Jump to content

I miss Reagan

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by I miss Reagan

  1. Spot on! The right really don't have steadfast convictions: they believe in the rule of law unless it involves someone like Khadr (even though he was a child heavily under the influence of his families convictions and, even if proven not guilty in the US's kangaroo court won't believe it), they don't believe in abortion unless it is someone like a Khadr. There is really no true ethics or morality that you can count on with the far right. The only thing you can count on is double standards.

    I'm sure if I searched through all of your past posts, Forunata, I would see you holding the "insurgents", Taliban and Al Queda to the same "rule of law" high standards you have set for the United States. In fact, I'm sure all you lefties are completely outraged every time you see Al Queda gently bend the rules of the Geneva Convention. :rolleyes: I know all you bleeding hearts gather together with the djembe drums and protest the outside the Iranian and Syrian embassies to decry their disregard for "rule of law" when it comes to their prisoners. No instead you protest because a fanatical murderer has to sit too long in the same position or has had a dog bark at him.

    I think perhaps that since we're so intent on following the "rule of law" perhaps we should send poor little Omar back to the country where he is accused of committing his crime. Maybe a little Afgan style of due process would help the situation. I'm sure Omar would miss the loud music at Gitmo once they started cutting off his fingers or began throwing rocks at him. Perhaps then naive Canadians would get a gimpse at what torture truly is.

  2. Stevoh, you're right. Gore could be living in a cabin with no electricity and those on the right would still crucify him. Their hatred knows no bounds.

    Not true. I actually don't mind Gore, he's a pretty likable. I'm sure he's a nice person with good intentions. But he is pretty hypocritical. If he were living in a cabin with no electricity I'd still disagree with him but I'd have a lot more respect for him. I'm sorry but I'm not seeing any hatred here.

  3. So as long as you're rich it's ok to use as much energy as you want? I guess it doesn't take any energy to build those solar panels or build those wind generators.

    Interestingly Gore just recently decided to buy green energy, Bush was doing it before that:

    In the Washington, D.C., area, utility companies offer wind energy as an alternative to traditional energy. In Nashville, similar programs exist. Utility customers must simply pay a few extra pennies per kilowatt hour, and they can continue living their carbon-neutral lifestyles knowing that they are supporting wind energy. Plenty of businesses and institutions have signed up. Even the Bush administration is using green energy for some federal office buildings, as are thousands of area residents.

    But according to public records, there is no evidence that Gore has signed up to use green energy in either of his large residences. When contacted Wednesday, Gore's office confirmed as much but said the Gores were looking into making the switch at both homes.

    ``I'm here to change peoples' minds on the climate crisis and to support Prop 87,'' Gore called to a group of reporters after he emerged from the ``100 miles per gallon'' Toyota Prius that brought him to a noontime rally in a sun-drenched park behind Berkeley's City Hall.

    His motorcade also included three motorcycles, two limousines and a Dodge Ram 1500 light duty truck.


    Gore has held these apocalyptic views about the environment for some time. So why, then, didn't Gore dump his family's large stock holdings in Occidental (Oxy) Petroleum? As executor of his family's trust, over the years Gore has controlled hundreds of thousands of dollars in Oxy stock. Oxy has been mired in controversy over oil drilling in ecologically sensitive areas.

    He also owned shares in a zinc mine before it shut down.

    "Whether we recognize it or not, we are now engaged in an

    epic battle to right the balance of our Earth, and the tide of this battle

    will turn on when the majority of people in the world become sufficiently

    aroused by shared sense of urgent danger to join an all-out effort."

    Applause filed the halls of the Kyoto International Conference Center. "We

    must achieve a safe overall concentration level for greenhouse gases in the

    Earth's atmosphere."



    The message is serious. So serious in fact, the DRUDGE REPORT has

    calculated that Vice President Al Gore is burning more than 439,500 pounds

    of fuel, or 65,600 gallons, at a cost of more than $131,000 on his 16,000

    mile daytrip, just to deliver the warning.

  4. Typical leftists, talk a good game but nothing to back it up. It's interesting how no one here has any good justification why Gore and the other limosine liberals should be given a pass to lecture to the rest us. Gore's only justification is that he uses energy efficient light bulbs and drives a Prius to the airport. (Drudge actually does a great job at tracking Gore's emissions with his entourage of black Suburbans and Jumbo jet flying all over the world).What a sacrifice Al! He fits in well with his new friends... the same Cape Cod bunch that lectures about the environment but put a stop to wind generators blocking their precious view. Kinda like the Ontarians who want Kyoto as long as it doesn't touch their polluting auto industry. Kinda like the majority of Canadians who want Kyoto but driving a environmentally friendly car ranks 24th down the list of when looking for a car.

    Come to think of it of all my liberal, so called environmentalist friends I'm the most environmentally conscious. I take the bus while my best friend, an environmental consultant, drives his SUV to work. His other car is a gas guzzling beast. I wonder if he uses energy efficient bulbs though?

    Ah well, wasn't to long ago we realized that the right is more generous with their time and money while the left just tells everyone else to do it. And we're the ones who are self righteous?

    As a side note it'd be great if someone got some video of Suzuki's giant bus starting up one morning and put it on youtube. Picture it, that boasting statement in green lettering on the back claiming carbon neutrality while that black diesel smoke is billowing out of the tail pipe on a cold Winnipeg morning.

  5. The economy won't be effected. What he is saying is that the oil patch will be affected. It won't be. Was watching Canadian AM this morning about the oil patch being in fact the world's largest supply of accessable oil. With reserves into the trillions of barrels. The fact is they want to get that oil as cheap as possible with no concern for the environment. Can't have emission caps, would cut into the record profit margins and all that to make the oil patch environmentally friendly. Too bad.

    The fact is they will want that oil NO MATTER WHAT. If they have to go green they will, they just do not want to. With Harper in government they are safe, and we all now know that.

    You really should look into the economics of retrieving oil from the ground, especially oil sands. It wasn't even economic to extract oil from the oil sands until oil rose above $50. There are a lot of costs involved.

    Ya the NEP didn't affect the oil patch either. And all those record profit margins... No one was crying for the oil patch when oil was $20/bbl and families were losing their homes. Of course once anyone in Alberta starts making any money it's time to reign the selfish bastards in. It's the Canadian way.

    I agree with Argus, the Canadian media is doing a huge disservice to Canadians by contributing to the brainwashing of Canadians. We need some balance in the media to give the other side. We'll see how much Canadians gush about Kyoto when gas is $2 a litre. Of course we could legislate that any CO2 taxes would not be passed on to the consumer and shut down oil production in Canada completely. Kill the golden goose... also the Canadian way.

  6. An ad hominem is when one ignores the argument to focus on the person making the argument (that's your scthick).

    Hmmm. Ignoring the argument like say pasting a picture of Nuremburg or perhaps calling someone a "douchebag".

    The Nurenberg picture was in specific context of the argument. The douchebag comment, well, like I said: if you actually had a point to make, then I'd consider the argument and a appropriate response. But since all you've been doing is trolling me with asinine personal comments, well, you reap what you sow. Anyway, I'm done with your shit.

    Ya the context of calling someone a war criminal. I hope you're done, done with the verbal abuse.

  7. Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said Monday that his country will continue its offensive against Hezbollah until its two captured soldiers were released and Hezbollah no longer controls southern Lebanon.

    Interesting that all that is necessary to stop the big, bad, fascist Israel is to give them their 2 troops back.

  8. Actually, Godwin's Law states only that as an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one. It has nothing to do with winning or losing. Try and be sure you know what you're talking about before opening your yap.

    :lol: About opening your yap...

    There is a tradition in many Usenet newsgroups that once such a comparison is made, the thread is finished and whoever mentioned the Nazis has automatically "lost" whatever debate was in progress.
    It's also interesting how many Manachean idiots equate criticism of Israel with "siding with" the other side, as is your determination to turn this into a debate about me as oppossed to the issues. That's not to say I'm not flattered by your attention, but I don't roll like that.

    As much as you like champion yourself as the defender against adhominem you sure do seem to make a lot of use of it. I'm just looking out for you Black Dog. I don't want you to leave because you're getting kicked around by Rue and Argus. After who would be left to regurgitate the Air America talking points. ;)

  9. Tough

    See you there!

    I don't have a problem with holding a society collectively responsible in certain cases - including this one.

    After, all, they are just untermenschen anyway.

    And when the Israelis start murdering entire communities you get back to me.

    Do try to keep up. I wasn't talking of extant policies, but of your little wet dream which I quoted.

    Yeah, actually, they do work, given the right circumstances, and the population already hates Israelis. If they want to hate them a little more that's fine, as long as they stop their brethren from firing missiles into Israel.

    Proof? Yeah, I didn't think so.

    Nothing like the snivelling of one who is badly losing a debate. :lol: What's that law again that refers to the one who brings Hitler (or in this case Nazis) into the debate as the loser? It's interesting how many people siding with Hebollah and Hamas are comparing Israel to the Nazis. hmmm

  10. Well, we can't all be anti-semites like you.

    What was Anti-Semite in his post?! Stop calling everyone that disagrees with your views on the Middle East an Anti-Semite?!!?

    The emotional tirade by Kindred was clearly anti-semitic as evidenced by his use of "the poor Jews". His use of the "...Jews intent to kill..." rather than distinguishing between Jewish people and the state of Israel.

    The UN and the rest of the world seems to agree that Israel has gone too far.

    The UN and the rest of the world? well that says it all doesn't it. Ya gotta love the "UN and the rest of the world" card. :rolleyes: Especially when the "rest of the world" is defined as Russia and France.

  11. Bush got him back.
    I somehow doubt that.

    For a preppie, Yalie Bush Jnr to say "Just wait" is an admission of abject defeat. No preppie says that. (It appears that, during the Cold War, the LGY/MGIMO were better forming grounds than US prep/Ivy schools. Nixon of course knew that.)

    Good quip by Putin but holy over analysis there August.

    Putin is more red than most red state voters.

    What a foolish comparison. That's along the lines of saying hmm Castro is more red than red state voters.

  12. IMR,
    I'm not sure Ohlmert is the man for the job.
    He has certainly 'taken the gloves off', but a 'go for the throat while kicking for the nuts' kind of guy has to be Uzi Landau. Things would have to look bad for Israel before anyone would put him in charge, though.
    We need some closure here. I get annoyed about the call for cease fires by the UN. It seems it's always just a temporary fix. The passifists of the world seem to be able to stomach a little bit of killing here and there even if it lasts for 50 years. I'd prefer for them to have it out and get it over with.
    I agree, not much different killing thousands of people over a 50 year span or a 50 day one, they are still just as dead. 'Having it out' might change 'bloodletting' into lots of bloodshed, but if a workable and long term peace can come from it, then I agree...get on with it.
    Establish a Palestinian state and build the biggest fortified wall possible
    Been tried, doesn't solve the problem. Either the Arabs accept Israel (in which case they wouldn't need the wall) or they won't, which seems more likely.
    Thoughts on the wall Thelonius?
    Ah yes, I see some trouble ahead. Israel cannot 'clean house' in the Middle East without help, they simply haven't the resources without going nuke, or having the US (and possibly a lot of others) firmly on board. That would mean a showdown with Islam. However, I think that is coming.

    Countries like Saudi Arabia need to be confronted or cut loose from their cozy, yet Janus-faced relationship with the 'West'. The US can't turn a blind eye to state sponsors of terrorism for favourable economic reasons much longer.

    I think either all world religions must sit down and talk over their differences, divide up regions according to religious preferences and keep them segregated, or fight it out. I think the latter is far more likely to happen, so it should be prepared for with the utmost of urgency. In short, I fear open war with Islamic nations, and therefore Islam, is going to happen. We can choose the time or wait for it.

    I'm not sure Uzi is the guy either. His opposition to disengagement isn't the greatest idea. However, right now he seems to have been correct.

    As for Saudi and others I agree with you. I think the US and Canada (Canada is just as guilty) need to get off the addiction to oil and leave these places in the sand. Let's face it we're the ones feeding them with our SUV's and such. I don't think there will have to be a war with Islam if we cut ourselves off from them.

    For Israel, Islam is never going to be OK with them until every last Jew is gone from Israel. So in my opinion they need to build a wall to keep out the suicide bombers as best they can. They need to arm them selves to the teeth with nukes and missile defence systems. As for using the nukes, yikes, I hate to think about it but they might have to. The repeatative history seems to have been knocking back the surrounding countries until they rebuild only to do it over again.

  13. Machinations:

    How ironic that the specter of the new facism rises under the wings of those persecuted by the Nazis. For facist it is. Shame on you.

    This is not only way off base it's completely offensive. These kind of comments don't even deserve acknowledgment. I'm embarrassed for you.

  14. That is like blaming a woman who fights back as she is being raped and telling her she is equally to blame for the violence between herself and the would-be rapist.

    I am speechless.

    Israel is violently attacked and fights back. How is it both sides are equally to blame for this violence?

    The real analogy if you were to compare is the woman gets raped, and kills the man, kills his family, then randomly starts killing people on the street in revenge, and that's justified because someone was violent towards her initially.

    Go for it Israel, kill the terrorists, hang every fool that challenges your government. But randomly bombing subdivisions is absolutely ridiculous and I can't believe Argus supports Israel in this regard. Your ok with our citizens being killed too Argus? Just some minor 'collateral damage'? How many innocent people are ok to kill before it's wrong? Quantify this for me.

    I might have missed something, but I haven't seen Israel randomly bombing anything. Every action appears to be strategic to me. Let's remember it was Hamas militants who early in this recent violence captured civilians and assasinated them. Let's remember that it's Hezbollah that is indiscriminantly firing missiles into Northern Israel. Most of the time Israel is hitting the homes of Hamas or Hezbollah militants. Women and children are going to die in war. To think that war is possible without the death of innocents is utterly naive.

  15. It can only be called genocide, suburbs are being targeted and the objective is to level the city
    I wish people would stop misusing terms like genocide - aerial bombing actually kills relatively few people - its main purpose its to destroy infrastructure and terrorize the populace. You can criticize Isreali tatics but don't call it genocide.

    I agree and would add "ethnic cleansing" to that. The hyperbolic misuse of these terms diminishes the meaning for those who are true the victims of genocide and ethnic cleansing. It's unfortunate the some people use this as a tool in an attempt to win a debate.

    The other thing is that some of these same people seem to cry a lot about "rules of war" and "innocent civilians" as if war would be ok if everyone just "followed the rules". As if it's possible to engage in combat with out collateral damage. War is sick any way you look at it.

  16. IMR,
    I think this is offering Israel the perfect opportunity to strike Iran's nuke sites. I think it's time to clean house a little.
    Iran has signed a treaty to defend Syria, should Syria be attacked by Israel. Israel would be prudent to attack Syria, drawing Iran into an action. Then, Israel wouldn't look like it was launching a 'first strike' (or purposely attacking another Islamic country) but rather defending itself. All of these things would require meticulous measurement, though.




    But Saudi Arabia lashed out against what it called "rash adventures" by elements inside Lebanon without legitimate authority or coordination with Arab countries.
    Is Saudi Arabia 'pulling the strings', and is chastizing Hizbollah for not following orders?



    Lebanon's government has requested the U.N. Security council to implement an immediate cease-fire in the region. Lebanese officials insist they had no prior knowledge of and did not condone the attack by Hezbollah guerrillas on Wednesday.

    On Thursday the United States vetoed a United Nations resolution demanding that Israel halt attacks in Lebanon, but U.S. officials also urged Israel to show restraint in defending itself.

    This is a toughie. Is Ohlmert ready to play for 'all or none'?


    I'm not sure Ohlmert is the man for the job. Enough is enough with all of this stuff though. We need some closure here. I get annoyed about the call for cease fires by the UN. It seems it's always just a temporary fix. The passifists of the world seem to be able to stomach a little bit of killing here and there even if it lasts for 50 years. I'd prefer for them to have it out and get it over with. Establish a Palestinian state and build the biggest fortified wall possible. Thoughts on the wall Thelonius?

  17. I'm not certain how Iran and Israel would fight a war except by proxy. Israel invaded Lebanon in 1982 and occupied the entire south of the country including part of Beirut. This did not provoke a general war between Syria and Israel.

    The IDF is dealing with Hamas and Hizballah. The better question to ask is what options do they have.

    This morning, the Israeli prime minister warned Iran and Syria that if the kidnapped Israeli soldiers ended up in either country, that Israel would respond. I don't know if that would be a proxy war then.

    It's a big if to be sure about Iran but it isn't beyond the realm of possibility that Syria might somehow get involved.

    I think this is offering Israel the perfect opportunity to strike Iran's nuke sites. I think it's time to clean house a little.

  18. This is a thread about Isreal and Palestine and I for one would like to see it continue WITHOUT any off topic annoying references to Indians and land claims in Canada, every thread here seems to be taken over sooner or later with the indian theme - I noticed an attempt was made and ignored, thank you for that!

    I know it's the Canadian way to pretend to be the world's leader in human rights while sweeping the aboriginal problem under the rug, but it's a little tough to stomach listening to someone lecture on "stolen land" when they themselves are living on "stolen land". It is relevant and is the pinnacle of hypocrisy.

    I sympathize with the land grab thing being - well - not nice - , but not the violence. Historically Britian created most of the messes still plaguing the world today -- and not just in Isreal.

    At least we're on to Britain now and not the US :rolleyes: What about the French in Indochina? The Dutch in Southern Africa?

    How about we hold the people accountable who are firing missiles into Israel and crossing international borders to attack? Why not take into account that Israelis made huge gesture of peace by walking away from Gaza? Instead you guys always fall back on the bigotry of low expections for one group and unreasonably high expectations for another.

  19. Britian created this mess, where are they? Years ago my sympathy was with with the Jews, now it is with the Arabs who had their land appropriated and hostile neighbours dropped into their laps to contend with, and Britian who created the whole damn mess simply withdrew and left it to boil -

    Kind of like dropping rats and terriers into the same small cage then walking away from it -

    It really is amazing when one looks back on history and sees how STUPID the decisions were that were made by what was supposedly a Superior Ruling Class at the time.

    Has anyone learned anything from this meddling in other countries and their affairs? Hell no it is still going on and on and on ....... creating one mess after another ..........

    You might be right but laying the blame soley on Britain or others just takes away from the Palestinians own accountabilty to solve the situation as it now exists. Telling them to be adopt peace while at the same time telling how wronged they've been and how awful Israel is (not that you're saying that) just encourages their violence. The Palestinians need to be held accountable for their actions.

  20. As for the absurd claim that "the Jews had been there before," that assumes some kind of direct lineage between the former occupants of the land that is now Israel and Palestine and the people who founded the modern state of Israel who were mostly European Jews who would be hard pressed to find any connection to the land beyond sharing a religion with the former occupants. By the same logic, one could argue for the return of the Caliphate (after all, much of what is now the West was once Muslim territory).

    I see so if there is a break in the chain you can't have what was originally yours. How exactly does that jive with your native opinion here in Canada? Must be nice to have a rule book to go by, where do I get one?

  • Create New...