Anti Americanism and what is Canada ?

[Craig Read]

Canadian culture - how is it different than American culture, and isn't it true that the only thing that unifies Canada is the fact that it fears and envies the US? In other words a form of nationalist racism or anti-americanism ? Is Canada really a country if that is all that unites it ? Is it a worthwhile entity ?

[rdresser]

Craig: People in Toronto tend to have a different view of the U.S. than Canadians in other regions. Eastern Canada reaps enormous trade benefits from America. Sadly, what you get, we pay for out here. If you've ever wondered how "free" free trade really is, ask a prairie wheat farmer or a B.C. logger.

The Americans have mugged us with crippling softwood tariffs four times now. They put their boots on our necks until their complaint gets before the trade tribunal and they're told their complaints are groundless. Do they back off and let everyone get back to work? Hardly. They start all over again, building tariff walls and killing B.C. jobs. Mills are getting shut down - permanently. It doesn't make any difference that they're wrong. Their harrassment alone gets them the win they're after. What kind of friend harrasses another out of his job?

Then there's the prairie grain farmers and the U.S. tariffs on their wheat. Has everyone forgotten the obscene farm subsidies introduced by Shrub? Canadian subsidies are roughly a quarter of the U.S. handouts. Despite this they have the gall to claim Canada is over-subsidizing Canadian wheat farmers. That's what our friendship with the U.S. gets us in Western Canada.

Things are a lot different in your nice regional trading centre. Be grateful you've got it so good.

[FastNed]

Friendship, what friendship? For the last several decades, you've been electing politicians who snear at America and its people. Lately, our President is a "moron" and we, the American People, are a bunch

of "B*stards".

Did I miss something, is there a Charter provision somewhere that states Americans must continue to buy from or give preference to people who make a national cult of and take pride in being anti-American? There is no free lunch: many Canadians have been eating at the Anti-American Cafe for years and years. Well, guess what, the waiter is bringing the Bill and America is not going to pick up the Tab!

If you think its bad now, wait until we begin Free Trade with "New Europe". Take a good look at what they produce and where they need help. Agriculture, forestry - do any of those areas sound familiar? Those people have made a choice to stand with us, no matter the cost. They understand, based upon bitter personal experience under the Soviet Yoke, that there comes a time when you must stand for principal or you stand for nothing.

Does Canada stand for anything?

[Neal.F.]

A few years ago, then Opposition leader Lucien Bouchard made the Statement "Canada is not a real country" . The words hold true, though not in the context he meant them.

During the Mulroney era, Canada still had an armed forces to be proud of. It was on the mend after 16 years of Trudeau rule. Trudeau castrated this country both militarily and socially. He destroyed the social fabric by enacting heinous legislation which decriminalized abortion and sodomy.

By his radical socialization of this country, he created a culture of dependency out of one that used to be enterprising and pioneering. Now we have an unproductive little nanny-state where the best and brightest flee south at the first opportunity. The nanny state can exist only because of the trade that exists between canada and the US> the few enterprising people left are for the most part pro-american (thoughh not neccessarily in lock-step with the current administration's foreign policy) but they are fewer in number than the pathetic little whiners who vote Liberal thinking they are so much better than Americans. It is so like Trudeau who shat on Nixon, and hobnobbed with Jimmy carter. Who thought having Castro as a friend was better than Ronald Reagan...who ran about with his dictator friends in Socialist International like Tanzania's Julius Nyerere, and sold nuclear reactors to such nice people as Nicolae Ceaucescu.

The Liberal party is the political legacy of Trudeau, so it breeds anti-Americanism. Te reason these jokers are still in power, and still popular is because they have divided the traditional conservative coalition that has been able in the past to form alternative governments, and by virtue of the possibility they might win an election next time, has hitherto kept the Liberals in check.

What about the possibility of change in the near future? Lets see. Stephen Harper has failed to capture the imaginations of people outside the Reform party strongholds. And even there, he is faring worse than his two predecessors. Things do not look good for the CA at the moment.

Now the PC party is having a leadership contest which could change things: if they can find a leader that can re-unite the traditional fiscal conservative(but socially indifferent)/social conservative coalition that was able to win in the past, and who can strike up a rapport with canadians in all regions, then there will be a chance of ousting the Liberals, or reducing them to a minority. At worst , you'd have an opposition that could keep Liberal excesses under control.

Depending on who wins the PC leadership, a merger between the PC and CA (or ebven the collapse of the CA) could happen quickly. I'm told that Jim Prentice has the respect of many in the CA, and if he wins, we might see Mr Harper, who i wonder if he even wants the job, step aside and encourage co-operation. Peter MacKay is also said to be open to a merger under the right conditions. He is also more socially conservative than most of his opponents, (such as opposing the decrim. of pot, anti-gay marriage etc), and so could bring back the social conservatives into the fold.

the election of the new NDP leader could have the very disireable effect of suctioning off left Liberals who are uncomfortable with the Martin coup-d'etat and his (sham) fiscal conservatism, thus re-creating the conditions which existed 15-20 years ago, where Ontario seats come into play again, which have not been since the day the NDP elected Audrey McLaughlin as leader. Paul Martin would not have the cakewalk everyone expects. Quebec is the one wild card. Liberals could make up for lost Ontario and maritime seats in Quebec, should the Bloc collapse, as it well might. on the other hand the increassed profile that will result for Andre Bachand's participation and possible kingmaker status could get the tories a handful of seats in the province, especially if the Bilingual Layton makes inroads in Quebec for the NDP.

It's about time the anti-american liberals were riened in. They'll always be there, but if we can get our act toegther, the impression they've succeeded in creating that we as a country, are anti-American can be changed.

[Craig Read]

Some good points in the thread from what i read. I have to state that NAFTA is the greatest boon to Canada and without it the country would be even poorer. Someone mentioned wheat and lumber tariffs. Canada subsidizes both through marketing boards and provincial stumpage frees. The Americans subsidize both industries as well but in a different less direct manner. Economists have proven that even if your trading partner subsidizes it pays not to follow their lead ie. Canada must stop subsidisation of business and agriculture. In any event Canada has lost WTO rulings in both industries, so if you want the US to stop enacting barriers - stop contravening trade laws.

I remember in 1988 Maudlin Buffalo and her Council of [small and narrow minded] Canadians stated that Canada would be destroyed by the US after the FTA was signed. Since then the economy has grown, job growth is strong, US investment in Canada has increased and is only $30 billion higher than the flow south, Canadians now own 20 % more of their oil resources, and access to the huge US market more or less assured. FTA is another topic but it is basically sectoral and not free trade [ie. many sectors are still protected], but it is critical to Canada.

I bring up the FTA because during the 90s suddenly the 40 years of hectoring and rhetoric and anti-americanism came into full bloom. As the economy expanded so too did the demeaning of the US.

I am not sure that a country where politicians are allowed to make racist nationalist remarks is really an entity worth defending.

Can you imagine the reaction if you said "I hate those Arab or Chinese *******s". In Canada as long as your racist slur is directed at a polyglot and multi-ethnic America or the Jews, it is accepted with cheers.

Carolyn Parris received an ovation on Open Mike Bullard for her infantile analysis of Canada-US relationships.

In that context is this a country really worth anything in the spheres of global and humanist affairs ? What type of people resort to such racist propaganda to create a social bond ? Most likely ones that are inferior in many ways. If you disagree with a profound friend, and have little to offer [ie. money, ideas or military], than such demeaning public displays actually reveal a deep pathos. Or is the Canadian objection to Americanism so deep and intellectually challenging that we are missing the real point of it ?

[Guest]

Wow! I'm an American and I don't believe what I'm reading.

Do you really believe that Canada is anti-American? That is just not possible.

Some of you have taken what a few people have said and blown it out of proportion. I have met many Canadians and they are not anti-American. Sure there a few yahoos out there and there are some that disagree with the current admin over here, but then again something like 57% of Americans ar not following whole heartedly along the current admin right now either.

All this talk about principles, well you've got to stop being such collectivists. I have recently moved to Canada and have a Canadian wife, we were talking about how we both have relatives intermingled between the two nations. Both her and I over seventh generation, so you can imagine the blend over that time frame.

Our cultures are the closest out of the whole world, and we need each other well into the future. Please see past the next two years and please stop judging Americans and Canadians as though they came from two distinct molds, because WE don't!

And read your history! During WW2 we fought elbow to elbow. I had an uncle who fought with along side a Canadian unit in the winter of 1944 right around Christmas. In one story, he told me of American bodies lying over and around the bodies of fellow Candian fighters, and about the blood that flowed into single large stains in the snow. I never forgot his story and you shouldn't either! Out of respect for those fallen men alone, you should all take a moment and think of how far we've come together.

[FastNed]

You normally assume that a Free World Government relects the attitudes of its citizens and by that measurement, Canada is Anti-American. It did not make a great deal of difference up until 9 - 11. Until then, well, Canada was like the next door young neighbors - just a little jealous that were were better situated, had a bigger house and had life a little easier. But we believed that with a little NAFTA help, things would get better next door and as things improved, so would their attitude. But the World changed.

After 9 - 11, President Bush stated quite clearly: "You are with us or with the Terrorists". It was a call to arms, a notification that a choice had to be made, that you would be part of the solution or part of the problem! Those leaders who were not fat, happy and stupid and/or Anti-American understood that the world had changed. And a number of those leaders realized (while it might sound trite) that America was the last best hope for a free world. They listened and came to understand what this attack upon us meant to Americans. And they made a choice - one that had highly significant costs because they understood that their choice might bar them from EU membership and NATO memership. A membership they desperately sought. But perhaps because they had been captive for so long, they understood that Freedom has a cost and so they chose to stand with America. Like Americans, they chose to pledge their lives, their fortune and their sacred honor to the cause of Freedom. And we welcome their presence by our side. They are honorable companions and brothers-in-arms. And as always, the Brit's and Aussies are there. Canadian Forces (a clearly endangered species) who belong there with them are absent because they do not have a government which stands for anything. And a government is a reflection of its people.

When the new free trade pacts are written, and our allies need markets for their agriculture and forestry products, where do you think we are going to buy them?

[rdresser]

Craig, as a transplanted westerner, born and raised in Ontario, I've spent the better part of the past quarter decade listening to western Canadians complain that easteners are ignorant of and indifferent to the west. What usually sets them off are remarks similar to those you just made.

You contend that, if we want Americans to stop enacting barriers we should stop contravening trade laws. You would be marginally credible if you looked into that claim before you threw it out. There was one WTO ruling on sofwood that went against us but it had nothing to do with stumpage fees. It was about raw log exports.

B.C. lumber comes almost entirely from provincial Crown lands. That makes the trees the property of the people of B.C., and theirs to decide what to do with, or so we thought. We thought we could limit, not cut off but limit, the sale of raw logs for export to increase the amount of milling and processing of those logs in this province. We thought those jobs should be developed for the benefit of the people who owned them in the first place. America, however, wanted those jobs, those lucrative industries - the sawmills, pulp and paper mills, wood products plants, etc. - in America, so they took their dispute to the tribunal and - well, let's say we got Free Traded. We can't even control the terms on which we sell our own logs.

The stumpage fee business, as you ought to know given your sage suggestions, is another matter entirely. This is the fourth time we've been down this same road and we've won each of the last three battles, only to emerge weaker and poorer despite our vindication. Now we're at it again. That's why I used the word "mugged" before. You ought to take a summer holiday to the beautiful north end of my island. You could perhaps enlighten all those unemployed loggers and millworkers up there and their families too. I'd pay a buck and a quarter to see that!

As for Ned in Vermont, you need to get a grip. Canada is the number one export market for 34 of your states and I suspect that includes your native Vermont. We're also the largest overall market for American goods. That, however, is kids stuff. You folks down there receive more of your imported oil from Canada than you get from Saudi Arabia or Venezuela. Yeah, that's right, check it out, and that's not even counting the massive supplies of natural gas you get from western Canada. We trade energy to you as a good neighbour. We're not awash in the stuff like the Saudis and it wouldn't hurt us greatly to keep our supplies for domestic needs. So don't give us that schoolyard bully nonsense about shutting us out and taking your business to eastern Europe although I'm sure you're looking forward to that shiny new Yugo.

[Craig Read]

Well Wet, you are right about Oil, Canada is the largest exporter to the US. However the trade is not asymetrical ie. Alberta sends directly south its oil product, while Eastern Canada is a large net importer of foreign oil. [rather curious but there are inter-provincial barriers and government invoked pipeline issues from west to east].

Nevertheless the point is well made - the US needs Canadian oil.

I would however point out that the US has other alternatives and that Canada ie. Alberta could not survive without oil exports so i doubt that Alberta would endanger its own prosperity and would seek an accord with the US [if need be directly]. I have argued elsewhere that Alberta should seek a reconfederation deal since Ottawa fleeces the province to provide socialisation elsewhere.

As for lumber i am no expert so i defer to your arguments, but the WTO rulings are not in Canada's favour they are at best neutral. In the last ruling the WTO stated that the US was wrong to put tariffs on Canadian products and redistribute the monies directly to US firms. It did not state that Canada was right [contrary to media propaganda here which was falling over itself with droolong glee].

In fact i read a report a while ago that stated that Canada's lumber industry was over populated and inefficient, and now due to US actions it is now leaner, has thrown out inefficient operations and is better off. Those who have lost jobs would disagree but overall the industry seems to be in better shape. The last thing we need is more government money to buy jobs that are not necessary so another hair-and-teeth hand shaker can go to Ottawa on a gold plated pension plan on an anti-american program of 'saving jobs for our great land'.

More importantly like I said before subsidies don't pay. Even if your trading partner does it, don't do it - there are many studies on this and evidence. I will compile a list and post it

[FastNed]

Parts of both of my beat-up vehicles are made in Canada - I don't have a problem with that, at all. Personally, I feel like a chicken wishbone split between my Canadian heritage and family and my American birth.

The point I am attempting to make is that it has come to this: It is time for Canadians make a choice, to continue to define themselves as "anything but American", to continue to be represented by the likes of Parrish & Chretien who exult in their anti-americanism and to decide with whom they shall stand to be counted. For America, the world changed on 9 - 11 and it is no longer business as usual. Canada no longer has the luxury of being Anti-American without cost. And the cost will be high - do not be deluded to think that America will not pay it.

Immediately after 9 - 11, Canadian politicians had a choice - to be inside or outside the North American Defense Perimiter. They chose to be excluded and now crossings in Quebec and other places are being closed and barbed wire is being strung. Canada's choice, as was their right as a free Nation and one we do not begrudge no matter how short-sighted we happen to believe it to be. A very good illustration of the cost which must be paid for decisions. One follows the other and we can live with it, can you?

It's time to stand and be counted. If you wish to play in the game of life, you have to chose a side. It is becoming quite obvious which side your politicians have selected and if that's not the choice of Canadians, you had best speak up quickly and loudly . Absent evidence to the contrary, we can only conclude your politicians speak for you. And Canadians will live with the consequences.

[Guest]

I can only imagine how difficult it must be for Craig, RWR and so many of you of the same persuasion to have to live in a nation, often judged the best on the planet, populated by committed social and political moderates whose government, the one you so openly detest, conforms so closely to the will of its people. That expression of democracy appears to throw you into sheer apoplexy.

This isn't the United States. We agree with them on many, indeed most matters. We just don't agree with them on all matters. Various American administrations have berated our leaders for that. Johnson found our unwillingness to endorse America's adventure in Vietnam outrageous and he unloaded his rage on Lester Pearson. We let that incident pass as we have done on so many others.

The insurmountable problem you face is that social and political moderation are bedrock values for the Canadian people. You can mock and condemn that as much as you like, you can howl at the moon, but you're not going to change those values because they're too deeply entrenched. This, above all else, distinguishes us from our cousins to the south yet we and they rarely have difficulty finding common ground in our daily lives. How else could it be that we're approaching a bicentennial of peaceful coexistence?

The prevailing "you're either with us or against us" posturing of Washington places a real, unproductive and unnecessary strain on relationships between nations, and sometimes between their peoples. It isn't particularly helpful at a time when America is going to need all the co-operation and support it can muster. It stupidly squanders the immense outpouring of international goodwill that America banked in the wake of the terrorist attacks of 11 September, 2001.

Look at this "Coalition of the Willing" of which Mr. Bush so foolishly boasts. There isn't a country in that supposed coalition whose population supports this march to war. What kind of a coalition is that? To some it's a "Coalition of the Billing", nations that have been bought and paid for. Even Tony Blair has reached the point of yielding to the anger of his own people. Suddenly the Canadian compromise, Mr. Chretien's initiative, scorned only last week by Messrs. Powell and Straw, has become the framework for Britain's compromise resolution to the Security Council.

Those of you who bemoan that Canada has no principles, stands for nothing, really don't understand this country at all but, then again, I've seen very little in your rants that suggests you have much interest in understanding. What you want is America but that's not Canada and it won't be in our lifetimes. If you want that so badly, if that is the model of society and government that truly commands your respect, well, you know where to find it.

I've only been involved with this site for a couple of weeks. At first I found it interesting but I now see it as a tedious place where so many of you just come to howl and deride rather than contribute through informed and considered thought. At least that's my take on what I've seen here so I'll move on and leave this place to you. Goodbye.

P.S. By the way Ned, your threats are pretty silly.

[Guest]

Well said Wetcoast. I agree completely.

[Greg]

I think I can say without a doubt, the political discussion on this forum is easily of the highest quality on the Net. I've been to other political forums and believe me they're full of smut, racism, spam etc. Sure we all get little carried away with our positions sometimes, but for a good portion of the time everyone contributes something to the overall discussion.

It's also important to remember that a forum where everyone agrees with each other is indeed a boring one. Maple Leaf Web doesn't provide this forum just so you, the user, can personally change the opinion of someone else less informed. Because I an assure you, very few of you are going to change your positions on Iraq, social welfare spending etc. We provide this forum so users like yourself can contribute to the overall debate and maybe, just maybe, learn something about the other side of the debate.

[FastNed]

WetCoast, if you believe I am making threats, then I lack the eloquence of my convictions. There has been a sea change in this World; some will sink in it, some will swim or tread water and some will find they rise with it. That is reality, not a threat.

I do not believe the survival of America has been in this much doubt since the Revolutionary War. Our enemy are religious fanatics scattered and sheltered among several dozen Arab Countries and quite simply, can you tell me how one fights a religious war? Or more to the point, how does one do so without it becoming a Crusade with all the implications of the extinction of a Religion?

Odd, isn't it, that we Christians who believe that His Kingdom is not of this World are face to face with a Warrior Religion, a religion of conquest and subjugation which believes that success will bring their version of His Kingdom to exist in the here and now. And the choices we see available to us are die, submit and convert or change the equation - change the Arab World and offer a better future not based upon this particular religious world view. (And perhaps we pray that a Luther is sent to them.)

For the fifty years of the cold war, we took allies where we found them; fifty years of different politicians making deal after deal, sometimes with people that disgusted us and there were mistakes made. Some very bad mistakes and in retrospect, it would have been better had we never been involved with these people and there were politicians we never should have elected and policies we never should have implimented. Perhaps that is a hidden price of democracy but all we can do now is learn from our errors and do better in the future. Adults have learned that you can not dwell in the past or wish yourself into the future, you can only live each day as it comes. Those who oppose us because of the past do not understand the reality of the present.

We are fighting for our right to exist, to live free, to continue our revolution begun on this continent several hundred years ago. Call it serendipidity, call it the Law of Unintended Consequences but 9 - 11 awoke the American People; it sent us back to our revolutionary roots and provided a bitter lesson that survival of our way of life and our Nation required of us, as of our founders, that we pledge our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor to our vision of America. We are determined that America will survive, that we will prevail and that America shall continue to be the beacon of freedom within this world. It is not a pledge to be taken lightly or passed over as politics as usual. Those that mistake this will pay a price for it, perhaps a very heavy price.

Some people can live a lifetime and never reach a moment when they have to stand and be counted. For some, that moment comes and they never realise it and their choice is made by default. But when that moment comes, a choice must be made. On 9 - 11, a finger of fire wrote "Mene Mene Tekel Upharsen" in the sky above America and Americans have made their choice, they have risen to the call. Now the rest of the World must choose if they are part of the solution or part of the problem.

How will Canadians choose?

[Neal.F.]

I concur with Greg as to the quality of the discussions that take place here. Though we differ in our opinions I must say the posters here treat each other with respect,and don't resort to ad-hominem attacks, smear and partisanship for its own sake.

The points are thoughtful and I haven't seen any real malice here.

This is civilized debate...something missing from the political scene in Canada since the dawn of the twenty second soundbite.

Ok everyone..... big group hug!

[Craig Read]

That is pretty funny Peter. I would concur if you were a female

But Wet and Mod don't like to listen, let them go, who needs them.

Some here believe that Canada's anti-americanism does not impact trade. According to the BCNI and others - it surely does. NAFTA is not a free trade agreement but a very detailed sectoral trade agreement. Softwood lumber, culture, transport, water and other resources are not covered under NAFTA. You anger the US with immoderate anti-American racism and you will put many jobs here at risk.

There is no question we should be supporting the 30 nations that are supporting the US invasion of Iraq and by extension making the UN security council relevant. Canada is actually undermining the UN, its relationships with Britain and the US, and its standing in the world. The very opposite of what it should be doing.

This is very stupid politically and economically. But it buys votes domestically and reinforces the 'us vs. them' racism. This is pure national socialism at work.

To reinforce its anti-americanism, Canada has well decided to ratify Kyoto. This is nothing more than a foreign aid scheme and redistribution of money. The cost ? The Government's own study says it will cost each family $4000 by 2008 in extra taxes. That is Net. It does nothing about climate change or the environment.

210.000 megatonnes of CO2 is emitted naturally into the atmosphere. Mankind adds on 5 % of this total. Get beyond the CBC and read about Kyoto - 18000 leading scientists have signed a petition on why the science from the UN is not science - but PR. The entire science of Kyoto is bunk. Why did we sign it ? Because the US wouldn't - Stewart in 1997 on her way to Japan said they would sign the deal no matter what, and of course Chretien wants to be the UN secretary general.

Why did the US not sign it ? It can't afford to wipe out 2 % of its economy, and it actually had a debate on Kyoto in the Senate. Kyoto was defeated 95-0 after the debate. This includes left liberals from Minnesota, California and New York. They all shot it down.

Did Canada debate Kyoto ? No. Does Canada debate its military role in the world ? No. Does Canada have a real foreign policy that upholds its national interests ? No of course not, it is about buying votes and raising taxes.

Canada is run by people interested in social engineering, votes and power, as well as gold plated pensions.

They are making a mockery of us all. Anti-americanism is just the racist element of Canadian national socialism. Hitler would understand.

[AgentSmith]

I think its important to make the distinction between Anti-Americanism and legitimate democratic debate and criticism.

I think also a lot of people who are anti-war and anti-imperialism (pax Americana) are being painted unfairly as Anti-American.

Sounds very much like the debates during the Vietnam war.

[Craig Read]

Anti-war protestors and those who leave their clothes off, when they really should put more on given their ugliness, do not debate the merits of the case.

They propose no alternative to some facts:

-Iraq terrorises its own people, contravening the UNO - why doesn't the UNO condemn this and liberate Iraq ?

-Iraq is 2 years from building a nuke - this is from their lead scientist who defected and from Hussein's son in law who defected. What do the anti-war nude protestors say about that ?

-Iraq has massive stockpiles of anthrax and chemical weapons - not destroyed. What is the plan of the anti-war, anti-reality protestors to prevent Iraq from using or selling this stuff ?

-Iraq is paying for terrorism - $25 K per hit in Israel and funding groups in Israel and Iran. Where are the plans from the anti-thinking anti-everything nudes on this one ?

The anti reality, anti everything, protestors are short not only on common sense and perspective but they cloud all issues with virulent anti-americanism.

I have yet to hear someone who is anti-war come up with a credible plan to solve these problems.

The only solution is more time for the Useless Nattering Organism to inspect.

As the former Chief Scientist of Iraq's bomb building program said, they have been fooled now 3 times. Inspections are useless and now it appears that Blix and team are hiding evidence.

Nasty.

[AgentSmith]

"Anti-war protestors and those who leave their clothes off, when they really should put more on given their ugliness, do not debate the merits of the case."

Thats a general statement that I don't think applies to debaters here. 'Anti-war protestors' is like referring to Americans as 'warmongers' its a label that unfairly paints and generalizes, and creates barriers to the kind of real debate you claim you want to engage in...

[Craig Read]

Anti-war, anti-reality, protestors. They offer nothing but anti-Americanism or 'its all about oil'. What nonsense. For France and Russia it is about oil - $17 billin in fact in money. Anti-war, pro nude, anti-reality activists are wrong and have been wrong on every issue. They have 0 credibility. Especiallly when naked.

Here is a good letter in a newspaper today, thankfully some Canadians are still realists:

============

AS THE debate over war with Iraq hits a fever pitch, I've been listening to the arguments from both sides and ask myself this question: Where were these peace activists on Sept. 11, 2001? My guess is they were on a desert island with no TV or radio. I, for one, remember the bodies falling from windows, grown firemen sobbing and the body parts of men, women and children being picked up and put into plastic bags. Luckily for the "silent" majority that does remember and doesn't want to ever see that happen again, we've got U.S. President George Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair, along with other strong-willed nations (Australia and Spain to name two). These people remember and understand that passivity only will bring on more 9/11s. Granted, there is a hint of hypocrisy from the U.S. in it's dealing with Iraq and the way it is handling North Korea. One can only hope that after Iraq is liberated and Saddam is overthrown, The U.S. and its allies continue the fight for justice in every corner of the globe. P.S. Last time I checked, 86% of our goods went to the U.S. The PM may want to join the fight for justice instead of risking the livelihood of the citizens he is supposedly representing.

Bryan S. Khan

Scarborough

===========

Well Bryan i doubt Canada will wake up. We love the Useless Nattering Organism too much. Pity.

[Craig Read]

What is with CBC radio. Has anyone tuned in ? I hate that station. Yesterday i heard the following from solemn wise prophets:

-The War is illegal [it certainly is not]

-UN must approve all international war activity [there is no precedence for this at all]

-Canada is right to ridicule the US for attacking Iraq over oil [this is truly bizarre, as Saudi Arabia could easily produce as excess capacity Iraq's entire output]

-There is no link between Hussein and the war on terror [ok so nukes, and WMD are ok in the hands of a pyschotic, nice logic]

-People are getting hurt [as opposed to the 50.000 that are murdered every year by Hussein, interesting morality]

Time to pull the plug on the Communist Bu**Sh**ting Corporation. NO more public funding. Privatise it so we can have some intelligence on the radio please.

[Moderate Centrist]

Craig,

Why do you listen to it in the first place. There are plenty of private radio stations available to get your news from.

As for private news programing just take a look at what they have on some of the major networks in the states - lot's of pretty faces and no brains.

And you're wrong again on Hussain -

Saddam is not a terrorist in the sense of Osama Bin Ladin and no link has been established between Hussain and Bin Ladin Period!

Also - the 50,000 people murdered has been thrown around quite a bit. Let's get a source on that.

[Guest]

Here is your source

Iraq’s Crime Of Genocide: The Anfal Campaign against the Kurds

ISBN 0-300-06427-6

Quote

Iraq’s Anfal campaign of extermination against the Kurdish people living within its borders resulted in the death of at least 50,000 and as many as 100,000 people, many of them women and children. This book, co-published with Yale University Press, investigates the Anfal campaign and concludes that this campaign constituted genocide against the Kurds. Unquote

[Guest]

Well that’s a start.

Is that 50 – 100,000 people every year? Every two years? In ten years? Since Saddam took power?

We need to get specific here.

[Craig Read]

According to UN numbers and the British support them, Hussein murders through various means on average 50-75.000 people per year. 25.000 or more are children. These numbers are also sourced in detail by Ken Pollack in his recent book The Threatening Storm. Pollack is a hawkish dove so to speak. Rather ambivalent about the war but recognises the threat Hussein poses.

This is indeed a liberation for the Iraqi people. A main point that I have is that not supporting this liberation is equated to a war crime. If the UN truly believes in its own rhetoric and is unable to stop the murdering of civilians in Africa, Kosovo, Iraq and elsewhere, than what good is it.

==========================================

For those who wish to support America here is website and email to express support --next week there is a rally April 4 starting in Nathan Phillips square i believe at noon in Toronto: www.friendsofamerica.ca

[email protected]

you can write in and express your support. i think the post is collecting the emails and will forward them to our collective embarassment in Ottawa.