Black Dog

One dollar more for the Canadian Forces is one dollar less for the kiddies too, but I don't hear you calling for cuts to the military to fund social programs. We're one of the richest societies in the world living in a time of unprecedented wealth. There's no reason we can't have a government that helps all its citizens at home and abroad.

Not in the way you mean. If you can demonstrate the relationship between Foreign Affairs' budget and the amount of money spent on children, fine. But you can't. It's a false dichotomy.

It's not a zero-sum game fellas. It's not like anyone's saying no to a heart operation in favor of rescuing a citizen in a far off land. I also find it interesting that many of the peopkle suddenly so concerned with the well-being of sick kids and homeless people would bristle at the suggesstion of raising taxes so that the government has the means to look after the needs of all citizens.

Again: Svend committed a crime, confessed, returned the merchandise, stepped away from politics, and is prepared to accept the consequenses of his actions. In short, this man, who represents everything the right despises, perfectly demonstrated the trait of personal responsibility that is so beloved by conservatives. It's a dead issue, really, and the mileage the right wing is trying to get out of this shows they are doing so not out of a sense of justice (which Robinson has submitted himself to), but out of partisanship. And by the way, I have been ripped off on a couple of occassions. I felt violated, but would have been willing to forgive the perpetrators if they had, as Svend did, come forward, returned what was mind and demonstrated contrition for their act. That's the difference between Robinson and other "theiving bastards".

Who the hell cares? If it was his first or fifteenth time, it's irrelevant. he committed a crime, he confessed, the victim is not pursuing the matter. Case closed. If evidence coems to light that he committed other criminal acts, they should be dealt with accordingly. However, given there is no evidence of such crimes, speculation on their existence is just that: speculation. Indeed, such talk in this context amounts to little more than character assasination.

Thankfully, our justice system operates on the basis that accused are innocent until proven guilty. No evidence=No case.

Remember, they're pulling out of Saudi Arabia and need a new base of operations. Anyway, did a little more digging on the weekend. The 25-member Council you mentioned is not the body taking over. The council will be dissolved for the June 30 handover. So the next government of Iraq is still, at this point, unknown. Link

You make it sound like the people who head to these areas are actuially hoping they get kidnapped or something, just to waste tax dollars and piss you off. Fact is, there's a lot of good being done in this world by people who leave their safe and cushy lives here to make a difference somewhere else, even if that means putting their own lives on the line. Now imagine if these individuals knew that if they got into trouble, their government would not help them out. How many would stay home and how many good works would be undone as a result?

Svend has stepped away from politics. he won't run in the next election and he's accepting responsibility for his actions. So he's practicing what he preached.

That's fine, but what is the purpose of the article? What point are you trying to underscore? As for Horowitz, you're intelligent enough to know that the medium is important. Whatever Whalid Shoebat's message is, when people like Horowitz pick it up and run with it, I have to wonder what purposes they have in mind. It's like if I posted a third party article about Israel from the Heritage Front web site; people would understandably wonder what interest a white supremiscist party would have in carrying such information even if it was, itself, innocuous. Shoebat himself brings to mind the case of another religious convert: John Walker Lindh. And we all remember the kind of reception he recieved back home. (Edited to add:) Just want to make it clear that I don't doubt Shoebat's story, or support institutionalized anti-Semetism. I abhor the violent application of extremist ideaologies, whether in the form of suicide bombers in Jeruselam or illegal settlements in the west Bank.

Hugo and I almost never see even close to eye to eye, but I have to salute his eloquent post on this subject. Well said. On the other end of the spectrum, we have gibbering apes like Alliance Fanatic who can't even be bothered to get their facts straight before launching into a foaming -mouthed tirade. People like you are the best friends the left could ask for. Keep it up.

They're not going anywhere. Iraq is going to be home to permanant U.S. military bases. All your base are belonging to U.S. More. They can control the place just fine by putting in a puppet regime. Which is what they're doing with the governing council. Any body with Ahmed Chalabi on it immediately loses credibility.

I can't belive the level of mean-spiritedness on this thread. Like none of you self-righteous prigs have ever made a mistake? Svend had an all-too human lapse in judgement or reason and committed a crime. He admitted it, stood up and took responsibility and is prepared to face the consequenses. That takes courage, which is uncommon, especially in the political arena. I also am fascinated by the implications being tossed about that whatever Svend's problems are, they should disqualify him from life in politics. Yet would certain posters say the same thing about someone like Ralph Klein (an admitted alcoholic)? I detect the stench of partisan hateraide. I don't always agree with Svend, but have tremendous respect for him. He's one of the most dedicated and committed representatives in government, and I wish him the best. Robinson's statement I thought looniness was suppossed to be the domain of the left?

Excellent news!

Not sure how sales tallies of Iraq's oil indicate how things are "on the up and up". BUSH'S DEEP REASONS FOR WAR ON IRAQ: OIL, PETRODOLLARS, AND THE OPEC EURO QUESTION Getting back to the issue of Iraqi national soverignty for a second, I've heard a lot of talk about the "handover" of power to "Iraqis". However, I would like to know who exactly is getting power handed to them and what they will control. Will it be a hand picked "transitional" government, featuring the likes of the criminal Chalabi? And what kind of power will they have? The "new Iraqi government" won't control foreign policy or security, U.S. troops will be staying in country past the June 30 power transfer. Real soverignty will remain in the hands of those with the biggest guns: U.S forces.

First, the abducted Canadian citizen was not, in point of fact, a reporter, but was in Iraq working for a humanitarian organization. Second, I find the responses here to be puzzling, such as the questioning of the individual's motivations (which are mostly irrelevant: he is a civilian non-combatant). Finally, if you were on vacation and were kidnapped at gunpoint, would you want your government to help you, or would you just say "Oh well, I guess I got myself into this, so I should accept my fate."?

As near as I can tell, your point is "Palestinians are evil," which is understandable considering your source is the vile racist David Horowitz.

Actually Muslims make up 15% of the population, not 20%. And of course that doesn't include the 1.5 million Palestinian Arabs living under military occupation in the West Bank and Gaza. The Arabs who do live in Israel suffer from lower education and worse health, but they also have a far higher birth rate. And this is relevant how?

It wasn't a sell job. It was a hustle. And I'm sure tired of hearing how all that oil revenue is going to rebuild Iraq, even as the CPA goes about the business of privatizing evrything they can get their mitts on. They haven't done it to oil yet (probably because such a move would underscore the argument that the war was "about oil"), but I wager it's only a matter of time. Iraq oil profits will go to Halliburton, Exxon and other F.O.B's (Friends of Bush) as part of the new Washington Consensus.

Didn't you hear? This is the "war on terrorism". There will be-can be-no end. Meanwhile, it seems Bush has determined that while "brown-skinned" people deserve freedom too, only certain ones need apply. His endorsement of Israel's "security" wall and the transformation of Gaza into, essentially, a Palestinian concentration camp will fuel the fires of resentment across the Arab world, further galvanizing the conflict as a "clash of civilizations" and make peace in the region a distant dream.

Democracy requires citizens to be informed, vigilant and active. It is not simply casting a ballot once every four years in blind hope that things'll just work out for the best. Jesus, more than half of the people can't even be bothered to do even that and you seem to think people should care less about democracy? "If liberty and equality, as is thought by some are chiefly to be found in democracy, they will be best attained when all persons alike share in the government to the utmost." - Aristotle

I doubt Bush's performance would have brought anyone who was on the fence ove rto his side. It's not like he offered up anything new or substansial. But I wopuldn't be surprised if his arrogance, his unwillingness to accept responsibility for 9-11 and for the debacle in Iraq will drive some away.

I mourn for nuanced thinking. Absolutism rules the day.

Then why did he start with "my fellow Americans" instead of "my fellow Republicans" or something? Anyway, Bush had a chance to clearly articulate his Iraq policy and make his case. He failed. Blumenthal on Bush.

Let's revisist Chomsky's quote: Nowhere does Chomsky blame the president, nor does he say anything about global domination. As I said before, this sentiment is nothing new. Ancient Rome had the spectacle of the Coloseum to keep the masses entertained, even as the empire staggered. It's no different today. Not a tough concept to grasp and certainly not the stuff of a paranoid mind. If you're going to attack what Chomsky says, do so by countering his arguments. Dismissive hand-waving and talk of "tin-foil hats" (a phrase that can't go away fast enough for my liking) doesn't do the job.