ScottSA

Green candidate stands by remarks praising 9/11 'Beautiful' Katie Rook, National Post Published: Friday, April 13, 2007 A federal Green party candidate in Vancouver-Kingsway is standing behind a controversial editorial he wrote more than four years ago in which he describes the falling of the World Trade Center twin towers as "beautiful." The editorial, entitled, A Revolting Confession, was first published on Nov. 28, 2002 in an alternative newspaper, The Republic of East Vancouver, which Kevin Potvin founded. "When I saw the first tower cascade down into that enormous plume of dust and paper, there was a little voice inside me that said, 'Yeah!' When the second tower came down the same way, that little voice said, 'Beautiful!' When the visage of the Pentagon appeared on the TV with a gaping and smoking hole in its side, that little voice had nearly taken me over, and I felt an urge to pump my fist in the air," Mr. Potvin wrote in the editorial. http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/st...c4-67a170f45a3c

This sentence makes no sense. That's two sentences. They seem fine to me (not artistically speaking) Really? A lot of Muslims are made up of [people]?

This sentence makes no sense.

Reported. It wasn't an insult. It's a diagnosis.

And now you, Scotty (with meaningless irrelevant comments). I have to ask again: what's with you guys, is there an epidemics going around? An epidemics [sic] of what? The only epidemics I see are conspiracy nuts.

I don't suppose it would be possible to supply a link?

Why not. Anything involving PC decisions, education, speech, etc. is a topic of interest if a member in good standing of this forum wishes to make it so. It's just that it is British news..... But there's no British news category, and britain is too important to be considered "the rest of the world".

No, I think he grazed himself in the foot a couple times, and once scored a direct hit on one of his body parts. Fortunately it was his head, so all he did was rearrange the log pile a bit.

Apologize? No I dont think so. Nothing to apologize for. Here is what I wrote..."Come on scottsa , you are on plenty of BB's and frankly your shtick is unwelcome and other BB's have put you in your place (not speaking of MLW). Where is the rumour? Innuendo? ahhh....nope. You are making a claim. Unless you can back it up with references, it is slander. It is a rumour designed to plant in the minds of others the twofold idea that I am some kind of troll, and that I have been "put in [my] place" on other boards. Back it up with a reference or apologize. And stop pming me and asking me on dates. I told you no.

What I demand is equal rights for everyone. Again, marriage is not a "right".

This, unfortunately, pretty much plumbs the depths of understanding of the general lightweight atheism of secular society. It's all pretty much based on radical positivism, and hilights the conceit that we are privy to the definitive epistemology of everything. It helps avoid deeper questions and questions of the spirit, so it serves its purpose I suppose, but it's hardly clever.

So its considered tolerance to exclude people from marriage then? This is representative of the false kinds of questions the fag lobby puts out. It's not a question of tolerance. Tolerance simply refers to people tolerating homosexuality. That means that we don't burn or hang or stone or arrest homosexuals. What you are demanding is normalization; the idea that homosexuals and the homosexual lifestyle ought to be celebrated as just another lifestyle choice. You are going beyond this and demanding access to a heterosexual institution, using the grounds of normality to argue "rights", which don't apply to this at all. Marriage is not a "right", it's an institution.

So when you hear the deaths of two soldiers refered to as "a terrible setback for the Canadian mission", you don't think it's a bit over the top? The Battle of the Bulge is "a terrible setback". Losing two soldiers in an offensive is a low casualty count.

The CBC is constantly trying to dis the Afghan mission. Yesterday I watched part of or whatever of (deep voice intonation) "The Road to Kandahar", which even managed to drag a retired general out and take the odd snippet out of context to make it sound as if Canadian forces didn't want to go, are over their heads, and accidentally ended up in the south instead of some cushioned northern sector. The media in both Iraq and Afghanistan seem intent on painting the respective missions as an ongoing series of mistakes, when the folks who are there or have been there are very clear as to what they are doing. The mission is not standing around holding imperialist flags and waiting to get shot at; it is mounting an offensive into enemy dominated territory. It's hardly surprising that there is resistance...what is really surprising is the lack of any substantial resistance.

Hm. How would you know that? With a name like yours, you'd best steer clear of this thread.

Short of tattooing it on your forehead it's pointless to tell you because you'll just forget, but I'll help out anyway. Here are some hints: 1 ) Houses are not tried in courts of law anywhere in the world, including Afghanistan. 2 ) Courts of law are not precursors to target identification in freefire zones.

Well hell...what would be left? Free boat rides for Lebanese? A lot of people don't like that idea either. Me included.

You have evidence of that? I think this is in the realm of what is known as "common knowledge". It's the sort of thing that occurs when there is an overwhelming amount of evidence...like that the WTC fell down because planes ran into it.

No one quite knows what the GPC are, but judging from the US GP, they are a little to the left of the Marxist-Leninists.

Excellent post.

Care to back this up with something? Anything?

Read: When the facts don't fit the thesis, keep the thesis and change the facts.

You're insane.

Wait till the bankers find out. Then we're in trouble...

Which is irrelevant. Climate change is measured in far longer time spans than a month and in far greater areas than BC. Equally irrelevant is that January was the warmest on record in Toronto. Friend of mine a few years ago got this nifty fireplace that shot out a gazillion BTUs of heat.....he couldn't figure out why the rsdt of his house was so cold and his furnace had to work harder.... Global warming is measured in the time span most conducive to making it sound credible. We've heard that it's been warmer for the last ten years, the last 50 years, and a lie that it's been never been warmer for the last thousand years. Yet everytime a hot day comes along, we're reminded again that global warming is here. Of course, when a cold day comes along, that's an indication of "increasing weather variability" due to global warming. What rot.