betsy

I know. But it is not what they say that is causing us grief. It is their action.

If you are waving a red flag at a bull you have two choices: 1) step aside and let the bull run past 2) try to kill the bull and risk getting gored. We know from the disasters in Iraq and Afghanistan that trying to kill the bull is next to impossible. It is time to step aside and let the bull run around. Eventually, the bull will get sick of the game. I don't think choice #1 will work. This is not a stupid bull. We step aside...it won't run past. It will veer in our direction. Some terrorists had lived in western countries...sacrificed to be among the infidels...in an effort to achieve the ultimate goal. So that shows where side-stepping won't do. Your choice #2 holds some promise....risk getting gored. It may succeed in goring us....and it may not. So we have 50-50 chance. That's a whole lot better than lying down and hoping for mercy. Mercy may come...or it may not. And if it doesn't come, tough luck....it's hard to get into battle position when you're lying down.

But according to the extremists, the west is the evil incarnate. It is why we should be dealt with...because we lead by example. We corrupt them. Besides, we are non-believers. And according to extremists all infidels must die. Of course we can most probably negotiate....that they'll promise to spare us if we all promise to convert to Islam.

I'm not sure how our maturity, and our cultural and economic strength, will diffuse the situation. It is this very same economic and cultural strength...our way of life....that is like a red flag waving to the bull.

Negotiations is not the only option. Besides, negotiation actually means capitulation. Who do you think will scramble to do all what is demanded? It will all be acts of appeasement, a one-sided appeasing. There is another option though. Brutal but swift. The west is superior in power. Why wait for the enemy to gain the same power? Learn from WW2. How US finally decided to end that war. If eventually you'll have to resort to that kind of tactic anyway...why wait years before doing so? Which only means more lives getting lost? Should we assume that these anti-western sentiments and sudden onslaught of unrelenting terrorism happen only overnight? I tend to think that it was years of planning....and implementation. Why do all western nations have home-grown terrorists now? The beast had decided to test its strenght....it's flexing its muscle.

Most likely the first volley will undoubtedly be DIPLOMATIC. I can't imagine Harper doing anything less for a start...having proven he's got class. Defintely nothing like the Liberal way of dealing with the US. As a conservative MP said, if there is a problem with a neighbor you just don't go screaming on the street and hurling insults. He was referring to the US change of mind in delaying the border passports....and it turned out, Harper brought it out when he was in New York, and the Conservatives had had talks with certain US politicians.

Oh MDuffy sez there were still some criticisms about him in that summit. The news clip showed him go off-stage while the others were already lined up on-stage. He was huddling with his advisers. Apparently Harper was not agreeable to the resolution that the Francophonie wanted to pass: acknowledging ONLY the Lebanese as the victims of this war. Harper came back on-stage and voiced out his disagreement. He wants the Israelis to be included in the resolution. He went further to explain his stance. Chirac ended up agreeing with eveything he said. Of course Stronach and Nash were cautiously treading ...but you could tell they were going to use it somehow to knock down Harper. They already mentioned the heavy casualties among the Lebanese. But Helena Guergis (I like this Conservative gal...she knows how to whack Stronach) pointed out that this is not about being Lebanese or Israeli. This about being a casualty of war. That corked the two and they reluctantly conceded. One thing stood out though: HARPER SHOWED AN ASSERTIVENESS AS A LEADER. Nothing can intimidate him...not even other dignitaries...from doing what he considers the right thing to do. Considering he is the new kid on the block, Harper is not one to be pushed around by hardened veterans. I find that quite impressive...and I am proud of him as my leader!

WHERE DID THE MONEY GO? Where's the rest of the money that was supposed to be for the environment? Out of 6 billion, only 1 billion or so can be accounted for! And with no improvement at all!

There's been speculations that Mulroney may have been advicing the current government how to go about environmental issues. That it could be what they (MDuffy pundits) call the Green Plan 2. Rona Ambrose emerged yesterday on a one-on-one interview at MDuffy and revealed that "the time for polite reminders and encouragement is past over. It's time for legislations and enforcement." Big corporations, Gas and Oil, and Transportation are high on the list. She also revealed that under the Liberals, 6 billion dollars was alloted for environment....and out of that 6 billion, only 1 billion or so can be accounted for. The rest of the money disappeared. Of that money (1 billion or so), nothing really improved environment-wise.

Latest Buzz on MDuffy.... There was a judgement against Volpe's campaign! There is a fine. If he doesn't pay, he is out of the race. What happened to getting disqualified???? Oh dear.....the host of the show said the obvious: "the Liberal's "boogeyman" is all about money issues.

As far as I know, not just everyone can fully claim to understand and translate the bible....only those who are considered experts at doing so. Since you're obviously not a follower...or even a believer in Jesus, what makes you so darn sure what He would and would not approve? Are you into translations too?

First you need to come clean about this claim you've made: "That's my translation betsy. I am able to translate what people are saying in most cases, especially when it's as obvious as this is. It's not a gift or anything, most people have the talent." Do you have any proof that your claim is legit? Any certification that you do have this....talent? Just so to make certain that the posters are not attempting at "rational discussion" with someone who's delusional. And yes, rational discussion does definitely means answering straight legitimate questions given to you by posters. After all, you created this topic.

Okay. Since you say you've got this talent for translating, how do you translate Martin's public display of hypocrisy? A fortune-teller said: " The Liberals are still in deep s***. Someone will desperately try to take the heat awaaaaaaay from the mess the Liberals are now in.... especially because.... Volpe sez he's here to staaaaay."

You mean Paul Martin's sudden break-down? His uncontrollable need to prevaricate?

Oh not at all betsy. I'm quite happy to focus on the topic. I posted it, after all. I think it's clear this Pope engaged in criminal behaviour. I can make that judgement because the letter and the contents of it are not in dispute. You have pretended that it's not an established fact, but it most certainly is. The Pope should answer for his crime. <yawn> Whatever.

"... done TO the church"? Surely you meant "done BY the church" Sickos abound and are protected by their "leaders". In secular society we don't protect perverts. So much for "morals of the church" You'll find some explanations to your question if you pedal back a few posts and read the exchanges.

The way things are going, either western countries will voluntarily just end up losing their identities through compromises and appeasement...or there will come a time when immigration policies will drastically change and we'll see a world divided. Drastic measures that will see immigrants (and citizens) re-evaluating their decisions and making crucial choices. This steady and relentless encroachment on the cultures of other countries....through intimidation or threats of violence...can only lead to more violence in the end, unless a country completely capitulates and voluntarily decides to accept all terms.

Sacred to whom? By whose definition? Some classical music afficionados consider Mozart's pieces as "sacred".

Go ahead and do whatever you want betsy, quit acting like such a victim. And is that all being American is to you, a "label"? From your serious topic about the Pope...you're now focusing on being American and the proper usage of an expression. All because of a simple "eh?" I see you're still using the same tactics of steering away from your real topic. Cos your arguments are getting nuked? Because you're tripping all over your own statements? Well, from what you've displayed from previous debates, this is a cue for me to make my fast exit and run for cover....before you explode into hysterical petulant fits.

None of these acts were done in the name of the Church. But I would bet a lot of these perverts got really close to their chosen victims (and had gained complete trust of families) simply because of the frocks their wear. The apology does not mean that the Church itself did something wrong. It is acknowledging that abuses happened and that some priests used the Church and manipulated its teachings to their own personal advantage to gain access to their victims. I think we need to make a major step in order for us to start fixing the damage. Perhaps the apology serves to bridge the gap and help to heal some wounds. The Church is a victim too.

Since we're digging up bones...how about this? Remember Carolyn Parrish and the way she trampled the US flag on TV? My friend said: She's like "trailer trash!" That's the image she projected. Before her was another woman who said something quite sleazy too coming from a Parliament member. I mean, these behaviours one would expect from someone frequenting a dive! It makes you want to scratch your head and wonder how the bar got down so low. And they didn't get reprimanded or penalized. Why would they? It even seemed that the whole Liberal Party was just looking on with bemused paternal pride. Not too long ago before that, our PM Chretien was given an unflattering photo-op featured on all front pages probably all over the world, when he behaved like a thug collaring a protester. Incidentally, Ray Heard (Dir. of Communications for John Turner) from MDuffy had mentioned the very word "thug"...saying, "Martin had his thugs hammering at Sheila Copps". He was referring to the in-fighting due to division of loyalties in the Liberal Party.

I was looking for a board catering to this particular subject...and can't find one. Or a Miscellaneous spot for any topic that do not seem to belong to any other existing places? It can be the place to go to for those not heavily into politics. The "light" side of Mapleleaf Forum. It will help increase traffic....and who knows, manage to get some adding their few cents to some political issues.

Much as we would like to focus on rebuilding and helping Afghanistan to a new democracy....it is impossible to achieve when Taliban insurgents are shooting teachers, bombing buildings etc..., intimidating anyone from trying to rebuild. So of course, we've got to fight them in order to achieve what we all envision for Afghanistan.

I was referring to the last Alliance leadership campaign that signed up people fictional people and numerous people from a single address in Quebec. The PC leadership campaign also got down and dirty at the delegate level with members being signed up who were not PCs and with memberships being paid for the candidates. I won't even go into the sleazy turn of events that saw the PCs renege on not merging with the Alliance. Want to know how sleazy that was? Many long time PCs tore up their memberships while a few others, sitting PCs in the Senate, remain PCs to this day. But there is no longer an Alliance Party. That was years ago. They were referring about corruptions that is CONTINUOUSLY dogging the Liberals. Even now that they are trying to change their image...and promising to bring in a new leader....the corruption seems to stick like second skin! C'mon.....it's only approx. 10 months or so from their downfall....and how many fresh corruption-related buzz emerged already since then? How come they can't even manage to stay clean for at least 1 year?

Okay, latest buzz on MDuffy today: Paul Martin made a comment somewhere criticizing the war on Afghanistan....saying it was not the same war he supported. Scott Reid was of course, reiterating and supporting Martin's comment....saying Canadians probably are wishing he's back now. They showed a clip of Harper responding to that statement from Bucharest. Never saw NDP Brad Lavigne really seriously angry at Scott Reid. He taunted, "More beer and popcorn, Scott?" He just furiously ranted about the hypocrisy of Martin making the statement. That if Martin felt so strongly about the way Harper is handling the war, why didn't Martin show up during the voting in Parliament and have his vote be counted. Lavigne is angry over the fact that they lost due to 4 votes from the Liberals.