CLRV

There are plenty of countries on the planet with more freedom than America. This wasn't always so, but it's certainly true right now. Canadians can protest right outside the building where a Tory caucus meeting is taking place. Americans who tried to protest outside the last Republican convention in NY were herded up into a makeshift prison camp on the docks, complete with chainlink fences, barbed wire and patrol dogs. Canadian protesters can get so close to the PM he can reach out and choke them. American protesters can't even get on the same street Bush's limo drives down. These are severe limitations on freedoms, whether or not the "courts approve" or not. Many other democratic nations force their "leaders" to actually encounter dissent and protest instead of grinding it under police lines. France. Denmark. Holland. Check out how protests go in those nations. You'll see a lot more genuine freedom of expression than any American can dream of at the moment. I'll agree on one thing, though. Calling G.W. Bush a "leader" is a stretch...

The first letter bomb recipient's name was Abdelmagid Radi. Does that sound like the likely first-strike target of an Al Quaeda terrorist to you guys? Sounds more like a criminal idiot settling some sort of a score. At any rate even if this guy were a terrorist, this incident would only prove the point that terrorism is a POLICE issue, not a military one. Terrorists are criminals, not soldiers. You don't prevent terrorist attacks with military invasion. You do it with good, old-fashioned cop-on-the-beat legwork, as with the now infamous "17". Speaking of which... Those guys were set up like bowling pins. Their only "connection to terrorism" was a local Islamic cleric *posing* as an Al Quaeda operative and giving them all enough rope to hang themselves with. The "17" were actually nothing but a bunch of stupid post-adolescent males talking big without the balls or the brains to pull off anything by themselves. They were stupid kids. Stupid enough to show up at mosque in combat fatigues. Stupid enough to stand in the parking lot after service handing out Al Quaeda website crap they'd printed. Stupid enough to place a large fertilizer order delivered to their residential address in Mississauga. Real terrorists don't draw attention to themselves like that. Yeah, they had a plan to blow up the Toronto Stock Exchange and behead the PM. I got a plan too. I'm gonna do it with Angelina Jolie on the main float of the Santa Claus Parade. Anybody want to calculate my odds of success? About the same as these rubes ever even being *considered* by a genuine Al Quaeda operative, let alone pulling off a successful attack. If anything, the fact that it was the other muslims at their mosque who first called the cops about these guys and it was a local Islamic cleric who posed as their Al Quaeda connection and encouraged them to incriminate themselves so fully is proof positive that the majority of Muslims in Toronto are decent, law-abiding, responsible citizens. It was also proof that that policework and not military invasion stops terrorist attacks before they occur. But was that the way it was presented to us at the time? Oh no. It was a "wake-up call" of course. It was proof that terrorists walk among us and it's time to stop denying it. It was a justification of the Afghan/Iraq wars. It was reason to shut down immigration of "these people" into our precious land. It was any number of wild and hysterical things. Are we seeing that here? No. Be assured if there were any -- ANY -- terrorist activity here, we'd be getting more of the same. But we're not. Here's a helpful history of some letter-bomb attacks in Canada for the "why do we let THESE PEOPLE into our country" folks:

See what I mean? Suddenly this guy thinks homosexuals are being "harrassed". And I bet you've said so all along, eh? A real champion of gay rights from the start, eh? Mmmm-hmmmm

Even if I believed this guy wasn't yet another self-loathing repressed homosexual (and I don't), this is still irony writ large and a reaffirmation of my faith in the doctrine that what goes around comes around. This man's voting record has blocked gay rights for years. Every legislative attempt to bring gay people into monogamous mainstream life has been steadfastly opposed by this man and others like him. These politicians make a big noise about opposing gay rights, not because they are or are not gay; not because they are sincere about their professed family values, but because it's a guaranteed vote-getter. It garners cheap votes from that hateful segment of the voting public who obsess over the greasy details of homosexual life (and you know who you are ). It's a tried-and-true Republican election strategy. Get some fag-bashers and some anti-abortioners and some Christian fundamentalists and some gun-nuts and, pretty soon before you know it, you've sewn together a ragged bunch of disgruntled little minority patches into a crazy quilt encompassing 51% of the vote. It's how they win elections. So they do it to gain and hold power. If it weren't for men like this (and the obsessed, voyeuristic perverts who vote for them), homosexuals would be free to meet each other in public without fear and they wouldn't be hanging out in public washrooms. Undercover officers wouldn't be wasting valuable police time in airport crappers. Our media would be available for REAL news stories. This is the damage done by such cynical politics and it's poetic justice that this shall be the man's undoing. Now, is he guilty? Just look how fast his friends and colleagues in Washington have dropped him like a rock. Why, do you suppose? It's because Washington is a pretty small town. Everybody knows everybody else's secrets. People knew about Foley and his page boys. They dropped him like a rock. It's safe to bet that people knew about this guy's toe-tapping too, which explains their rush for the emergency exits. Now of course Republican supporters are going to argue with this (that is, the ones who have the guts to discuss this issue, not the ones calling it a "non-issue" and otherwise humming like hell with their fingers in their ears). They're going to tell me that all it takes for something like this is an accusation; that people's lives and careers can be ruined like this merely if somebody THINKS they are gay; that it's a horrid witch hunt. I would say: Precisely. These would be the same people who will tell you that homosexuals have all the rights they need; that they actually enjoy hanging out in bathrooms because they're just sick; they're not doing it to avoid having their lives ruined by busybodies and judgement-peddlers; that gays actually don't need more legislation to protect them from such oppression. I'd say they are trying suck and blow at the same time, but in the current situation I think I'll try to think of a better simile.

You forgot handicapped people and terminal cancer patients. There's a goldmine of yuks there, as long as we're all being complete assholes Which of course was my whole point. Some people don't have the power or ability to do that.

Yes-yes. All very amusing. However rationalizing this away with a "humour is subjective" deliberately misses the intent. There is a thing in comedy known as the Cheap Shot. It's not admired nor enjoyed, generally speaking. Nor do people have a tough time recognizing it as ugly and more an indication of a lack of genuine humour in the person doing it. Cheap shots draw audience groans and boos, not laughs. People ask "Is that the best you can do?" Islamic women? Could these wags have attacked anybody more powerless if they tried? What's funny is how the Islamic woman was justification for military invasion. Oh they have to wear burkas and they can't go to school and you anti-war hypocrites don't care about them the way we in the cheerleading squad do. Then the next moment the exact same people are posting that a cheap shot like "Miss Hairyarmptsbad" is "hilarious and harmless". So much for our abiding western concern for the plight of the poor Muslim woman. Only the most ignorant and boorish could find this amusing, let alone actually perpetrate it as an attempt at fun. Trying to pluralize it with a "one man's meat is another man's poison" excuse is simply an attempt to obfuscate the obvious. A cheap shot is kicking somebody while they are down. It is the act of a coward. Thank God good taste prevailed in this one instance.

For me the most amusing excuse was his blaming the footplay on the fact that he has a "wide stance" when taking a dump What is this, a driving range? But the real victims here are once again going to be the poor homophobic males. Now that these "gay bathroom signals" of foot tapping and foot placement have become public knowledge, these men are going to be be trying to defecate with their knees and ankles pressed as close together as possible, with their feet and toes held rigidly motionless, for fear the guy in the next stall is either a trolling queer or a vice cop. This is going to cause untold misery in constipation, muscle cramps and blood clots of the leg. The crapper was one of the last places where a man could truly be a man. Once again, the homosexual agenda destroys a sacred heterosexual institution... :angry:

Actually, it's a nice video of Christian pop by this guy, a catchy little number called God Hates Fags. If she gives it a chance, I think betsy just might find herself humming it while doing her housework. I honest think she'd approve. You too. Your chances of ending up before a Human Rights Tribunal are nil.

Of course, everybody knows the only proper form of post-nuptial street monopolization is to drive a convoy of rented limos and town cars up and down blatting the horns. Truly these 3rd worlders have no values. Now get this. This is what happened. Get this: a terrible thing happened to some people while celebrating a good thing and, rather than allowing it to destroy the day and put a shadow on a young couple's future, they bravely and philosophically chose to retain the celebration of life that a wedding represents rather than dwelling in misery and self-pity. Get this. No, seriously. Get it.

It took me exactly three seconds to find this artistic expression of disapproval towards homosexuality. I could find dozens more that are a lot more offensive, but I've made my point. It is directly addressing Betsy's (and your) farcical claim that it has somehow become difficult to criticize gay people. It's a ridiculous and easily disproven whine and it deserved a response that, although somewhat irreverant from my p.o.v. (because no I don't take bigots seriously), nevertheless strikes directly at the heart of the issue. People can criticize fags all they want. Never mind singing a little ditty about God hating fags. Free speech means people can go to funerals and wave those filthy words in front of grieving parents and loved ones. You would have seen the point if you'd taken the time to look. But you seem almost proud of the way you covered your eyes and ears. Any other groundless speculation about me and my motives you'd care to share?

This upsets you, does't it? Here's a little something to cheer you up. I'm sure you'll find it tasteful.

I'm reminded of an episode of "The Office" where Steve Carrell's ridiculous parodic character needs to have it explained to him why the black employees (and the white ones for that matter) don't appreciate his launching into a Chris Rock monologue. Of course, the lesson doesn't take and the episode ends with Carrell getting swatted across the face by a female Indian employee while he's doing his Apu voice at her. Of course we know that character is just a grotesque parody. Nobody is that grossly insensitive in the real world, right? Normal people can tell the difference between an honest joke and a deliberately mean-spirited attack or an ignorance-fueled failure to consider the feelings of someone else?

Yes, and Carlos Mencina parodies Latinos. And you're just playing dumb, right? You can tell the difference between politically incorrect humour and racist garbage.

Dave Chapelle is a white guy in burnt cork?

Anyone who thinks this is "harmless humour" would laugh out loud at a black minstrel show. Bojangles, Jim Crow, Mr. Tambo, Zip Coon....

In futuro? Is that latin for 5 years ago? Kingdom Centre was completed in 2002. At 992 ft high, it is only the 35th tallest building. It is certainly not the tallest one in the Islamic world. The nation of Dubai boasts Emirates Tower Two, Burj al Arab Hotel, Rose Tower and Emirates Tower One; the 29th, 22nd, 17th and 12th tallest buildings on earth respectively. It's quite a skyline.

By slapping the "Left" label on me, you're falling into the trap of the modern North American, which demands every issue coming down the pike must be broken into a clearly defined Left Side and Right Side, resulting in endless kneejerk argument without any hope of thoughtful consideration. Certainly you say that whenever anyone points out a negative effect. It's only when you look at something good that you insist, like Babylon 5 itself, America is "the last best hope of Man on Earth" which has "made the world at large a better place to live". All the good things in the world originated in the USA, but all the bad things have nothing to do with the last remaining superpower. That's nothing but blinkered hero-worship. To say a superpower is somehow not a dominant force in the world is just denial. I've tried several times to say already that economics, not militarism, is the core of contemporary imperialism. You insist on thinking in Cold War terms. The "Left" says these things because they are demonstrably true and are happening right in front of our eyes. War is always good for business. That is a truism. Funnelling cash into corporate coffers is the only thing the current US administration has done successfully in Iraq. Millions and millions of dollars have disappeared into an unexplained black hole over there. How dare you accuse other people of barking up trees when you look at that and simply blink?

That was a quick million years, wasn't it?

Would the term "hegemony" be more politically correct for you? As I said, the Gulf War had been won. The message was "What We Say Goes". What did America say when it had the chance? Nothing much. It idled away the decade mostly in self-indulgence. Think Bill Clinton playing the sax. Thus an opportunity was lost, I say irretrievably. You are more optimistic. Good luck with that.

I never said it was an Evil Empire. Just an empire, one that let a golden opportunity to spend the Peace Dividend slip through its fingers. That's all my original post said.

Yes. Fear and disinformation. By defintion NOT critically and independantly. Hence my spit-take when I saw it used below.

Which they never would have done if they were thinking critically and independantly. The opinion polls of the time tell the story.

I guess the concepts of neocolonialism and economic imperialism haven't filtered down to you yet? As I said, empires are run through economics now. I guess you haven't been paying attention to events in Iraq and Afghanistan either. Both governments installed by Uncle Sam. No. A modern economy depends on a whole bunch of consumers buying a whole bunch of the same things. In other words, it demands conformity. New ideas that upset the apple cart of established business concerns are not welcome -- witness the resistance to alternative fuel technology for but one example. It's as good as any, particularly since I placed the comment next to a link about Gitmo on the Hudson, where American citizens were rounded up and incarcerated for no reason while the Republican convention went quietly forward in front of the cameras. It's also a place where if you're gay, you can't get married or receive spousal benefits. If you're left wing, you're ignored. If you're Christian, you work to merge church and state. If you're a military gun nut with a mountain bike, you are appointed president. If you want to be middle class, good freakin' luck. We in Canada made our own reality, thank you very much. Perhaps you want to discount our efforts and leave it all to your heroes to the south, but I know better. Amazing. Public education: it's bad when Canada does it, but great when the US does it. I must point out that letting local government run schools means kids in rich areas get good schools and kids in poor areas get zilch. Of course you wouldn't, because they belie everything you say. Save the best joke for last, I always say. Critically and independantly? North Americans have no such skills. Most people pay to know what they really think. They read the op-eds and they parrot talking points. The Iraq war never would have happened if the American public was thinking critically and independantly at the time.

A country of a thousand warchariots cannot be administered unless the ruler attends strictly to business, punctually observes his promises, is economical in expenditure, shows affection towards his subjects in general, and uses the labour of the peasantry only at the proper times of year. -- THE ANALECTS - Confucious The Chinese knew centuries ago what George W. Bush and his supporters don't know today. I think the Chinese just might be capable of muddling through somehow, with our without the generous teachings of internet chat hall denizens...

Well, now that the Imperial WE has taught the inferior little men all our precious secrets; all the knowledge we superior white folks have invented with our mighty minds, what's to stop the inscrutable little men from now using this knowledge to outdistance us with a larger workforce; a stronger work ethic and a ghastly attitude towards environmental protection? We're not talking mars missions. We're talking economics here, since that is what empires are made of nowadays. Besides, your blank assertion that we invent and they copy is wrong. Any quick search can come up with Chinese R&D making a significant contribution to western innovation. Yes, yes, it's a western company. If IBM pulled out of China tomorrow, do you think the Chinese would just FORGET what they now know? Your argument is "the Chinese don't know A because I taught it to them years ago" and you completely fail to see the self-defeat in it.