Parrish set to rejoin Liberals?

[cybercoma]

ok then I am kind of having trouble with why people are mad at parish, this general has absolutely NO BUISNESS at all giving his opinions on anything but direct military evolutions okayed by the government. He’s not an elected official and he should be muzzled, not having moronic generals go off at press conferences is one of the reasons that the Canadian military has always maintained a respectability not found in most other nations. It’s not something I am anxious to see change.

Regardless of whether you agree with him, he should keep his mouth shut.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That's what I'm talkin' about....

[Argus]

ok then I am kind of having trouble with why people are mad at parish, this general has absolutely NO BUISNESS at all giving his opinions on anything but direct military evolutions okayed by the government.

Drivel. The CDS is not permitted to question government policy in public, but that is his only limitation.

He’s not an elected official and he should be muzzled, not having moronic generals go off at press conferences

I'm willing to bet Hillier is a helluva lot smarter and more knowledgeable than you are - about just about everything.

Then again, who wouldn't be?

is one of the reasons that the Canadian military has always maintained a respectability not found in most other nations. It’s not something I am anxious to see change.

The Canadian military has no respect in Canada, and nobody much cares about its welfare. If they did they wouldn't have allowed it to be run down to rusting impotence. In the US, the people are actively and intimately involved with their military, and care mightily about the welfare of their soldiers. Canadian soldiers don't even wear uniforms off base in many places so that left wing zealots won't sneer at them and call them names.

[Yaro]

Drivel. The CDS is not permitted to question government policy in public, but that is his only limitation.

Long standing tradition has been that Canadian generals have not spoken of anything but clear facts, clearly this man wishes to push us towards a more personality driven military. I am saying there are no benefits to letting a monkey operate a type writer, and monkeys are what most military men are.

The Canadian military has no respect in Canada, and nobody much cares about its welfare. If they did they wouldn't have allowed it to be run down to rusting impotence. In the US, the people are actively and intimately involved with their military, and care mightily about the welfare of their soldiers. Canadian soldiers don't even wear uniforms off base in many places so that left wing zealots won't sneer at them and call them names.

I for one believe that we should be doubling our military expenditures, I don't think we need a larger military but we certainly need a better equipped and paid one. But I would put the caveat of never again buying any American equipment.

I am sure that we could manage to sweet talk the Russians into selling us a hundred or so Su-35's and some T 95s or Black Eagles until we got our own productions up to speed.

It would also be nice to build and maintain about 300 or so long range 10-30 megaton nukes, seems that nobody gets to sit at the big table without them.

As for the Americans, I ask you who gives a shit how the Americans do it? They are a country born by the sword who doesn't yet realize the sword has become largely irrelevant. If you’re hitching your wagon to the "American way" then you had best prepare for the reality that it’s going to be a short bumpy ride.

In the end it’s once again obvious you have no clue what you are talking about, it’s sad that you’re so representative of the increasingly uneducated population.

[Argus]

Drivel. The CDS is not permitted to question government policy in public, but that is his only limitation.

Long standing tradition has been that Canadian generals have not spoken of anything but clear facts, clearly this man wishes to push us towards a more personality driven military. I am saying there are no benefits to letting a monkey operate a type writer, and monkeys are what most military men are.

You never can get a lefty to talk for very long without exposing the hypocrisy native to the breed. In your earlier post you were condemning him because you said the Canadian military had the respect of the people here and you feared his kind of comments might jeapordise that respect. Yet it doesn't take long to reveal the typical lefty wine-and-cheese eater mentality that all military people are ignorant swine.

The Canadian military has no respect in Canada, and nobody much cares about its welfare. If they did they wouldn't have allowed it to be run down to rusting impotence. In the US, the people are actively and intimately involved with their military, and care mightily about the welfare of their soldiers. Canadian soldiers don't even wear uniforms off base in many places so that left wing zealots won't sneer at them and call them names.

I for one believe that we should be doubling our military expenditures, I don't think we need a larger military but we certainly need a better equipped and paid one. But I would put the caveat of never again buying any American equipment.

So to sum up. You don't know anything about the military, but you highly disrespect those who are in it. You want to spend oodles more money, but without hiring more of those icky soldier types with their nasty guns. More pay? Why should they get higher pay when they're nothing but monkeys? And btw, do you have the first clue about what the military pay rates are? They're actually quite generous.

And, of course, the typical lefty anti-Americanism. You're becoming nothing but a particuarly shrill cliche. Buying American equipment would save us a ton of money. And it tends to be the best quality. Where we go wrong is we usually decide to build the equipment here, and what kind of equipment depends not on military needs but who's offered the ruling party the highest bribe. We could often buy off the shelf US stuff for a fraction of what we pay to build it here.

I am sure that we could manage to sweet talk the Russians into selling us a hundred or so Su-35's and some T 95s or Black Eagles until we got our own productions up to speed.

And why should our soldiers use third rate crap? Do you drive a Yugo?

It would also be nice to build and maintain about 300 or so long range 10-30 megaton nukes, seems that nobody gets to sit at the big table without them.

There's a unique idea for a lefty zealot. But then again I bet you'd want them all pointed at the Americans. Billions and billions in worthless bombs to serve no purpose but let you wag your weenie at the Americans and pretend you were a big man like Uncle Sam.

As for the Americans, I ask you who gives a shit how the Americans do it? They are a country born by the sword who doesn't yet realize the sword has become largely irrelevant.

Which is why we should double our spending on the military and build nukes!

God, this is too easy!

[Yaro]

You never can get a lefty to talk for very long without exposing the hypocrisy native to the breed. In your earlier post you were condemning him because you said the Canadian military had the respect of the people here and you feared his kind of comments might jeapordise that respect. Yet it doesn't take long to reveal the typical lefty wine-and-cheese eater mentality that all military people are ignorant swine.

Are you trying to prove what a simpleton you are? Trying to define the word maybe? The Canadian military has the respect of governments all over the world for doing what they are asked to do and not becoming a political entity. Is that clear enough for you? The vast majority of military people are social rejects, human history has displayed this well enough but by all means show the man occasions in which the military has proven to be the refuge of the intellectual giants.

So to sum up. You don't know anything about the military, but you highly disrespect those who are in it. You want to spend oodles more money, but without hiring more of those icky soldier types with their nasty guns. More pay? Why should they get higher pay when they're nothing but monkeys? And btw, do you have the first clue about what the military pay rates are? They're actually quite generous.

I know more about the military then you could ever dream of knowing. The military pay rates are PATHETIC; if you knew anything about the military you would know this. What has largely happened in the military however is that in order to maintain people and to justify paying them higher wages many have received undue promotions to the point where our military is insanely top heavy in officers. The reason I don't want more soldiers is because there will never be an occasion in which a large conventional force is relevant and our military is pretty proportional with every other military in the western world outside the US. But you know all this with your well researched position so I don't know why I bothered.

And, of course, the typical lefty anti-Americanism. You're becoming nothing but a particuarly shrill cliche. Buying American equipment would save us a ton of money. And it tends to be the best quality. Where we go wrong is we usually decide to build the equipment here, and what kind of equipment depends not on military needs but who's offered the ruling party the highest bribe. We could often buy off the shelf US stuff for a fraction of what we pay to build it here.

And of course the typical Argus stupidity, I could care less about the US, I just realize (through actual thought and research) that following there methodology in the new reality isn't viable. But I can certainly understand your steadfast reliance on talk radio and Fox news to provide you with your view.

As for military equipment, I will be brief. You have no idea what your talking about, you are so far out of your depth talking about military equipment with me you might as well take a good long run at brick wall right now. American equipment is overrated, way overpriced and extremely unreliable.

Among those that know about these things American military productions have become something of a joke always run up in cost and with released specifications way above there actual practical capabilities there are many many examples of Russian equipment built in the 70's that outperforms all but the very best current gear.

And why should our soldiers use third rate crap? Do you drive a Yugo?

The Su-35F is the best current fighter in the world; it is well suited to the Canadian environment being highly resistant to the weather and has extremely long range. It is a near perfect fit for the Canadian environment; did I mention that it doesn't inexplicably crash periodically as well?

The Black Eagle is one of, if not, the best MBT's in the world. It is tough enough to have a negative penetration on anything short of a 132 at all angles. It is lighter, faster and better armed the M1A2. The only weakness the vehicle has is its electronics suit which we could upgrade ourselves.

Both of these pieces of equipment could be obtained for far cheaper (read about 1/2 the price) of the crap that we buy from the US.

Third rate crap? I am talking about the luxury editions.

There's a unique idea for a lefty zealot. But then again I bet you'd want them all pointed at the Americans. Billions and billions in worthless bombs to serve no purpose but let you wag your weenie at the Americans and pretend you were a big man like Uncle Sam.

I wouldn't want any consistent solutions, there’s no point. I want them for the same reason that everyone else wants them because without them nobody respects you. The fact that your so pro American and anti nuke speaks nicely to your ignorance though.

Which is why we should double our spending on the military and build nukes! 

God, this is too easy!

We should double our spending in our military to develop a small elite conventional force that can serve our purposes anywhere and we should have a nuclear deterrent which would, you know, deter anyone regardless of who they are or where there from thinking about "claiming Canada".

I kind of feel sorry for you, I keep shooting you with a 44 and you keep hitting me with spitballs.

[Shakeyhands]

I think it may have been the way it was delivered.  I don't think that Canadians as a whole take to people calling others scumbags (this is kinda of funny, no?) While we may privately think some as scumbags I think that we keep that private, for the most part.  It also puts Hillier in the cowboy image that we see GWB as. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Note to self: always be polite when talking about subway-bombers and political regimes that hold public executions of homosexuals and adulterers in soccer stadiums to set a moral example. Remember, train-bombers and gay-killers have feelings too.

-k

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I don't think that any one would disagree with Hillier on his general feelings but we expect those holding office or senior positions to use better language than that. Nothing to do with PC.

[mirror]

MP on Gen. Hillier: 'Muzzle the beast'

Outspoken Independent MP Carolyn Parrish sent an open letter to Defence Minister Bill Graham yesterday, blasting his chief of defence staff as "truly barbaric" and calling on the government to "muzzle the beast."

Parrish, who was turfed from the Liberal caucus after calling Americans "bastards" and stomping on a George Bush doll for a satirical TV program, said she's offended by recent comments made by Gen. Rick Hillier. Canada's top soldier called terrorists "murderers and scumbags" and said the armed forces must be prepared to kill people.

"For the top general in this country to emulate the simplistic phrasing of Mr. Bush, on behalf of you and our government, is to degrade the hard-earned reputation of this country and its people," Parrish wrote. "I am shocked that you have tolerated it."

Parrish called on Graham to tell the public Hillier does not speak for the government to build confidence that Canada is dealing with the terrorist threat in a calm, reasonable and confident way.

 

"Stop this undignified and confrontational dialogue before it gets even further out of hand," she wrote.

MP Parrish furious over Afghanistan mission

Independent MP Carolyn Parrish lashed out again at the Liberal government yesterday-- this time criticizing Defence Minister Bill Graham for sending combat troops to Afghanistan and Deputy Prime Minister Anne McLellan for making "taunting" remarks about Canadians being potential terrorist targets.

Ms. Parrish is furious that Canadians and their politicians have not been consulted about what she calls the new role Canadian soldiers are being asked to carry out in Afghanistan, a role that includes killing, which is not the traditional job of peacekeeping. She warns there will be outrage when Canadians in uniform return home "in body bags."

Well there go Parrish's chances of rejoining the Liberals I suppose but she is igniting a debate that we need to have in this country anyways. Is the real reason Canada is in Afghanastan to ensure the US gets its pipeline built there?

[Argus]

I don't think that any one would disagree with Hillier on his general feelings but we expect those holding office or senior positions to use better language than that.  Nothing to do with PC.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Perhaps it is this strange desire to have all holders of senior positions speak like bland, emotionless automatons which has caused us to have many senior positions to be held by - well, bland, emotionless automatons.

Frankly, I'd rather have people with a few sparks of humanity in them.

[BHS]

We don't buy all of our gear from the US:

French Howitzers

(Note: I read the article in paper edition of the Post yesterday or the day before. This appears to be behind the subscription firewall. Perhaps the same story was carried in other Canadian dailies.)

[BHS]

Much as I dislike doing so, I'm afraid I'm going to have to side with Yaro on the Hillier argument. While I agree with the substance and tone of what Hillier said as a Canadian citizen, it is unprofessional for a military commander to comment publicly on a political matter. Sorry Argus. As much as I want our military personel to have a spark of life in them, it should stay confined to their duties. Bottle it up, boys and girls, and unleash it on the country in your post-military political campaigns.

[kimmy]

MP on Gen. Hillier: 'Muzzle the beast'

Follow-up headline:

Gen. Hillier on Parrish: 'Muzzle the beast'

MP Parrish furious over Afghanistan mission

Independent MP Carolyn Parrish lashed out again at the Liberal government yesterday-- this time criticizing ... Deputy Prime Minister Anne McLellan for making "taunting" remarks about Canadians being potential terrorist targets.

"Taunting"? If she'd said "fear-mongering", I'd disagree but at least I'd have some idea what she was talking about. Taunting? huh?

"Terrorists will blow you up, nyah-nyah!" ...now THAT would be taunting.

Ms. Parrish is furious that Canadians and their politicians have not been consulted about what she calls the new role Canadian soldiers are being asked to carry out in Afghanistan, a role that includes killing, which is not the traditional job of peacekeeping. She warns there will be outrage when Canadians in uniform return home "in body bags."

Who ever said we were in Afghanistan as peace-keepers?

Well there go Parrish's chances of rejoining the Liberals I suppose but she is igniting a debate that we need to have in this country anyways. Is the real reason Canada is in Afghanastan to ensure the US gets its pipeline built there?

Well, I agree it's a debate we should be having, at least. Not enough Canadians seem to appreciate how vile the Taliban and its allies are. They're the embodiment of everything Canadians oppose. We should be proud to be part of the UN-approved mission to destroy them. I feel strongly enough about it that I will consider signing up myself. If the armed forces need an I.T. person or a good waitress, I will do my part.

-k

[Argus]

Much as I dislike doing so, I'm afraid I'm going to have to side with Yaro on the Hillier argument. While I agree with the substance and tone of what Hillier said as a Canadian citizen, it is unprofessional for a military commander to comment publicly on a political matter.

I don't believe it was a political matter.

Sorry Argus. As much as I want our military personel to have a spark of life in them, it should stay confined to their duties.

I think as CDS Gen Hillier was acting in accordance to his duties.

And I'm sure the people under him and the people going to Afghanistan understood his statement much better than they would have some bland pablum about defending democracy from evil doers.

[Yaro]

We don't buy all of our gear from the US:

French Howitzers

(Note: I read the article in paper edition of the Post yesterday or the day before. This appears to be behind the subscription firewall. Perhaps the same story was carried in other Canadian dailies.)

Oh great, now were gonna buy French weaponry. The only good weapons the French have were designed by the Germans (like there newest LeClerc).

What I really wish the Canadian military would do is buy 5 of these:

AN-124

Buying 5 of these would actually be a profitable enterprise just by renting out the moving capacity during downtime to other nations as Canada currently does with other countries to get there equipment moved.

Or if we really wanted to get ambishus we should hire the old design staff for the old Russian elekto planes. If we could get a Canadian company to get a head start on that it would be an unbelieveable windfall in jobs and money. Although I can't seem to find any links for it, maybe I am spelling it wrong? Does anyone else know what I am talking about?

[BHS]

Oh great, now were gonna buy French weaponry. The only good weapons the French have were designed by the Germans (like there newest LeClerc).

What I really wish the Canadian military would do is buy 5 of these:

AN-124

Buying 5 of these would actually be a profitable enterprise just by renting out the moving capacity during downtime to other nations as Canada currently does with other countries to get there equipment moved.

Or if we really wanted to get ambishus we should hire the old design staff for the old Russian elekto planes. If we could get a Canadian company to get a head start on that it would be an unbelieveable windfall in jobs and money. Although I can't seem to find any links for it, maybe I am spelling it wrong? Does anyone else know what I am talking about?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I believe the flaw was in manufacturing, not in design (for the French guns).

I have no problem with Canada purchasing heavy lift aircraft, or even going so far as to hire Russian aircraft design teams and building them in-house. It would be a huge advantage to our military either way, as you've pointed out.

I think you'll find, however, that the federal government has, since the Trudeau era (including Mulroney), taken the line that military weakness is a virtue. We can't be expected to participate in military action if we don't have a military. I doubt you're going to see anything like these jets being purchased as long as the Liberals stay in power, or as long as events allow us to stay out of the war on terror.

[Argus]

What I really wish the Canadian military would do is buy 5 of these:

AN-124

Buying 5 of these would actually be a profitable enterprise just by renting out the moving capacity during downtime to other nations as Canada currently does with other countries to get there equipment moved.

Or if we really wanted to get ambishus we should hire the old design staff for the old Russian elekto planes. If we could get a Canadian company to get a head start on that it would be an unbelieveable windfall in jobs and money. Although I can't seem to find any links for it, maybe I am spelling it wrong? Does anyone else know what I am talking about?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

While I would like to see us have more heavy lift aircraft I'm not sure buying them from Russia is the best idea due to the difficulty of obtaining spare parts, especially since things are more than a little unstable over there and I don't think it unlikely Russia will wind up being our enemy again before a very long time. They're just one coup away, after all.

And building them ourselves raises the problem of who we sell them to. In order to make these sorts of ventures profitable you need to sell to a lot of other people, or have a whopping big military as your main customer. US military suppliers have the advantage that they can produce large numbers of trucks, cars, tanks, APCs, aircraft, etc. knowing their own military will purchase most of them. Selling to foreign nations is just cream on top. Our aircraft would have to be significantly cheaper than anything comporable that the US or Europe builds in order to sell abroad. Especially since nationalistic pressures and self interest would cause Europe and the US - the biggest consumers, to buy from their own manufacturers.

[kimmy]

While I would like to see us have more heavy lift aircraft I'm not sure buying them from Russia is the best idea due to the difficulty of obtaining spare parts, especially since things are more than a little unstable over there and I don't think it unlikely Russia will wind up being our enemy again before a very long time. They're just one coup away, after all.

And building them ourselves raises the problem of who we sell them to. In order to make these sorts of ventures profitable you need to sell to a lot of other people, or have a whopping big military as your main customer. US military suppliers have the advantage that they can produce large numbers of trucks, cars, tanks, APCs, aircraft, etc. knowing their own military will purchase most of them. Selling to foreign nations is just cream on top. Our aircraft would have to be significantly cheaper than anything comporable that the US or Europe builds in order to sell abroad. Especially since nationalistic pressures and self interest would cause Europe and the US - the biggest consumers, to buy from their own manufacturers.

How about this one, from the same source Yaro linked to earlier:

Ilyushin IL-76

It appears as though it's very economically feasible to buy "westernized" versions with western-made engines and mechanicals and avionics, or buy used ones and do the conversions ourselves.

He says the cost of the fully modernized and westernized version is $50 million per plane, which sounds expensive until you consider the near $300 million per plane cost of the American C-17s that they're apparently looking at.

-k

[Argus]

How about this one, from the same source Yaro linked to earlier:

Ilyushin IL-76

It appears as though it's very economically feasible to buy "westernized" versions with western-made engines and mechanicals and avionics, or buy used ones and do the conversions ourselves.

He says the cost of the fully modernized and westernized version is $50 million per plane, which sounds expensive until you consider the near $300 million per plane cost of the American C-17s that they're apparently looking at.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'm not saying it is neccessarily a bad idea, provided the quality is there and the problem of spare parts is solved. It won't happen, however. Cost and efficiency have never been particularly high on the list where Canadian military purchases are concerned. Let's instead turn to the overriding factor involved:

How many jobs will this mean to Liberal ridings and how much profit to companies which have donated to the Liberal Party of Canada?

Not enough, I'm thinking, given Boeing's importance to Quebec and Quebec's airline industry's importance to the province's sense of self importance. No, this would not provide enough work for Quebec aircraft manufacturers and suppliers like Canadair and subsidiaries. So there's simply no point in considering it.

Remember that we could have bought nearly new, off the shelf frigates from the US, which was downsizing its navy at the time. We paid approximately ten times more per ship in order to build our own and spread the work and money around various Liberal friendly shipyards.

[THELIBERAL]

RE::Perhaps it is this strange desire to have all holders of senior positions speak like bland, emotionless automatons which has caused us to have many senior positions to be held by - well, bland, emotionless automatons.

It's better than having someone in a senior position talking trash like a rambo!

Ever heard the phrase An Officer and a Gentleman!

Apparently little of the officier cooth training didn't rub off on our General!

Like others have tried to explain it's not the drift of what he said it's the words he chose to say it!

[Argus]

RE::Perhaps it is this strange desire to have all holders of senior positions speak like bland, emotionless automatons which has caused us to have many senior positions to be held by - well, bland, emotionless automatons.

It's better than having someone in a senior position talking trash like a rambo!

Ever heard the phrase An Officer and a Gentleman!

\

Hmm, would he behave anything like your glorious leader, who is known to fly into red-faced rages wherein he screams obscenities in the face of underlings so that spittle covers their faces?

Such a gentleman, that Paul Martin.

[BHS]

RE::Perhaps it is this strange desire to have all holders of senior positions speak like bland, emotionless automatons which has caused us to have many senior positions to be held by - well, bland, emotionless automatons.

It's better than having someone in a senior position talking trash like a rambo!

Ever heard the phrase An Officer and a Gentleman!

\

Hmm, would he behave anything like your glorious leader, who is known to fly into red-faced rages wherein he screams obscenities in the face of underlings so that spittle covers their faces?

Such a gentleman, that Paul Martin.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

How about Chretien, master of the Shawinigan handshake?

[Black Dog]

RE: Heavy lift.

Why do we need a heavy lifter? As BHS's link above on teh AN-124 states:

It would be prudent for the CF to wean itself off equipment so large that it routinely requires such an airlifter.

Course it would also be prudent for Canada to focus on protecting Canada's territory, not serving as America's own Gurkhas.

Is there a good reason for Canadians to be in Afghanistan?

[Yaro]

While I would like to see us have more heavy lift aircraft I'm not sure buying them from Russia is the best idea due to the difficulty of obtaining spare parts, especially since things are more than a little unstable over there and I don't think it unlikely Russia will wind up being our enemy again before a very long time. They're just one coup away, after all.

This is actually a good point, but this is actually one of the good things about buying Russian as they provide the specs necessary for countries to build there own spare parts as the US doesn’t. It’s actually one of the big benefits and why I tend to look at Russian equipment readily.

And building them ourselves raises the problem of who we sell them to. In order to make these sorts of ventures profitable you need to sell to a lot of other people, or have a whopping big military as your main customer. US military suppliers have the advantage that they can produce large numbers of trucks, cars, tanks, APCs, aircraft, etc. knowing their own military will purchase most of them. Selling to foreign nations is just cream on top. Our aircraft would have to be significantly cheaper than anything comporable that the US or Europe builds in order to sell abroad. Especially since nationalistic pressures and self interest would cause Europe and the US - the biggest consumers, to buy from their own manufacturers.

Another good point, we would definitely have to come to some kind of agreement with a basket of nations, but I figure if Romania can build F16's and Apaches then we should be able to find people to purchase our productions. But I would certainly agree that we would have to line our ducks up before proceeding.

Remember that we could have bought nearly new, off the shelf frigates from the US, which was downsizing its navy at the time. We paid approximately ten times more per ship in order to build our own and spread the work and money around various Liberal friendly shipyards.

That’s true we did pay allot more, but isn't there a certain pride knowing that as of right now we have the best frigates in the world?

RE: Heavy lift.

Why do we need a heavy lifter? As BHS's link above on teh AN-124 states:

The reason that IMO a small group of these heavy lifters would be a good idea is because there are so many nations around the world that are in exactly the same boat as Canada when it comes to moving there heavy equipment. The market for these lifters would more then make up there purchase and cost in fairly short order at the rates that we are charged.

Course it would also be prudent for Canada to focus on protecting Canada's territory, not serving as America's own Gurkhas.

Is there a good reason for Canadians to be in Afghanistan?

I think there was, but since the US is building 8 bases there that seemed directly aimed at threatening China and Russia I think its time we left to be honest

.

[mirror]

Parrish, Liberals still on outs

What makes this such a farce is that within in a few more months PM Martin may not even be the prime minister any more, and then we will see whether Parish and the other Liberals want Martin any more.

In the meantime I presume the Liberals can count on her vote for what it's worth, which may be worth quite a lot before this minority government is over. Parish needs to learn some negotiating skills. Perhaps Jack Layton and the New Democrats could teach her some.

[Canuck E Stan]

Jack....negotiating skills? I'm surprised Martin didn't charge him a user fee.

[BHS]

User fee... that made me laugh.