Catchme

Most certainly there is NOT world wide support for Afghanistan and the NATO mission. There is not even support for it from with in NATO. Also, in today's news there is a new Canadian Senate report out. Senate report recommends possible end to Afghan mission OTTAWA - Canada should consider pulling its troops out of Afghanistan if some of its NATO allies continue to refuse to allow their troops to fight on the front lines near Kandahar, says a Senate committee. “NATO must deploy more resources in Afghanistan and use those resources in a better way than we have done to this point. If this proves impossible, Canada should be prepared to consider withdrawing its troops from Afghanistan as soon as our current commitment ends,” concludes a report by the Senate committee on national defence and security. The committee of Liberal and Conservative senators recently returned from Afghanistan and has singled out the ongoing dispute within NATO as one of the major hurdles facing Canada’s deployment of 2,500 troops to the country... http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news...d2b7274&k=54891

They pay you for it because it's still yours. Remember NEP? It happened because Canadians outside of Alberta (incorrectly according to you) assumed that it's their resources too and that you must share them with ROC. Now let 500 million Americans and Mexicans think that they also have some rights to your resources and then imagine trying to fight them off when things go bad and they decide that you must share (like it or not). Very good point Saturn, and quite obvious, which makes one wonder what exactly some are thinking by backing "fire walling" NA. Why should Canadians absorb the US monetary debts? Why should Canadians give away our resources? And just what benefit would there be to Canadians, besides none? That the CPC has engaged in subterfuge to try and pull off deep integration is heinous.

When the FBI sets off bombs in apartment buildings in order to blame it on his political enemies and launch a war you'll have a point. As for Israel nuking Iran. The only way that will happen is if people like you get your wish and Iran gets nukes, or gets close to getting nukes. So if Iran is nuked it will be on YOUR head. Noticed that you used the FBI as your example, as opposed to the CIA, as we aALL know the CIA has done much than blow up apartment buildings. And BTW who blew up apartments that you are speaking about? Certainly NOT Iran. As for the spurious commentary that it will be upon our heads, if Israel/USA nukes Iran, it is so outrageous that it needs NO consideration.

Obama was just pointing out the empty rhetoric of all the chickenhawk neocons who bluster that we must fight the good fight in this clash of civilizations, but aren't willing to make the necessary sacrifice themselves. They don't send enough troops to get the job done; they send lots of money, but it all mysteriously goes missing; and they never enlist themselves because they have "other priorities." Have looked all over the net, to see if Austrailia was upset, or even had heard about Obama's remarks and nary a thing was about that I could find. In fact, the only thing I could find about Howards remarks to Obama was in an Irish on line paper citing Reuters. Maybe search engines have not yet picked up on it though. But it is interesting, as Americans on both side of the house condemned Howard, so they do not think Obama made any type of sniping commentary. And you are quite right Obama did not slam AU's contributions at all. http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/breaking/.../breaking11.htm

Their actions in government say otherwise... what did the Liberals do for Global Warming exactly, or the Great Bear Rainforest? What actions geoffery please do list them? The Great Bear Rain forest federal funding was already in place, prior to the advent of the CPC on the federal stage. The CPC just decided to follow through with it, as an attempt of PR. It is primarily and provincial iniative, that the LIberals had promised to help with. So it has little or nothing to do with the CPC other than it was convienent for them to follow through. The same can be said to the money for alternative energy, it was a Liberal iniative that the CPC followed through on to try and make it appear as if they were NOW all of a sudden green, because public consensus was quite clearly against their failures with the outrageous Clean Air Act.

It would appear that Weds is a key date in regards to Iran and the USA. http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/ Again it seems the Bush admin are being exposed for the lying liars they are, and that most Americans are not buying what they are trying to sell.

No, I didn't call anybody that. I only suggested that only such as they were unaware at how isolated the US is in this Iraq debacle. Certainly I believe you are aware of the loss of prestige for the US on the world stage. You are quite correct the USA has lost most if not all of its prestige, and trust on the world stage. They have shown themselves to be dishonest brokers. For reasons like this: http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/

Sadly, I do not know of what you speak, but again I notice your comentary is off subject and in no way addresses the salient rebuttal of the propaganda that Gates and the USA is falsely espousing. Please do try to remain on subject of the thread.

Yes, it will be these 3 with the 2nd up being the running mate. My bets are on Edwards Obama or Obama Edwards. Though Hilary could sneak in there as vice prez to Obama. The GOP do not have a chance, unless they try to steal it yet again. Doubt it would fly a third time

I am glad you caught my theo-coness statement, after all Harper does have a good case of of a messianic complex, or his highnessness. Though it would go right over many heads here. Boy, could you point to some threads where people provide the proof you talk about and who exhibit a partisian bias to Harper? I have not seen too many, it seems they are an endangered species. And I would most certainly book mark where they do, as a reminder that occassionally something more is offeredup except personal opinion. Oops, that is not a good use of words there, after all, Harper et al do not believe in environmental damage caused by Global Warming or endangered species. I suppose I should have said it would be a rare find or occurance.

Thanks for the disinformation that has already been debunked here and elsewhere on these forums about this. Again it is the lying type of stuff they used to attack Iraq with. Then some naive, or willfully misinformed, people run with it without actually reading or investigating the truth and accuracy of what is being said or presented by Gates Bush et al. It is shame that people run with these lies as mass extermination of peoles could be the result. However, in case you missed actually reading the threads, and the article and are not up to full speed, I will ellucidate that Gates said nothing and what he said means even less than nothing. The actual pictures of these devices showed English writing on them, if they were from Iran they would be in Arabic. There is a link in another thread here that shows the pictures of these with English on them. Lies by Gates. But he offers himself an escape clase with this, note the "there maybe": Hello, "there may be markings", does not mean a thing, especially when the opictures he presented show english markings. You do not make accusations that could lead to the mass extermination of millions and say "there may be markings". Then gates said this: Oh for sure, they picked up some Iranians, at the Iranian embassy. The one they are trying to make a case over was in Iranian military uniform. No doubt eh? He was at the Iranian embassy. Funny how they fail to mention just where they got the Iranians from eh? The Gates little non-expose closes with this: First, we are told they are very much involved in either the weapons or technology. Why do they know this? Because they are a type that the Iranians used against Iraq in the Iran Iraq war. Of course, the Iraqis have access to the technology, it was used against them by Iran. they in turn used the same technology against Iran. Again the USA fails to report this and skews it, without really telling lies heh?! Just innuendo, that some people just pick up and then spew as truth. Then Gates admits these IED's really haven't killed that many troops with them, so what it probably means is none. But were suposed to believe they're lethal and that Iran had something to do with them. Good thing most people around the world and indeed even in the USA don't believe the lies. This is the second time the Bush admin has tried out this false rhetoric of Gates to see how it played.

Somehow, I think I would like to be the Dixie Chicks with the kinda payoff they have been getting for their principled stand. They get to win awards, make millions, and still be principled and respected by the majority of the world. No boobs are by far superior to George Bush, as they actauly have goodness and worth. Hence my asking him not to denigate them by likening Bush them.

Please do try to rebutt what is stated with facts, as opposed to giving your personal opinion. Facts were, which were not, and are not my opinion presented. If you feel they are not balanced, again I invite you or others to provide facts that will back up your partisian and personal opinions. Please do read the links and what is posted you may have a clearer view, rather than epousing opinions based on who knows what. Also, nothing was downplayed at all, funny that you would say so, please provide me with an example of me downplaying his words? As I even agreed that he wa a fool. Howver, the truth was told about him, and his being a mouth piece figure head with NO political clout at all. No potlical clout = no ability to conduct any actions just a fool that is much less dangerous than the other fool making lying threats. How do you feel about the majority of Iranians wanting him gone? And their wanting a democracy? Do you think they should be nuked?

Hey we might like America as a nieghbor, we might like America as a friend, but we don't like America in that way, why can't we just stay friends and nieghbors? Exactly frienda and neighbours do not give the other everything they own. Or pay off their debts. It is not an either or situation here. How abouts we just stay as we are?

And it never fails to amuse me how the left is categorized and generalized as though they had no differences of opinion. Hmmmmm is that how the far right works? As far as Putin is concerned, it is time that someone put a stop (or try at least) to Bush. The rhetoric is ramping up and there doesn't seem to be any opposition coming from anywhere in the west. Steve will go along with whatever Bush decides so that counts us out to stand up for peace and freedom in the world. Yes, I think it is, they try to impose that upon all who do not think like they do. Truly what amazes/amuses me, is some's inability to acknowledge facts when they are presented. It gets trying when they try to use personal opinion against facts on the ground and then try to convince people their personal opinion is better than facts. Yes, it is certainly trying alright. The unfortunate thing about Steve going along is that now he implicates all canadians. Really glad to see Putin denounce Bush et al so strongly, no matter his reasons. Bush eta als reason are no better and much worse in many cases it seems.

Here is some good news on Iraq, in fact so good one wonder why the Bush admin is still ramping up surge deployments, ignoring the actual insurrgents in Iraq, and rhetoric against Iran. http://news.independent.co.uk/world/fisk/article2251354.ece Well, after reading the article and noting that it appears that ALL the insurrgents in Iraq have been talking, about negotiating no less, also I saw absolutely no mention of Iran at all, indeed there isn't any indication Iran was involved in any insurrgency in Iraq even. Moreover, if they were there certainly wouldn't be this let's talk, talk, unless of course Iran was urging them to negotiate. Now what is Bush et al going to do with Iraqis wanting peace and their country back? Continuing bombing them somemore?

Not just denounced them--threatened their lives. They had the last laugh though. They won song/record/album of the year, and the president revealed himself as an incompetent boob. Please do not so denigrate boobs that way. They have way more purpose and goodness than what you have just used them for. Funny thing though eh, the Dixie Chicks took their principled stand, on their own and those that denounced them were egged on to do so. Thereby ending up with egg on their face when the Dixie Chicks were proven correct.

One would hope that reason would indeed prevail here. Let's look at the facts: 1. Ahmandinejad, could be a dangerous fool, I agree, you could be correct. Looking at it rationally from a Canadian perspective, I would even say I agree with you. It does seem that way to us way over here, hearing the hype and propaganda. So, one has to temper what they hear with facts, and rational thinking. Thinking about such things as: there are lots of dangerous fools around the world and tehere are several prominent ones too boot. But that does not mean you go and and nuke innocent Iranians because the empty figure head is a fool. If it was the case, that fool figure heads should have their peoples and country nuked, then half of the USA would be gone, just because George Bush is a proven dangerous fool. Unlike Ahmandinejad, who just apparently is a mouthy fool who has never engaged in an act of aggression against another nation. 2. Ahmandinejad, the President of Iran has NO offical powers, he is a mouth piece figure head and nothing more. 3. The Mullahs control Iran, and the Mullahs have never utter threats against another nation or peoples, in fact they are calling for diplomacy and have been for 2 years or more. I also linked to answers.com earlier, that has indepth analysis about all of this and what the Mullahs, Israel, and others are saying. Here it is again below, for those who missed it. It has every Iran Israel event/word that has has happened, or been spoken for the last 2 years. And it is all discussed from an non-partisian position, with links to news sources and government documents around the world. http://www.answers.com/topic/mahmoud-ahmadinejad-and-israel 4. The youth of Iran are struggling with the Mullahs for control of Iran, they want peace, and a democracy, and they are with in striking distance of getting it. http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070127/wl_mi...nt_070127165723 And they, the vast majority of Iranian citizens are moderates, are getting support from other interesting quarters; http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5367892.stm And no, that should not mean going into rescue them and destroy their country while doing so, if diplomacy is worked hard at externally, and they work within their own country, Iran will become a democracy, and not in the to distant future. 5. Nuclear war is never the correct thing to do, some may think it is the "right" thing to do, but then that's George Bush et al for you. Here is a link to pictures of what the cities and people looked like after the USA dropped the last, and only atomic bombs to be dropped, on peoples and countries, as yes some of the pictures are graphic. And Iran would look much the same if Israel/USA nuked them. http://fogonazos.blogspot.com/2007/02/hiro...want-us_05.html Just reposting this again so you can rebutt it point by point instead of making false personal claims and drive by smears of the poster. That you did not may have been an oversight, as opposed to creating a diversion from the truth, so please do refute what I have posted. Also, I have put additional facts on the Iraq Cake walk thread that also support, what proof/facts I have presented here. It is not my personal opinion I am preesenting but actual facts, and links to prove the facts. Facts that support again the imminent attack on Iran planned by the USA/ISRAEL, also there is more evidence on the Putin thread. Please feel free to read it as well. I look forward to any proof/facts that you would could apply to the contrary that is based upon real facts and NOT personal opinion, or spurious rhetoric regarding Iraq. As I have yet to see any.

Excuse me your shortage of Drs in AB is your provinces responsibility it has nothing to do with the national Medicare act. If you have a Drs shortage address it with your province. Your supposedly swimming in ooil money why are they not training more Drs? Again hospitals are the provinces responsibility why are they not funding them thought you had mega bucks there? Just imagine what kind of health care system you would have if your province actually sold the oil for what it is worth instead of giving the oils companies a record 86 billion dollar profit, off of the backs of Albertans and their health care system, in the last quarter? Again the same holds true for the BC Liberals. It is all about training Drs, or utilizing them in a different way. Again nurse praticioners is a good move to do. If the system was was changed so that we all pay individually to several different service providers, instead of paying the government to pay them for us, there would still be the same shortage of Drs unless of course one had thousands and a house to mortage to pay off the Dr's hostage fees.

Well now the plot is thickening up a bit, we have 4 aircraft carries, that are in full attack readiness in the Persian Gulf, we have increased false rhetoric against Iran, and now it turns out that a good while ago now this was ordered: a fivefold increase in jet fuel from 2006 to 2007, means a lot of extra flying.somewhere, and a Iraq surge would not account for it Then we have this: They want Irans oil and everyone says Iran is not doing anything in Iraq Then we have this little ditty: http://www.upi.com/International_Intellige...8-100038-4021r/ So, they know what their actions will do, we know that they are lying about Iran, just as they did with Iraq, and now we also know they do not care about Iranians or indeed the rest of the world, they want Iran destroyed and as a bonus its oil. After they nuke Iran it will be too late, way tooo late, any support of USA Israel aggression against Iran, is supporting pre-meditated mass murder. I sincerley hope that anyone who supports this, will be able to live with themselves and with more blood of the innocents upon your hands, just as those do from their support of the Iraq travesty.

Thanks for that BC CHick Let's expand on Harper's theo-coness, that Ms MacDonald quite clearly addresses in her article in all its ramifications like of a prominent Texas evangelical being a guest of Mcvety's and honouring Harper's activities in his speech, and McVety himself being an invitee of the CPC to sit in the Gallery on budget day. And then look at Darrel Reid being made Ms Ambrose's aide. Then let's look at the recent polls. The fact is, there is nothing that supports, factually wise, a true chagrin on the part of evangelicals with Harper. I would postulate, because there is nothing but blathering from FD being used for evidence, the fact is there is nothing but false posturing going on by those who want to blurr the edges of Harper's theo-coness, so that Harper can get a majority. They are fully aware nothing can be done about their agenda unless the CPC have a majority. Hence the rhetoric geared towards theo-con displeasure, it's just the good old bait and switch propaganda ploy. Harper has been throwing bones to the centre appearing just moderate enough to appease some, or trying to, by giving the appearance he is being un soc-con like. when as it has been point out, just by his use of "God Bless Canada" shows his theo-coness, and where he would take Canada. Having a gay in the CPC is nothing new, nor evidence that Harper is not theo-con. It is only evidence of pragmaticism to get re-elected.

One would hope that reason would indeed prevail here. Let's look at the facts: 1. Ahmandinejad, could be a dangerous fool, I agree, you could be correct. Looking at it rationally from a Canadian perspective, I would even say I agree with you. It does seem that way to us way over here, hearing the hype and propaganda. So, one has to temper what they hear with facts, and rational thinking. Thinking about such things as: there are lots of dangerous fools around the world and tehere are several prominent ones too boot. But that does not mean you go and and nuke innocent Iranians because the empty figure head is a fool. If it was the case, that fool figure heads should have their peoples and country nuked, then half of the USA would be gone, just because George Bush is a proven dangerous fool. Unlike Ahmandinejad, who just apparently is a mouthy fool who has never engaged in an act of aggression against another nation. 2. Ahmandinejad, the President of Iran has NO offical powers, he is a mouth piece figure head and nothing more. 3. The Mullahs control Iran, and the Mullahs have never utter threats against another nation or peoples, in fact they are calling for diplomacy and have been for 2 years or more. I also linked to answers.com earlier, that has indepth analysis about all of this and what the Mullahs, Israel, and others are saying. Here it is again below, for those who missed it. It has every Iran Israel event/word that has has happened, or been spoken for the last 2 years. And it is all discussed from an non-partisian position, with links to news sources and government documents around the world. http://www.answers.com/topic/mahmoud-ahmadinejad-and-israel 4. The youth of Iran are struggling with the Mullahs for control of Iran, they want peace, and a democracy, and they are with in striking distance of getting it. http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070127/wl_mi...nt_070127165723 And they, the vast majority of Iranian citizens are moderates, are getting support from other interesting quarters; http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5367892.stm And no, that should not mean going into rescue them and destroy their country while doing so, if diplomacy is worked hard at externally, and they work within their own country, Iran will become a democracy, and not in the to distant future. 5. Nuclear war is never the correct thing to do, some may think it is the "right" thing to do, but then that's George Bush et al for you. Here is a link to pictures of what the cities and people looked like after the USA dropped the last, and only atomic bombs to be dropped, on peoples and countries, as yes some of the pictures are graphic. And Iran would look much the same if Israel/USA nuked them. http://fogonazos.blogspot.com/2007/02/hiro...want-us_05.html

These are not facts. These are allegations with which many people in the world disagree. Including the IAEA. Pardon me for being sceptical of allegations against other countries after the WMD farce which has destroyed a country of millions for years to come. You are correct BC Chick, it is NOT facts, there is no proof that Iran is involved with Iraq in anyway shape or form. And it is true the US government is busily trying to manufacture evidence just as they did all the lies about Iraq and WMDs. Moreover, if one really reads/listens what is being said by the USA, you will find nothing is really concrete is being said. They are actually Again typical to what they used before Iraq. Alluding, with the use of "may have", "could be", "hidden sources say" and not even making a concrete fact says it all. The propagandists know some naive people will run with the false uttterings, and their job is done. BC Chick your right, they destroyed Iraq, and millions of lives for decades to come, over lies, and more lies. Only this time they want to use nukes, again for no reason. And again for NO reason, and your analogy was excellent. You cannot shoot your neighbour because your neighbour may get a gun someday. You cannot shoot your neighbour for uttering threats, particularily threats you were not sure you heard even. You cannot even shoot your neighbour if your neighbour is attacking someone else. You would be arrested charged and convicted. It is against the law here in Canada and it is against the law Internationally. Hence why Bush and most, if not all of his admin have been charged with assorted crimes against humanity. The charges only await, his/their leaving office.** And yes, for those who want the evidence and are too lazy to google for it, using something like Bush Cheney Rumsfeld Kissenger crimes against humanity, I will provide it. Now back to their using, or wanting to use nukes, and yes evidence has been provided by me, on the Putin thread, the other recent Iran thread. So I am not going to repost it here. If they use nukes, it will not only be another peoples, and country, destroyed, but as considerable area in the ME as well. And it will affect the whole globe, and more than just environmentally. People should look at the links in the first page to the pictures of the peoples and cities after the one and only prior atomic bomb drop on Nagasaki and Hiroshima, and then go look at the pictures of Iranians. Again the youth, who are a majority in Iran, are struggling for a democracy, they want the Mullahs and the President gone. We should be supporting them, NOT supporting those who want to nuke them.

Well, I guess the "home town crowd" is responding to Putin's shot across the bow. So much for those trying to discount Putin's words and discount that he was telling the USA and Israel to stop what they are doing by planning to attack Iran with nukes. And of course they have stated they would use nukes, upon Iran, there are even links to their words here at mapleleaf forums in other threads, and I am sure all have read them. So there is no use saying otherwise, such a pretense is obvious. Putins words: ‘ USA takes Putin seriously Oh, I would not be too hasty condemning Putin for blood dripping off of his hands, just take a look at the Bush regimes hands before you cast stones. And if Israel nukes Iran, blood will be dripping from Canadians hands too. .

A free market would allow me to choose my provider, the current system does not. As well, competition requires easy entrance and exit from a market, which our current health care scheme does not provide. I cannot setup a hospital, so the market isn't free, or even remotely competitive. What do you mean a "freemarket" would allow you to choose your provider? That is so not true. Not only are you free to choose your health care provider/Dr in Canada you can see several Drs, who are considered private contractors BTW, for as many opinions as you want. Again the government has free market dealings with independant businesses every minute of everyday in Canada, and this is no different. Again, Drs are considered independant contractors. They are NOT state employees. Most medical tests are done by MDS Metro, across Canada, another private "free market" enterprise. Moreover, HMO's in the USA dictate what provider you use and even what type of treatment/tests/medicine that you can access. It would be no different if they came to Canada. Other than for Canadians, of course, who would be able to access less services for more money output. Why should hospitals be competitive? They are there to provide services not shoddy services because of undercutting costs. Why do you think there are so many legal actions launched against hospitals Drs and HMO's in the USA? Money is more important than people. Sure you can start a hospital, just as the Catholics have done. But you must administer it according to Canadian universal access to medicare laws, and set up billing to the government, as opposed to billing a 100's of HMO's respresenting 33 million Canadians. Again government conducts itself in the "free market" all the time. This is no different other than it is more responsible to Canadians as opposed to unrestricted profits. Those who advocate individual pay really do have to realize it is already individual pay and at must cheaper costs than what HMO's can offer. Remember American seniors coming here for drugs?