ScottSA

Well, perhaps the entire region should open floodgate immigration and swamp the area with people from third world shitholes? Multicult is the answer to everything, right?

And those are only the Food banks. The outreach programs, the shelters, charities of all description...most of them are faith-based to some degree. Mind you, I haven't seen many atheist organizations setting up charities...

ur right i have my mnd mad up abt immigrants. Mexico happens to be a third world country, given that it fulfills all the criteria of a third world country, whether you like it or not. Yes, immigrants are trouble, and for the most part far more trouble than they're worth. Especially third world immigrants.

Obviously politics in the real world is far beyong your ability to comprehend. This isn't a schoolyard.

This thread is a bit odd. It seems the folks who don't like our presence in AF didn't actually read the poll results. Everyone wants us out? Is that the right way to intpret this: "Results from the Environics Research poll, conducted in partnership with the CBC, show 60 per cent of Afghans surveyed believe the presence of foreign troops has been good for their country." or this: "As well, 51 per cent said they feel their country is headed in the right direction, compared to 28 per cent who responded that it's headed in the wrong direction. The remaining interviewees saw no change or didn't know." how about this: "Forty-three per cent of all Afghans surveyed say that foreign troops should stay as long as it takes to get the job done. Only about 15 per cent of all Afghans surveyed want foreign troops to leave their country immediately, and the rest want time limits." I don't know...this doesn't seem to suggest that people are about to riot in the streets to get us out...and if anything the pressure is on for people to slant in that direction, since the bad guys are ready to slit the throat of anyone who cooperates.

These idiots are so used to being pandered to that they think they can actually reap the benefits of war without the downside of it? I can just see the loud cringing and snivelling about "innocents" if someone lobbed a mortar shell at them the remind them that war is not all peaches, cream, and heroic beer guzzling. Apparently it's been a generation or two since they saw real war. Good grief, if these "warriors" saw one tenth the travails their forefathers did they'd run screaming for the nearest bar.

I'm sorry, but your level of discourse is a little shallower than I had first given it credit for. As soon as someone trots out "fascist" as the alternative to liberalism (since you don't actually seem to know the difference between a 'Liberal' and a 'liberal' and have gone in an entirely different direction), I already know that what's coming is a 12th grade alternative school diatribe. Sorry I bothered you...carry on.

What word is "ur"? And yes, Mexico is third world. Have u evr bn thr? You might glorify it by calling it 2nd world, but if you've seen the barrancas outside Mexico DF, even that would be quite a stretch. As pleasant as I'm sure your lilly white PCness, apparently grounded in 100% new and improved total ignorance of world affairs is, it realy doesn't have much to do with reality.

Yeah, it's sposed to be. People should learn not to plagiarize when Momo is around.

As a totally unbiased judge with nothing to gain by "supporting the status Quo, I declare the winner is.... Well, we all know. I've never seen such a complete and utter trouncing in months. Complete with attempted plagiarism as a Hail Mary pass.

In reference to "unabashed" "abashed" is the gay root. That's why I put an "un" in front of it.

Are we expecting an invasion of seal pups? Moose?

I think you ought to learn the meaning of words before you use them. Just a suggestion. And as an aside, I'm not sure who you mean when you say "the rest of the world" will band together and teach the US a lesson. Perhaps you should take a lesson in the relative hard power metric of the international scene.

Wrong. Utter hogwash. This is a myth that's unquestionably accepted and bounced around as a truism. Even if it were true, and it's not, what does that say about our own society? Shouldn't THAT be addressed long before we start importing third world trouble?

Funny thing about dyed in the wool Liberal party members. They, without exception, make the claim to speak for "Canadian values" and "Canadians." I suppose it started out as a cynical political sales pitch, but these days they seem to actually believe it. The fact that the Liberals are in opposition now and about to take the greatest trouncing of their political existence since Turner doesn't seem to suggest anything to them either...for some reason they still cling to the notion that the GTA speaks for Canada in some way, and that the "majority" of Canadians are the same body politic as existed in 1999. Canada has aged and matured as a population and is taking a sharp turn to the right, while the left fractures and drifts, and in some cases actually disintegrates. The population is shifting westward into territory known for a strong work ethic and individualism, while the east is losing productivity, becoming ghettoized, and sinking into the inevitable mire of socialized sheepism. Liberal "visions" of multicult have been proven to be empty pipe dreams and even dangerous, and it won't take much of a wakeup call to radicalize the GTA. Yet for some reason Liberals imagine that things are just the same as they were ten years ago, when passing out a few flags and putting up posters of smiling multicoloured faces and slapping a few happyisms like "vibrant" and "diverse" was quite enough to keep everyone obliviously shuffling along in rightthink line. Poll Canadians today and I expect you'll find that "Canadian values" are not exactly what you think they are.

Homoerotica is a subjective thing. Any barechested male is no doubt homoerotic to a homo, momo, so anyone who sees homoerotica in the movie is, well...rather in touch with his..errrr..."feminine side." What normal males see is unabashed heroism and a glorification of male strength...a welcome change from the feminized "sensitive" anti-hero of late 20th century Hollywood. The message of the movie is "rock on western society...remember when...?" Now they need to make a movie about the Gates of Vienna, when we did it again, for the last time.

Fewer women enter the workforce, fewer women stay in the workforce, and fewer women are willing to put in the all-consuming time required for the corporate world. Since boards of directors are made up of people who spend their entire lives as workaholics, it's not even a little bit surprising that most are men. Quite frankly, given the snivelling and lawsuits that all too often accompany women into high places, I'd just as soon not hire women anyway. Feminism kinda shot itself in the foot...it's one thing to demand entry, but quite another to demand that everything change once you get there.

'Was' is perhaps the operant here. 'Is' is the operant with regard to islam. I don't know why some folks have such a hard time getting that.

Quote sniffing Momo unmasks another plagiarist! I have had a lot of fun watching jefferiah, whose debating skills, at least on this topic, have become quite good, slay the opposition so badly that they all dropped out except margrace and an occasional cheerleader. Now it seems that margrace has been pushed so far into the corner that she has to resort to plagiarizing second rate new age conspiracy sites. That's kinda the icing on the cake!

...or other name non-specific but very present individuals demonstrating the debating techniques of the left by donning blindfolds, grabbing smurf bats, and setting out to thrash opponents on the right, who happen not to require the same battle gear.

Sure, in killtheinfidelland. Not here.

You've obviously missed every nuance both Argus and I put forth. Next?

That can't be true, because I never chase Scotsmen away from the family farm. I'm one meself, ken?

While 'feminism' is far too broad a topic to lambast under one heading, because feminism comes in many "schools" (and I quoterize the term for a good reason), many in direct opposition to others, it can certainly be lambasted under various different headings. The 60s liberal feminism, making the reasonable claim that men and women are morally equal didn't take long to reach ridiculous heights in claiming that women and men are exactly the same in all respects (unisex); a notion that still has its hangovers in lowered firefighting and police standards to accomodate women. And apparently in Norway, where the hangover is not only far worse, but much longer lasting. The later standpoint and postmodern feminisms are like opposition parties in Parliament...all sorts of crazy criticisms and pledges that women could do better if only they were in charge, but 0 need for proof...still plaguing mankind with demands that men become women, or at least feminized. The anarcho and Marxist feminists...well...it's almost embarrassing to women to talk about what they want; a switch from daddy warbucks to mama cradlestate, because women are all "victims," doncha know? Not exactly what the auld bra-burning battleaxes who started this mess had in mind, to be sure...

Engrish preeze?