I miss Reagan

We are a completely open and tolerant country except you can discriminate against Christians, sometimes Jews, white men, victims of violent crime and anglophone Canadians. Oh I almost forgot, as a Canadian you are encouraged not only to discriminate against Americans but to hate them.

Wow, "I miss Reagan", did you actually put this quote on the bottom of your post on purpose to discredit yourself. The conservatives prepared for war against whom... Iraq .. with all their weapons of mass destruction.... or were they interested in whom they should attack.... Should it be the easiest target that has the most oil ??? You should probably do some more reading, where you might discover that the Bush found 9/11 to be a wonderful OPPORTUNITY to wage a war that they had been planning for a long time. Your Conservative heroes just wanted to jump in bed with Bush? without caring anything about the truth really was ??? And this war wasn't about 'Liberating' anyone.... If you think it was to stop an evil tyrant, you should look up the "Prevention of Genocide Act", where the Democrats tried to block the sale of the helicopters used to gas the Kurds, and the Republicans struck it down. The Americans can have no moral authority here... And neither do your conservative heroes. Given what has just transpired in England, you should be glad we weren't Bush's bum buddies over in Iraq.... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> *gasp* Are you serious? This is all so new to me! Tell me more about Iraq, I've never heard this before...

You poor misguided child

Well: "Aganist Abortion on demand, but if it threatens the woman's life then yes. -For civil unions (keep marriage between man and woman). -Pro gay rights (except right to marry, again marriage is between man and woman)." I totally agree and I am in no way a "red tory". Your views are quite in line with Stephen Harper's views and he isn't a "red tory". Perhaps you equate "red tory" with being a balanced conservative. You certainly aren't a reactionary or far right winger, even though the left would like us to think our views are radical. In fact I think so called red tories are worse than Liberals by virtue of the fact that they are Liberals in denial. Liberals like Joe Clark and David Orchard do our cause a lot of harm by pretending to be Conservative. They split us up from with in by encouraging intolerance of differing opinions. It's fine if we have a few evangelicals in the party who are completely opposed to abortion or whatever. We don't have to let one point of disagreement tear us apart. We have more in common than not. We need to be more like the Republicans in the US who have room for the Guliannis and the Buchanans. But instead we act like the Democrats bickering and fighting within and intolerant of any difference of opinion. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> You be surprised, I can be liberal on some issues and very conservative on issues. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> So can I but I'm still not a red tory. For instance I'm in favor of gun control (not the gun registry), I believe in rehabilitation for drug offenders, good environmental policy, and allowing poor people to immigrate not just those who are rich and educated. I think the left and the leftist press has stigmatized conservatives. They would have you believe that if you're not a 'red tory' you're a radical.

You do? So if you are good and kind then no one will ever harm or hurt you? Even people who are unreasonable and illogical? Even people who are, in some ways, insane? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Ya, I wonder what seeds Tibet has sown to "reap" what they've gotten from China. Definitely a large part of it but it flies in the face of your premise that the terrorists want to provoke the US and UK into invading. In the West we tend to elect our governments. When we don't approve of those governments we usually get rid of them. Remember they re-elected Blair. I heard a reporter saying the other day that it was 1 in 7 Canadians or 13%. I can't say whether it was someone's opinion or an actual poll but it sounds about right to me. I've heard plenty of people justifying the attacks. Of course those on the forum don't want to be accused of condoning murder but they offer plenty of euphemisms saying basically the same thing.

No not at all. I completely understand the difference between gaining an understanding and being an apologist. The problem is anytime a terrorist attack occurs you justify it by turning the topic to US foreign policy or the motivations behind the attack. It's not like we're talking about you starting topics in the morality/ religion section of the board on why Islamic Fundamentalism exists. We're talking about your justification of Islamic terrorism. And your bus analogy is so much more relevant. I think the Bernardo analogy fits quite well. An individual displaying sociopathological tendencies who feels justified in inflicting pain on others because of selfish desires and justifies his acts by blaming the victims. Oh Black Dog, you're so beyond my capacity to understand all of these difficult concepts. Is this why you resort to name calling like "moron" and say "bull/ horseshit" every time you're losing a debate?

I think it's pretty obvious this was the work of Al Qaida. Just because OBL might not have issued a direct order doesn't mean it isn't Al Qaida. Al Quida has had training camps for years and has trained thousands from around the globe. These guys then preach their poison to potential recruits. Al Quida is like the ELF, it's a movement. You are an apologist. You remind me of the Muslim barber who said to me "ya Osama is a bad guy, BUT (there's always the 'but') the US pushed him to do it. You are constantly ranting about US foreign policy being the cause. Since we're doing the analogy thing I guess following your use of the "cause and effect" logic, Homolka and Bernardo victims school girl clothing was the cause of the effect. We just need to have more understanding towards people like Homolka and Bernardo eh?

Just a look into the future. Could it be any more obvious that you're going to have problems when you create a society where that society's rules and customs come second to the incomming cultures. People need to clue in, there's a reason why they're moving here... because they're societies aren't working out so well. Then when you add to that a Canadian agenda of encouraging immigration from traditionally anti-American countries and people who oppress women or kill members of their families who "dishonor" them. The cultural mosaic idea was destined to fail from the beginning. Melting pot is the only way.

Oh ya I forgot, "there is no terrorist threat" "Al Quida, is a boogey man". You may not think they deserved it, but many Canadians do. See: "Some Canadians ( I don't know how high the percentage is), believe that UK & US foreign policies and actions lead to these kind of reprisals. And of course they do." Basically a euphamism for "They deserved it!". Talk about horsecrap. What's difficult for me to understand is you radical Islam apologists constantly preach understanding for terrorists yet you are completely intolerant of the US's point of view. You hate the right so bad you'd rather equivocate about the definition of terrorism and stigmatize the victims.

Here here. The funny thing about Klein's "3rd way" is that nothing seems to have changed. It sounds like the same old system to me. No. All you hear is the biased media telling you that Conservatives want a U.S.A. style of system.

Well: "Aganist Abortion on demand, but if it threatens the woman's life then yes. -For civil unions (keep marriage between man and woman). -Pro gay rights (except right to marry, again marriage is between man and woman)." I totally agree and I am in no way a "red tory". Your views are quite in line with Stephen Harper's views and he isn't a "red tory". Perhaps you equate "red tory" with being a balanced conservative. You certainly aren't a reactionary or far right winger, even though the left would like us to think our views are radical. In fact I think so called red tories are worse than Liberals by virtue of the fact that they are Liberals in denial. Liberals like Joe Clark and David Orchard do our cause a lot of harm by pretending to be Conservative. They split us up from with in by encouraging intolerance of differing opinions. It's fine if we have a few evangelicals in the party who are completely opposed to abortion or whatever. We don't have to let one point of disagreement tear us apart. We have more in common than not. We need to be more like the Republicans in the US who have room for the Guliannis and the Buchanans. But instead we act like the Democrats bickering and fighting within and intolerant of any difference of opinion.

I find this recent concern for security quite amusing. The usual suspects are now calling for beefed up security and admonishing us to be ready. The same people who claimed "no one would ever want to harm Canada". I thought we were safe because we didn't go to Iraq? I thought we were safe because we hate Americans? Funny these people paid little attention to what CSIS has been saying for years, that we are a vulnerable target. Meanwhile a good percentage of Canadians feel the US and Brits deserved the attacks.

Heck I'd vote for ya BBM! I thought you were a red Tory. Glad to see you are not. (have to work on that single tier health care though )

I'm not familiar with the plight of Ken Saro Wiwa, I'll have to read about him. Nevertheless, one anecdote doesn't prove that all oil companies are out pilaging Africa at the expense of the people. Well at least we're getting somewhere here rather than argueing in circles about Bush and the definition of "terrorism". I agree there needs to be change. And I would even admit that some times the Suzuki types play a benefitial role in instigating positive change. However, more often than not, these radicals do more harm than good with their unrealistic approaches to solving the worlds problems. Ya eliminating DDT saved a few species of birds but eliminating it now is the cause of 2 million people a year dying from, as Bono puts it, "a mosquito bite". It's the same with oil. The radical fringe never thinks of the consequences of their knee-jerk solutions. For example they cry out for the popular solution of the day like Hydrogen yet don't understand that creating hydrogen is an energy consuming process. Since it seems this straw man of yours will not go away, allow me to oblige. I have met with US forces recruiters on more than a couple of occasions. For certain reasons I was unable to commission. As much as I like you BD, I'd prefer not to get into the personal details of it. All this has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

Ya how long will it take for Canada to start blaming the victims like they now do with 9-11. There was a lot of shock and compassion on the day of, but soon turned to the "they asked for it mentality". It appears some on the board have already skipped right to it. Please don't degenerate this into this type of crap *exasperation* Said William J. Clinton... Come on just admit that you want to take the conotation of a negative term and project it on the US and UK because you despise them. How about we just call Bush a "freedom fighter" or an "insurgent" how's that?

So what is terrorism, then? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I don't want to get into semantics. We all know what terrorism is. Refering to the US and UK actions as terrorism is sophism. Of course but Islamo-terrorists also hit Spain and claimed it was in retaliation for actions over 500 years ago. These same terrorists attempted to hijack planes in France and fly into the Eiffel Tower. And France seems to be on their side. And if you think us boy scouts in Canada are safe just because we distance ourselves from "the Great Satan", just read the CSIS web site to review the threats. CSIS prime concern right now are "Sunni Muslim Terrorist groups".

For the past few weeks, on business. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> They have a cool subway eh? Pretty majestic decorating. Tough to figure out where you are in that thing though. I understand the Al Queda group claiming responsibility is bringing up the crusades again. I always have to laugh when the usual suspects claim that the terrorism would stop if weren't for US/ British foreign policy. These thugs will always have a grude and an excuse to attack us.

Well I suppose I have to disagree with your consensus. Would that be pro-American as in Al Franken type of pro-American? All due respect Flea, I have a heard time swallowing that you would call any pro-American book "great". Oh great. Is this the newest Chomskyism meant to insult the US and UK. While I'm always happy to not be targeted I'm reminded of a couple good quotes. "Hi-diddle-diddle, the Radical Middle; T'was such a charming scene, As right or wrong we sailed along Half-way in-between." R.W. Grant And of course Edmund Burke's classic: "The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."

What rust belt? The Japanese are building even more manufacturing plants here- Ontario now produces more cars then Michigan. Whose wealth again? Alberta's? How many people in Alberta-about the size of Mississauga? Alberta would have its fantasy realized by becoming "Klineland"- a red neck, cowboy theme park. Imagine the pavillions- kick a psychiatric homeless person, Indulge in a two minute hate of everything eastern, reflect in Alberta's national socialist history of eugenics and forced sterilizations. Everyone could enjoy Telus delivering health care with their usual competence and efficiency. Sign up your boys and girls to serve in what ever war corporate America is thinking up. I think everybody wins with this proposal! <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Whoa, Whoa, Whoa. You crossed the line with that Telus comment. Never would I ever use Telus! I resent that. :angry:

You live in Moscow August?

Flyweights? LOL. Limbaugh is the most popular radio host in the US. Experts hmm Savage has a PHD does that count? How about O'Reilly would he be credible to you? he has a Masters degree from Harvard. But when can debate this somewhere else.

I would love to see it! They can keep their rust belt. However, I'm not sure they could handle not having anyone else's wealth to steal from to benevolently bestow upon the Maritimes. I'd much rather see Ontario leave than Quebec.

Are you kidding? You seriously think that the election results were based on the publics assessment of the handleling of the aftermath? They voted based on fear. No one but I guess I could start quoting Limbaugh, Savage, and Hannity to back up my points eh.

Sure there is. Stop. Propping. Up. Dictators. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Alright then stop holding rock concerts that send money to dictators. Stop wasting money on the UN which does nothing for places like Rwanda, Congo, and Sudan. Maybe you should hold countries like France, Germany, and Russia responsible when they trade with sanctioned countries. Most of all quit myopically blaming oil for all of the world's ills. What? What's BS. You say this whenever you're frustrated but you don't back it up or explain yourself. Correct. If you are using gross amounts of oil, as we do in Canada, you shouldn't be lecturing the rest of us about oil. People who are benefitting by the exploitation of raw materials in Africa should be lecturing the rest of us about it. It's offensively hypocritical. Interestingly the radical people who condemn the rest of us and insist on instant alternatives are also the same people who are complaining about high costs of transit or education for example. They have little understanding of the limits of economics. They want us out of the middle east yet they're pissed that we're in Africa. They want us out of Africa but are irrate about ANWAR. Don't drill in ANWAR but forget about sensitive waters off California. Don't use oil use wind power... but don't put the wind mills near me or don't use wind power because it kills birds. Don't use hydro because it destroys rivers... Don't use nuclear... etc. etc. etc. You people are completely unrealistic.

Oh ya great thesis. Is bombing Saudi Arabia and killing Muslims all over the world in his terror campaigns part of his plan to win over the Muslim world. Was killing Egypt's ambassador today part of the plan to win over Egypt? Give me a break. As for Michael Scheuer, I find it odd that you would hold a CIA analyst up so high considering your past statements about US intelligence and the CIA. It's is quite apparent that you'll believe anything as long as it is in line with your anti-American views. And Imperial Hubris was incredibly one sided. You find that out in the first few pages as he rips on Israel's stance on Palestine.