of democratic legitimacy, was sanctioned by the UN and the International community, and it has a right to exist, and defend itself. These facts are self evident. It is being attacked by terrorists funded by Syria, Saudi Arabia and Iran. Until Iraq was invaded it too was funding the war against Israel. Now Syria wants to further pervert the UNO process by redefining what a terrorist is. Syria is breaking a UN resolution. Under UN Security Council Security Council Resolution 1373 States are no longer at liberty to serve as a landlord in aiding terrorist groups. Under the mandate they must shut down terrorist financing and training, and arrest or exclude the actors who seek to maim and kill civilians as a political technique. Of course Syria has announced a rather different standard. In a little-remarked September 2002 Counter-Terrorism Committee filing, Syria reported that it could not regard as terrorism any acts committed in a "legitimate struggle against foreign occupation." More particularly, Syria has elevated the Arab League convention on terrorism, adopted in Cairo in April 1998, above its obligations to the United Nations. The 1998 convention says that "all cases of struggle by whatever means, including armed struggle, against foreign occupation and aggression for liberation and self-determination, in accordance with principles of international law, shall not be regarded as an offense." Such is the post modern world. Hypocritical posturing while financing the death of Jews. Hate the Jews, embrace hypocrites like Syria and France and pervert UN resolutions and processes. This is why Israel must fight and win its war.

The LA Times spent 9 days trying to take down Arnold's campaign and they thankfully failed. Sitting on a story about Davis' own physical and verbal abuse of employees the LA Times employed Lie-beralism's favorite tactic - smear and stain. The real issue was the economy, the high taxes and the incredibly inept spending not gropegate. Now Arnold has to put forward a detailed platform of tax cuts, spending reductions and gov't downsizing. Time to cut down the size of government. Maybe he can cut the LA Times down to size as well.