Craig Read

The BBC lied. It is has a habit of lying. It is funded by taxpayers. Why do you need state own propaganda mouthpieces ? Is that the basis of your national identity ? Of your self esteem ? Do you need to be spoon fed by the CBC or BBC what makes you unique in the world ? Is that the limit to the populations ability to think ? Or more roundly isn't it just another organ used by gov'ts to whip up anti-Americanism ? Freedom to choose, the BBC and the CBC offer neither freedom, nor choice. They serve up palp, and in the case of Gulf War II a lot of lies.

Arnold, now mid 50s, arrived at age 21 in the US from Austria, with no money and less english. After winning bodybuilding contests he invested $28.000 and built up a real estate empire - he now owns shopping malls, a jumbo jet he leases to an airline and other venues. He has an MBA, and is a permanent Hollywood icon. Another Gipper ? Can Arnold the Free to Choose capitalist save California from itself ?

You are right Ned. Like I said post modern hypocrites. I think the Idiots and that is what they are, who believe the anti-american drivel, the same clowns who screamed for unilateral disarmament with the Russians, can go - directly to hell, where they can fry in their own pious ignorance. Free riders. Here is an editorial by Ayid Rahim an Iraqi journalist: "For years the very mention of the names Uday and Qusay sent fear into the hearts of the Iraqi people. Now, thanks to the coalition forces, Iraqis are free of their terror. But others continue to wreak havoc in my native country. As pro-Saddam elements attack coalition troops almost daily, we mustn't forget how American, British and Australian soldiers have conducted themselves with exemplary humanity and heroism since the beginning of Operation Iraqi Freedom. * * * To begin with, the bombing campaign was nearly flawless, targeting, first and foremost, the bases of Saddam's rule. That supplied a crucial message to Iraqis -- that Saddam, and his rule, were the sole targets of this military action, and not his victims, the Iraqi people. On top of that, Iraqis were giddy with delight at the sight of Saddam's palaces going up in flames, and they finally got to see something they hadn't dared to dream of -- the destruction of secret police, security and party centers across the country, places they had feared setting eyes on." And where were the Post Modern Canadians in all of this ?? Clowns.

What piffle. This is idiotic. Then how about this: -NAFTA revoked -Canadians can pay their own defense costs -Canadians can pay for their own drug development costs -Canadians can support the UNO which they apparently love so much The country is a free rider. Before you bleery eyed post modern types criticise a freer society solve your own internal issues. Sad, bloody Hypocrites.

What nonsense you offer. The only discrimination i see is in government hiring - Toronto City Hall is a minority jobs program for instance, as are most government depts regardless of what needs to be done in terms of skill or productivity. I have never met someone in the private sector who cares a jot about race, religion or the color of the person's hair, as long as the job gets done well, efficiently and accurately, and as long as the person helps the firm make a profit. In the real world, if you are a racist, a bigot, a moron, a thief, a clown or a drunken mental midget, people will not work for you. Period. They just leave or if egregiously treated, will ensure you are investigated ie. for sexual or racial harassment. Your mantra that only whites are racist, and that only whites created slavery and that only Anglo Saxons plan, implement and coddle a philosophy of discrimination borders on fantastical ignorance. Slavery is still practiced in the world - in Africa and Brazil mostly and has very little white involvement. Slave trading long predates White involvement - it was going on thousands of years before British, Dutch and French traders discovered West African labor. As recently as 1000 AD the Muslims wrote in various letters that the Franks ie. Europeans, made good slaves. In 1807 Britain became the first country to ban slave trading and in 1843 became the first country to brand slave owning a crime. 500.000 whites died in the US civil war, in part to free Blacks. Black power, Muslim hatred of the West, Oriental contempt for 'barbarians', and other such racial profiling exists in the world. Are you for or against this? Probably for it, since it is anti-white, I would assume. One should stop rewriting history and justifying reverse racism on the grounds that some historical crime must be atoned for. Using your logic, as a Britisher, i can sue the Normans, the Danes, the Germans, the Italians, and the Dutch for war crimes and acts of bondage and slavery. The Fact that such a claim is piffle, basically sums up the inanity of AA.

The BBC - Kelly suicide story apparently has the British titillated. The BBC lied about its source on a report by its man Gilligan on Blair's 'sexed up' threat of Iraq's nuclear program. Gilligan and the BBC said that Blair's spokesman Campbell was the source. When Campbell vehemently denied the charge and after the BBC admitted that it had no evidence that Campbell even talked to a BBC reporter, it went lower down the food chain - in fact quite a bit lower to some obscure cranky bureaucrat named Kelly who said he gave the BBC information but did not quite know how the BBC took that information and created the idea that Blair 'sexed up' the Iraq file. Kelly in effect said that the BBC perverted any information he might have given them. In effect both Campbell and Kelly said the BBC had lied. As one analyst rightly pointed out: "That's the way demagogues have operated through the ages and, while it seldom works in the long term, it can succeed in the short run, where elections are won and lost. This strategy is now being fully deployed on both sides of the Atlantic in an attempt to nullify the victory in Iraq." Time to privatise these monstrous State owned propaganda networks. The public should not countenance the lies constantly put forward by the BBC as 'fact'. Especially when the cost of such reporting is on the back of the taxpayer.

Islam is a hyper dictatorial religion. Centralised control, only ONE way to live, ONE book to believe, ONE prophet to follow, ONE belief that is superior to all others and a view of the world that is male anthorpomorphic [females need not apply], and disdains other cultures. Christianity and the Bible are totally different. The Bible is for eg. a collection of stories, parables and histories, that often conflict with each other. I am not religious and disdain the church, but i can see the value of having a 'flexible' spirituality in which there is debate about the meaning of the doctrine. This is entirely healthy. In Islam there is less flexibility in interpretation [only about the real blood lines of the true Prophet], and less curiousity in trying to resolve complex intellectual questions about the Trinity for instance, or the meaning of the 'Son' of God [how can a God be his own Son?]. This type of intellectual ferment is indicative of a culture that is content to debate and understand and not merely follow [witness the Reformation, Luther, Erasmus and the Counter Reformation replete unfortunately with the horror of the 30 years War]. There is plenty of written testimony that from about 900 AD onwards the Christians were far more interested in the Arabs than vice versa. Arab chronicles rarely mention the 'Franks' except to state that they have abundant slave material. The Christians traded, traveled and warred against the Arabs and were quite fascinated by many aspects of their society [though not by their religion, neither side apparently had much interest in understanding the other's religious doctrine]. The Christians for all their mistakes, travails and atrocities, were more willing to change, innovate and get ahead then the Arabs, who never really took seriously the incipient threat from the 'Franks'. If they had spent some time understanding the Europeans maybe they would not have fallen so far behind especially post 1683 and their defeat at Vienna. Islam by its construction expects obedience, and does not elevate curiousity, experimentation or technology creation. It is a contained world - the outside world is inferior and therefore of little interest. Such a society can only attain a certain level before rot and corruption sets in. As I said previously and it holds today, any country or empire that has access to easy resources, and easy trade money will inevitably fail, if its political system is 'Oriental' ie. despotic or centralised and based upon nepotism and fear as opposed to talent and freedom. Islam fits the bill. It is a religion that the ancient Greeks living in the time of tyrannos or the first tyrants would have recognised quite easily. A state religion, a set of concrete rules and limitations on freedom and trade and innovation, all to ensure that the society is not corrupted. Well that is what the Communists attempted in Russia as well. Their religion was socialism. A variant of tyrannos.

Islam has never produced social and economic goods. Oh yes people will point to the golden age of 1000 AD and Arab hegemony. More realistically the Arabs took over more advanced cultures and left them alone. The money was too good to tamper with the conquered states. Now the Arab/Islamic world is a mess. GDP of all Muslim states in the Near East is still less than Spain's. Discrimination, hate, death, Fatwa's, no outside news or book reading, ignorance, crime, unemployment, anger, attitude all from this monolithic construct that forces people to believe in spiritual nonsense. How do we get these people into the modern age ?

AA harms women and the target market by giving them the entitlement attitude that they should receive and not deserve. As well it creates apartheid. Read the book Mexifornia- by pandering to AA and the nonsense of multiculturalism you create a 2 and 3 tiered society. What you are really saying is that Western Liberal constitutional society is no good. There is no evidence to support this view. As a woman if you want kids fine, that is your choice, we don't have to give you something because you made that choice and anyways you receive entitlements through the social safety net so what more do you want. A completely and freely paid life style of your choice ? It is insane that hispanics, blacks and native indians get preferential treatment. What do you do with the girl who's dad is white, mother is 1/2 Cherokee and whose great grandfather was black. Is she a minority ? Not really. Though she can argue that she is and play the race card to get what she thinks she deserves. How about the Asian man who marries a white women whose dad was Native American. Is their kid a minority ? Not under the current legislation. Why is an Asian inferior to a Black ? AA is drivel. It tries to recompense for past wrongs. It imposes today's morality on yesterday's actions. This is revisionist engineering at its worst.

The only thing the Dumbocruds defend are Trial Lawyers and Hollywood Starlets. Billy Clinton and his friends turned the White House into a permanent panty party. Thankfully some adults are now back running the country. The Democrats suffer an intellectual deficit - none of their socialising demagoguery makes sense. They are weak on foreign policy, the military and weak on economic prescriptions. They offer little but socialised health care concepts and more government intervention and of course politically correct rhetoric. The Democrat disease can best be seen in California which is a thoroughly Democrat leaning state, now with a yawning $38 billion budget deficit, declining standards in schools and education, rising taxes and a sick energy sector. Some of Cali's woes can be attributed to too much direct democracy. A lot of it is the direct result of Democrat party misgovernance and a poor lot of Democrat politicians capering around in Sacramento.

If you have nothing to add, then get off the site. Your immoderate mind is not needed. You are a clown. If you want 1-1 discussion email me. Schmuck.

Ad nauseum defines your defense of the indefensible. The Dumbocruds and their trial lawyer friends [with Hollywood sluts right behind them], have the potential to destroy American values, commerce and the Constitution. Why anyone would support a myopic party which has been wrong on every issue for the past 50 years, which is trying to socialise what does not need socialisation, which relies on slander [all republicans are stupid therefore i win the argument], which has 0 policy initiative, and which has no leadership is quite simply confounding. The Dumbocruds offer nothing but boils, theory, tears and slander.

Well no one abhors King Kofi and his merry band of socialist engineering friends than myself, but Kofi is dead right about Africa. Good to see that the UNO finally recognised the Black Hole that is the African Continent. Poverty, War, Disease, Misery; all induced by corruption, fraud, stupidity abetted by Western largesse, monies and funding of various stripes. Now the UNO has to follow up its rhetoric with hard action - no money unless political and economic reforms are undertaken. Period. Money talks. Rhetoric walks.

Well Hilarious leather face Criminalton gets a lot of press. She is the only star attraction that the Dumbocruds have outside of 'i am a genius but failed divinity school' Gore. Another nitwit. I dare say the Dumbo's better get some more money, some reasonable policies, and get organised or 2004 will be a walkover for the Reps. I hope this happens so the poverty of liberalism is again exposed.

Howard Dean - a McGovern like figure - propounding national socialism and an awkward mix of socialist economics and societal demagoguery. Hilarious Clinton, she of the Tolkienesque face, the Whitewater scam, the big profits made off inside commodity trading, and a book that makes a good paperweight, angling for the 2008 election. The Dumbocruds seem confused - do they criticise Bush openly ? Is it the economy stupid ? Or did the buble burst under Bill 'get on your knees' Clinton and his mismanagement of asset prices ? Do they disagree or support the war against terror ? Tax cuts - do they loathe or love them ? Medicare - drug plans ? Support it or diss it ? Could it be that Georgie has 'triangulated' the left with some nice political policy choice ? Can Hilarious win her nomination in 2008 and if so, won't she get destroyed anyways ? Tough times to be a supporter of the Trial Lawyer party.

Maple, maybe if you read carefully you could follow an argument. The post was on Population not land mass. This has socio-economic implications. Canada is constrained geographically. 40 % of Canada is rock ie the Shield. 30 % is ice. 30 % is left. Of that maybe half is habitable for obvious reasons. You do the math. There is a clear reason why Canada has 30 million people vs. 270 million in the US. Its population is smaller than Spain's and the same as the tiny Benelux area. Canada is large but largely uninhabitable for 2 reasons; 1. Economic -- try building business in northern Manitoba, Ont or Quebec outside of some natural resource industries. Won't happen. 2. Access to Markets. Basic economics and costs dictate that suppliers prefer to be closer to the market. This is why southern ontario is so crowded. I don't see many people in Toronto pining to living in Sudbury. So yes Canada in effect is quite small. This has an enormous impact on social and economic structures. In any event the thread is about anti-americanism so what is your point Maple ? Or do you have one other than to now state that because Canada has a lot of rock and ice it is superior to the States ? BTW the most resource rich country in the world happens to be the US.

Sorry don't buy any of it. AA is discriminatory. Go down to City Hall, or the UNO - gov't is just a massive minority hiring program. Regardless of skill, productivity or need, you will be hired because you have brown skin. This is a fantasy society. Equality in justice and law are mandatory. Any programs beyond this, are pure political projects to buy votes, and appear sympathetic. Another post modern fallacy. I don't believe that certain races need help from the government. There are plenty of private societies and citizens that can help these people if and when needed. Forcing firms to abide by schemes of equity and racist profiling is unconstitutional and immoral.

AA, and pay equity and other 'levelling' programs only serve to buy the votes of the targeted group which claims to be suffering, and philosophically attempts to cleanse society of its White Male dominance and associated guilt. Historically society did commit offences against minorities - Indians, Jews, Blacks, Chinese - all suffered in Canada and the States, physical and/or social abuse. AA is a belated attempt to equalise and erase history, but I have to agree with Hugo and Rhonda that biological, social and economic incentives differ by group, by race and between men and women. These differences cannot be legislated away. The key to society is to have justice and equality before the law and an equal opportunity to pursue ones interests without being prevented from doing so, due to skin color, or religiosity. AA actually is a perverted policy because it discriminates against a large fraction of society and tells the targeted groups to expect, nay demand, government help. This is not the role of government. Politicians should not be buying votes of interest groups by suggesting that they have the legitimate power to elevate certain sectors of society above the rest. This is pernicious and offensive to fairly functioning society. As much as slavery and jewish pograms were offensive and as much as racism is a disease that should not be tolerated, AA is a program that exacerbates and not alleviates the cause of conflict. That cause is simply a racist ideology that we must [at all levels] sponge our society clean of, through the enactment of laws and statutes granting equal justice and opportunity. Such laws of which there are many, are protection enough without the cost and distortion and power that goes along with AA policy setting. AA is more of a political tool of power, and a mistaken abuse of such power, than it is a rational and far sighted program.

Well AA is racist - the Supreme Court decision stated that only Blacks, Latino's and Native Indians would benefit from affirmative action policy. This is extremely racist to me. What about Japanese, other Asians, Pacific Islanders, Bulgarians, Moldovans, Islamo-Fascists, Reindeer Hunters, Vegetarians, Yoga enthusiasts, Scientologists, people who can't dress properly and dwarves ? Aren't these groups all disadvantaged ? Don't they all suffer pain ? Can't you feel their agony through their beating breasts? Soon every group that feels hard done by will be lobbying for some sort of allowance. This is not what the US Constitution or people like ML King and S. Douglass had in mind during their civil rights crusades. The Americans better start beating down the left liberal courts and getting a handle on their politial appointee system before they start to destroy their own society.

One of the most illiberal concepts is affirmative action. I believe that beneath the surface of those who support AA are closet racists. What they really believe is that certain races and sexes are inferior. I do not, and see no need for racist legislation based on skin, hair, tie, suit, eye or any other color or religion for that matter. The Supreme Court basically upheld the Univ. of Michigan's ridiculous claim that 'diversity' is vital to the American system. Diversity is nonsense. What is necessary, and what Stephan Douglass and Martin Luther King and various suffragettes fought for, was 'equality before the law.' Clarence Thomas was one of the judges that sided against the Court's decision. He quoted Douglass in essence stating that justice was more important than discriminatory laws. Basically Thomas and true liberals believe that as long as the institutions and laws are neutral as to race or religion, there is enough opportunity to seek and obtain advancement. I believe this to be true. In a world of Jim Crow laws the opposite point can be made and was made by various activists. However since 1964 there is no reason for 'diversity' or racist quota's. Racism, protected by the Supreme Court, is a supreme threat to the functioning of the US system. The US is going down the wrong path on a number of key issues. For the record here are some facts for the Univ of Michigan: ==== The presumptive admit score for the racially preferred at the Michigan Law School is lower, as it was (and as it soon again will be) at Texas, than the pre-emptive reject score for others. Of the 4,000 or so blacks who take the Law School Admission Test each year, no more than two or three dozen score as high as the 93rd percentile with a 3.5 or better GPA. Median scores at the nation's half-dozen top law schools, however, are at about the 98th percentile with a 3.8 GPA, at which level the number of black applicants approaches zero. [sce WSJ] ===

SARS is another good example of the impotence of the WHO and WHAT and UNO groups. That Canada's socialised health care system failed [along with China's socialised system]is obvious. That socialised health care is a scam is clear - economically, morally, and in terms of technology and efficiency. The real debate in Canada which will never happen due to the 'mass tyranny' of ignorant people [ie voters] is the reformation of the entire health services sector. Having said that Gro Bruntland, a socialist Norwegian, and her band of merry Marxists have NO authority to issue warnings, advisories or comments on national systems. None whatsoever. Through media manipulation and hysteria the WHO created a major problem with SARS over a small epidemic affecting less than 100 people in Toronto. Each year in Toronto thousands die from the flu and other communicable diseases. In a rational world these diseases, which still do not have a known cureall would be the subject of 'travel advisories' and 'public panic'. Like the entire UNO, the WHO has to justify its budget, its $400K salary for a former socialist PM, and its massive tax payer funded facility in Geneva. Creating panics is a good way to justify ones existence. No funds should be given to UNO agencies without a review of where the funds go, who uses them and why and what the return is to the Canadian taxpayer. As for SARS the UNO should give Canada 2 % of the GDP of Toronto's economy as compensation for its delusional hysteria and media manipulation.

Yes exactly. Sumbit your national autonomy and security concerns to the wonderful claptrap called the UN. Soon they will be telling us if our local police can issue parking tickets to minorities, since that properly infringes 'human rights' development and 'self esteem' principles. The UN is the epitome of a governing body looking for something to do. To justify their existence they whip up frenzy, SARS, Global Warming, American war crimes, Israeli war crimes [never Palestinian or Arab], destruction of Whales and so on. Not one politician in Canada has explained why we fund the UNO and where the money goes and what it is the return on the investment. A lot of it gets channeled into foreign aid and hand outs which does nothing to help the receiving country. It is a collection of small weak nations that feels the UNO can challenge US hegemony. In order to so, they will enact the most frivolous and illegitimate of acts and proposals. Instead of reforming themselves they like to lecture others though who exactly the others are gets lost and usually is directed at the US and Israel. Time to pare it down and reform it.

The habitable part of Canada encompasses about 1/3 of the land mass. The Arctic which Canada cannot patrol, defend or develop is more of a wasteland than a viable living area. Most of the country is covered by rock - ie. The Canadian Shield and Rockies - and is not opportune for massive settlement. Why do you think most of the population is huddled like Chile's along a narrow strip of land. The Canada is big myth dies hard. It is not big. It is already crowded. Unless you plough over the prairies there is no need to have a large population here of more than 40 millions. That is of course unless you advocate a lower standard of living and equal misery for all and the tax potential from non-Western immigrants which it is hopefully assumed will cover their costs plus help pay down our debts. In order to ensure this Canadians feel they need to erect socialised economic control, regulatory boards, gross subsidies, Kyoto protocols, inefficient and burdensome political processes, lack of internal free trade, rationed health care, energy subsidies, political corruption, and illiberal provincial constructions, to realise their dream of equal misery for all. All in the name of post modern nonsense in the breathless rush to become European, illiberal, anti-freedom, and anti-individualistic. Gee, the last time i checked France and Germany were bankrupt. Oh well.

Besides Kyoto which is now under daily fire for its Junk Science, we have Junk Judiciary - the ICJ. I can't understand why nation states voluntarily support unelected unaccountable un-democratic groups like the ICJ. Who are these clowns ? Can anyone name 1 article of the ICJ or one ICJ Judge ? I read today the following. It is laughable until you realise what is truly at issue: ========= The U.N. Security Council on Thursday approved another one-year exemption for American peacekeepers from prosecution by the new international war crimes tribunal. France, Germany and Syria abstained, apparently ignoring a U.S. appeal not to further strain the bitter trans-Atlantic division over the war against Iraq. U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan spoke out strongly against any attempt to try to make the exemption permanent, which the U.S. initially sought. He warned that this would not only undermine the International Criminal Court but the authority of the U.N. Security Council "and the legitimacy of United Nations peacekeeping." The resolution, adopted by a vote of 12-0 with the three abstentions, authorizes a yearlong exemption from arrest or trial for peacekeepers from the U.S. and other countries that have not ratified the Rome treaty establishing the court. ================ Incredible. Now the idea is that after one year we can try any and all nationals including Israeli's of course, that defend themselves or civilian populations from aggression and terror. Brilliant.

Canada is not a large country. This is a myth. 50 % of Canada is covered by the Canadian Shield and another 1/3 by the Arctic. Neither is habitable nor prone to development. Canada is like Chile - a narrow strip of land along the US border. It is a supply point for US industry as well as providing a fragemented internal market for its domestic producers - thanks to provincial trade barriers. For instance manufactured goods shipped out of Ont. into the rest of Canada carry a markup and surtax of around 20 %. Rather insane. The Canada is big and sparsely populated myth dies hard. If you look at habitable land than Canada with the exception of the Prairies is fairly well populated. In any event it is dispersed which makes current Canadian policy such as regional subsidies, internal tariffs, over taxation and over regulation even harder to bear and support. In other words the country's size mitigates against the illogicity of its social construction.