AndrewL

Yes, especially now that they have lowered themselves to the level of reality TV broadcasting. What a disgrace. Of course I bet the more the CBC produces 'programming for the stupid' the less conservatives would complain about it. Speaking of taxes, i wish i didnt have to fund an army tasked to protect a buch of islamic religious wackos in Afghanistan. http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news...23-e841f10322a4Why should my taxes go to fund these people? Fuck em' Id rather fund the CBC. Andrew

Huh? What purpose does Harper serve anyway. He literally just repeats whatever Blair and Bush say, effectively reducing himself to the lapdog status of John Howard in Australia. There was a protestor in Edmonton a couple days ago who had a sign: It was a picture of a miniaturized Harper sitting on Geroge Bushs shoulder with the caption, "Harper needs a cracker!" That pretty much says it all. The absolute failure of Harper to present any sort of plan for a solution to this crisis is pathetic. He should be at the UN calling for immediate aid to lebanese refugees and for an end to the indiscriminate bombing on both sides. He should be a neutral leader, not a mere parrot of US and Israeli militancy. It makes me wonder why he would even bother to say anything if he is only going to fall lock-step in line with the US on foreign policy issues. Seriously, why would he even bother with any statements whatsoever, he could just ask people to watch a theatrical white house news conference for Canadas position on international relations. And you call him a champion of the people? How so? He is showing a total lack of leadership, a total disregard for international law and values, a total uncaring for the collective punishment being dished out by the Israelis, and he is a total failure in his first challenge in the face of international crisis. If anything he is revealing his true colors as a champion of failed american policy, and for that one has to wonder if he has any brains at all. I say we need to consider getting rid of this maniac before Canada becomes totally irrelevent on the world stage. If not we might as well lower the flag and start pledging allegiance to the stars and stripes, for all the difference it makes to be Canadian. Andrew

So the Iraq war is state terrorism. The existence of Israel was forged through terrorism., etc... That definition is the oldest definition of terrorism around, and it is rejected by states because it defines them as terrorists, rightly so IMO. Andrew

If anything i have only come to resent the narrow conception of left and right politics. But if i am forced to decide I view myself as a conservative on the economy, and a liberal WRT social programs and the environment. As far as politicians go I have never seen any reason to trust or support them, from any party. Thoughtful and intelligent people dont usually ruin a conversation by focusing on cheap ideological political spectrums that are increasingly irrelevent. Andrew

Its because people do not think for themselves. A right government means more maleable minds shift to the right because they absorb government propoganda without thinking; under a liberal government more maleable minds shift to the left because they absorb government propoganda without thinking... People are generally stupid. Andrew

So exactly what policies implemented by the Harper government have led to this job increase. I suspect all these joobs are in alberta and it has nothing to do with the federal government past or present. Andrew

Well I think reasonable people from both sides of spectrum will want to discuss honestly all aspects of what could possibly cause this to happen. Why now and not 10 years ago. Why the new phenomenon of homegrown terrorism, how did that come to be? How is this different than the terror wrought by FLQ? How does this terror differ from state terror? Or are we to go the american route and just say that they hate us for our values. That is convenient if you need an excuse to kill them in large numbers in far off nations, or if you desire to expand state interference and authority at home. But i suspect that debate won't be had in public, it will be relegated poli-sci circles. People like the simple explanations, so it does not interfere with their TV time and such... One thing for sure it will be a long and arduous trial that will bore the bejeebers out of most people, and it will result in maybe one or two serious convictions, while the younger kids will get a chance at rehab. Andrew

War has always just lead to another war. Lets take the most honorable and famous example of a 'just war' WWII and the defeat of fascism in Europe and Japan. This ultimately led to the use of Nuclear weapons and towards constant warfare for the last 60 years, most likely culminating in massive proliferation and mass destruction. That not what i mean entirely. I mean that war is profitable, war always benefits a minority of people who have nothing to fear from war, and so war always feeds off itself. Deconstructinmg Iraq for instance allowed the US to hand out reconstruction contracts to their buddies like candy. Or look at the perceived success of war in Bosnia/Kosovo; that led directly to the hubris of George Bush heading into Iraq thinking they would love the death and destruction wrought by cowards in their jetfighters and bombers. The weapons industry loves war and it is not in their interest to wait too long between wars. I don't claim to know the answer. But if we tell ourselves that the only reason they want to harm westerners is because of this we are way off the mark. If we pretend it has nothing to do with the long history of propping up dicators and partaking in terrorism ourselves (either through proxy or through collateral damage), then we our just delusional. Not canada so much as our neighbors are directly guilty of this, but our leaders in canada should have the courage to speak the truth. We are not the good noble people with no blood on our hands that statements like 'they hate our values' would seem to imply. Andrew

Why would i resist the temptation. Because it makes you look dumb. Thanks for the repeat, maybe next time you can post something original you twit... I apologise if pointing out how dumb your response was made you feel even dumber than you did before. But your response to FTA made it appear as though you might be too dumb to understand how dumb your opinon made you look. So really, I was just trying to help. Well post something that actually contributes instead of just filling space with garbage. Andrew

And you are basing that on what? Harper is representative of 20-30% of the nation at best. Do you see a threat anywhere on the world even remotely similar to Nazi germany? I sure as hell don't. You shoud come up with ananlogies that actually fit the times. We have an anarchist party? No, I alternate between Green and NDP. They are actually focused on important issues. Not time wasters like gay marriage or abortion..... The liberals are just useless. Andrew

Martin gave a boost to the military budget by 10 Billion. It was a campaign promise that apparently Liberals liked. About half went to long overdue repairs (so it was mandatory, not a boost), about 1/4 went entirely to JFT2 (now increased 5x to about 500 personnel) and a puny 1/4 was left for the entire rest of the forces. Martin also promised to continue with budget boosts and permanent increases. People have been harping about the ailing military for years. As someone who feels no solidarity with any particular party I can't help but see how a military budget increase is fine if the Liberals are doing it, even if their spending structure is screwed (1/4 of it just for the JTF2?), but as soon as a Conservative party does it -- oh well all of a sudden it's time for the Bush analogies. Or is it just that liberal supporters only read the news when it suits them? . I would not support any party increasig the size and reach of our military. Nothing good can come of that. If they need to maintain the current military and supply the troops with good dependable equipment then so be it. I would rather they pulled the troops out and coverted our military into a disaster releif force. BTW, I have never voted liberal or conservative. Andrew

Why would i resist the temptation. Because it makes you look dumb. You were speculating about the evil mounties entraping poor young Muslim boys, and using legal terms like habeus corpus when you apparently didn't know what they meant. Thanks for the repeat, maybe next time you can post something original you twit...

Entrapment is probably an overstatement. But we do live in a society that still has habeus corpus. My one concern with this case is that they were some angry young kids on the internet who were offered weapons and explosives by CSIS. The kids then began to escalate their plans facilitated by the CSIS and RCMP involvement. There was probably one or two older guys who are dangerous and should be charged, but i feel that most ofthe arrests will prove unwarranted as there would be no proof these kids would have done anything if not offered the chance by CSIS and the RCMP in the first place. (i dont really know since not all of the details have been released, so i am certainly just speculatiing here). Perhaps Harper needed an excuse to make Canada a militant nation. And now he has an excuse to invade some random Arab nation with the Americans..... Think Iran.... Andrew Andrew, I don't really understand your comments...and I'm not sure that you do either. The writ of habeas corpus is a remedy for an unlawful arrest / detention / imprisonment. I'm not sure how you were intending to use the term in the context you have put it in your comments. Entrapment is a technical and complicated area and I am sickened that the media has tossed it out there flippantly for the uninformed masses to discuss unintelligently. A relatively simple explanation comes from a Manitoba Court of Appeal case in 1987 known as R. v. Biddulph: Mere solicitation of an offence by an undercover officer is not enough to raise the defence. There must be evidence that the accused had been pressured, threatened, or deceived, and conduct on the part of the police so shocking or outrageous as to bring the administration of justice into disrepute. Offering someone who is espousing hate over the internet the opportunity to escalate their behaviour into full-blown terrorism is not entrapment. With the incredibly minimal details available at this stage, there is no responsible basis for anyone to be suggesting entrapment is in play. And it should be kept in mind that entrapment, procedurally, is only a defence in a criminal case after the Crown has proven the accused is guilty. In 1998, the Supreme Court of Canada in a case called R. v. Pearson said: Once the defendant is found guilty, he alone bears the burden of establishing [on a balance of probabilities] that the conduct of the Crown and/or the police amounted to an abuse of process that deserves a stay of proceedings. Further, it is well settled law that a stay of proceedings will only be granted in the "clearest of cases" where an abuse of process is so serious that there is no other available sufficient remedy. Please resist the temptation to give your opinion on issues unless you first research and understand them. FTA Why would i resist the temptation. If i did all the research then you wouldnt have anything to post. And BTW, i said i was speculating and that entrapment was an overstatement on my part. Did you just ignore those things so you could show us all how smart you are? Andrew

Where do you get these ideas? Harper has no intention of making Canada a militant nation, that sounds like Liberal Fear Mongering. The same kind of Liberal Fear mongering Liberals used in the TV Ad against Harper using the Canadian Military which backfired.. He is already looking to spend millions on the military. If he can spin this whole event the right way it might give him carte blanche to increase the size and reach of our miliatry. Next thing you know we will be holding hands with the US in their next fabricated war, and becoming a target in return. Andrew

With more information being released it's becoming more clear of what was planned as not only did these 17 Terrorist suspects plan Terrorist attacks against Canada they planned to behead Canada's Prime Minister. That alone should be a wakeup call to Canadians of how dangerous and serious these Terrorists are. How long till the apologists start defending these 17 Terrorists suspects? I'm interested in their defense arguments as I already have an idea of what they will be, blaming Canada's role in Afghanistan, Israel and of course the United States.. The biggest question I have it what would drive them to even think of committing acts like this in Canada? I wont defend the would-be murdereers but to me it seems rather clear that war begets more war and rarely ever solves anything. If you want to go with the simpletom explanation for all this that they hate our values and freedoms than that is your decision. You can absorb all the propoganda statements that harper will spew about this as if they are at all meaningful, but they will not help us understand or solve the problems. Andrew

Entrapment is probably an overstatement. But we do live in a society that still has habeus corpus. My one concern with this case is that they were some angry young kids on the internet who were offered weapons and explosives by CSIS. The kids then began to escalate their plans facilitated by the CSIS and RCMP involvement. There was probably one or two older guys who are dangerous and should be charged, but i feel that most ofthe arrests will prove unwarranted as there would be no proof these kids would have done anything if not offered the chance by CSIS and the RCMP in the first place. (i dont really know since not all of the details have been released, so i am certainly just speculatiing here). Perhaps Harper needed an excuse to make Canada a militant nation. And now he has an excuse to invade some random Arab nation with the Americans..... Think Iran.... Andrew

Andrew, you are entitled to your opinion but your opinion or theory does not explain the following facts: Wikipedia Wikipedia Wikipedia Wikipedia Wikipedia WikipediaKen Livingstone is a well-known Leftist in the UK who is Mayor of London. Here is what he had to say after the London bombings: LondonOnlineI happen to think that Afghanistan and Iraq are rather symptoms of a larger problem. Harper's characterization strikes me as more accurate than your opinion or theory. I never said terrorism began after the invasion of Iraq. But what is unique is the homegrown nature of the two attacks and one fioled attack. Are you sure these would have transpired had the botched Afghnaistan and fabricated Iraq invasion created all the loss of innocent life for no reason whatsoever. OBL has consistently stated american foreign policy as his main motivation, long before iraq. He listed the Saudi Arabia bases and the one sided treatment of the palestinian issue as his two main causes. Why is this always ignored in favor of 'they just hate freedom' which is a complete non-starter as far as understanding these people. The USS cole was a military target and entirely justified given americas past crimes in the region. The targets on 9/11 were military and economic targets as well, the loss of innocent life pales in comparison to the 'collateral damage' america causes in its wars for oil. Ken Livingstone reveals that the attacks in london were very unique in that they were meant to terrorize purely and were commited by localas who have stated on videotape that they wanted revenge for all the innocent death caused by Tony Blair in Iraq. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4206708.stm Yes I canot deny that radical islamicists are a dangerous and twisted group of people who sometimes want to kill westerners. But this cannot be the full explanation (if it was the only answer would be to kill them all). These people have always existed, yet london, canada and spain have never ever had homegrown islamicists wanting to kill people just crawl out of the woodwork. Yes they can become radicalized by religion, but their cause is political and it is often as a result of western foreign policies that are also radical, terrorizing, murderous, and based on lies and deception. I reject Stephen Harpers simplification of this and think Canadian are smart enough to take a more abstract, honest, and realist view of these issues. I am worried that Stephen Harper will use this to further a militant neo-con agenda. Andrew

deleted post

Using the Wars in Afghanistan and Iraq is nothing more then an excuse by the Terrorists and their apologists. Harper's comments are not US propganda or nonsense. How do you know the Madrid and London bombers were inspired by the Iraq War? Where's you're proof? Sounds like you're already making excuses for the 17 Terrorist suspects who wanted to kill Canadians.. The videotape put out by one of the london bombers blamed the invasion of Iraq. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4206708.stm The spanish government went to iraq against the massive demonstrations against this warin spain. They got bombed by local terrorists right before an election and then they pulled out. Im not saying these are the only reasons for the attacks on london and spain and the allegedly foiled attacks on Canada, im just saying that I do not accept as any reason at all that we are a target because islamicists just hate us and our values. That is stupid. And AQ has never once claimed any attack on the west has anything to do with our values. It is about our foreign policy primarily, and the use of religious rhetoric just reveals the secondary factors that help facilitate murder and mayhem. Which of course is true of any religion. (except perhaps some of the eastern mysticisms which are more philosophies than religions anyway). Im not making excuses for these alleged terrorists, I want Canada to look at the issue realisitically and not just repeat the simplified and useless mantras that are common in the US government and conservative think-tanks when they talk about terrorists. Does Stephen Harper think Canadians are stupid? Are Canadians stupid....??? Unless we actually recognize the real causes of terrorism we have no hope of solving it. And if we go the path of the US and start to actually partake in terrorism than this whole thing is just hopeless. Andrew

Here is a quote from Harper in regards to the terror arrests: "We are a target because of who we are and how we live, our society, our diversity and our values," Prime Minister Stephen Harper said. Does anybody actually beleive this nonsense? I guarantee these people are inspired by the war and death being waged in Iraq and Afghanistan and not some 'they hate our freedom' bullshit that the brainwashed like to spew. Let me be more clear: I have no doubt that some muslims hate liberalism and secularism. I have no doubt they always have. But this is not the reason they are planing attacks now. The spain and london bombers were motivated by the death in Iraq, their religion was only used to facilitate those murders, not unlike George Bush consulting God before unleashing hell on Iraqi civilians. As every day goes by i am distrusting Stephen Harper more and more. Congrats to the RCMP and CSIS for nabbing these guys. (hopefully this was not a staged entrapment for political gain) Andrew

They are both nice cities. Both have two excellent pro sports teams. Edmonton is an artsy city with many great festivals, great river valley if you like mountain biking. (We have the the largest city parks and bike trails in the world). The mall sucks, who cares. Edmonton is blue collar in the north and white collar in the south with a cool artsy crowd in the middle. Calgary is pretty much white collar all the way through. If you are into dressing up and going clubbing and pretending you are very important, and if you like to buy expensive things because they are expensive, if you are all about image and style, then Calgary is the place to go. Honestly, since you are american you will probably be much more at home in Calgary. Calgary has the largest american pop in Canada. One note. If you are moving to Canada be prepared to constantly defend yourself if you are a Bush supporter or you think Iraq was a smart thing to do. Calgarians will be nicer to Bush supporters, in Edmonton you might be constantly arguing with people. But all in all alberta is closer to america than any other province, and there is plenty of money and work. Andrew

I take it your a yank from this post. Is it typical american fare to think that sending the troops in is all that is required for success? Its a common america attitude to think that troops are a solution even though you have no clue what the problems are or how troops are a solution to anything. Afghanistan shows no signs of becoming a liberal democracy with secular government showing religious tolerance, but how is this possible... there are troops there? Iraq is full of troops yet somehow the situation disintegrates even further on a daily basis... But how is this possible?.. there are troops there? We need to realize that sometimes cheap american bravado and hubris, and now with Harper trying to emulate it (what a dumbass) is not a guaranteed solution to anything, it usually just creates more bitterness, more hatred, and more problems. We cannot expect a bunch of trigger happy adolescents to bring about freedom, secularism, and liberal democracy to religiously fundamentalist nations. Troops are for fighting clear and present military missions. This is an impossibility in a nation that has no military to speak of that can fight in a conventional manner. Sadly, our troops will be there for a year maybe two in this combat role. They will kill some bad guys, probably kill some innocents in so called collateral damage, some of our troops will come home in body bags. Nothing noteworthy of any political import will be accomplished, Afghanistan will still be dominated by religious nutcases (poeple who would be at home in Kansas or Southern Alberta) and Stephen Harper will try to spin it as a success. Stephen Harper has no clue what is going on. He is an untravelled economist who is wasting our troops on a mission that is already a massive failure from any political or historical perspective. Andrew