ChuckerCanuck 2.0

Crass political manuevering at the expense of a people who would be ruled over by the most brutal regime of our time, represents politics at its worst.
 

There will never be enough reconstruction to satisfy the opposition.

I have no option but to agree.

And I agree that Duceppe probably feels threatened and wishes to survive.

I do not see the election imminent - I believe the Liberals will support Harper.

I agree that the mission is off-track and off-course, because we are not hunting down Osama Bin Laden. I do not believe in calling off the mission, however.
 

G & M
''Mr. Harper is said to be considering the idea of putting constitutional limitations on Ottawa's spending power as part of resolving the fiscal imbalance -- an initiative that, presumably, would be accompanied by tax cuts flowing from Ottawa's scaling back its activities.''

Gilles can not let PMSH solve fiscal imbalance, and deliver a budget.
The Bloc have been howling for years about fiscal imbalance, so how could they vote against it?
No fiscal imbalance, (and Quebec is a Nation) how does Gilles justify his big fat Canadian paycheque?
So he'll try to bring down the govt before PMSH can endanger his comfy sit in the House.
 

bo green,

I agree. The Libs will break ranks and vote with the Tories, but it will take major sting out of their anti-Afghan stinger.

I also agree that an election is not imminent, but that is the silly game that Gilles Duceppe wants to play.

We could debate the mission on your terms, which are noble and just, but that's not what Gilles is about. He's using this exactly as Biff describes.
 

wilson61,

so true. I think its a foolish thing to do because it will just become Issue 1 of the Campaign anyway.
 

now, I to bed because I'm in Truro, NS and have to wake up very early tomorrow.

Bonne nuit, tout le monde.
 

The troops heading for the next tour are now from Quebec.

Apparently it's one thing for Canadian soldiers to put it all on the line.

And it's entirely another for Quebec soldiers.

...upon which political hay can be made.

Really impressive.

If I'm in the Canadian forces, I'd be more than a tad disgusted right about now.

Only in Canada, eh?
 

Observation...

When I first looked at this poll from CTV about 185 votes were in, and the split was 86% to 14%.

Should there be quotas to help ensure women more fully participate in politics?

Yes 1122 votes (14 %)

No 6648 votes (86 %)

Total Votes: 7770

I find it striking that over 7500 votes later the split remains virtually the same.

I see this in online polls so often that I'd suggest this is the norm. It's this particular aspect of online polling that, IMHO, attests to their relevance...albeit it reflects the unique audience of said website, which can be taken into consideration.

I assume that when the results suddenly shift more than 5 points, someone's screwing with it. But that said, when the sampling involves several thousand votes it takes a helluva a lot of effort and time for someone/group to skewer a result.

The second reason I don't discount online polls outright is that votes are given in total anonymity. People aren't tempted to give an answer they think is either politically correct or what they imagine someone else wants to hear.

On relatively apolitical subject matter such as the above question, the results thereof have at least some merit.

FWIW.
 

"The Libs will break ranks and vote with the Tories, but it will take major sting out of their anti-Afghan stinger."

--I doubt it, if they do that not only will it show that the party isn't united under Dion, but they will also loss many votes to the NDP in the upcomming election because they will be the ONLY anti-war party.
 

Yet more solid evidence that gun registration really works
 

There must have been a LibBorg directive, the anti-religion attacks have stopped.
 

The CCF were the only anti-war party going into WW2, too.

At least they're consistent with their pathetic gutlessness and total disregard for human rights and freedoms.
 

but that's not what Gilles is about. He's using this exactly as Biff describes

Absolutely, I agree completely. He is just (pathetically) trying to stir up an issue.
 

Of course, when Duceppe uses Afghanistan as a stunt, the media call him on it and tell us he's only trying to score political points, save his career, position himslef to run for the PQ... etc.
When Dion comes out of the convention and uses Afghanistan as a stunt, he's a leader who wants to lead us out of this quagmire and focus on reconstruction.

The media doesn't call Dion on that bullshit. Thank God someone did.
 

I'm proud of a Canadian mission that kicks ass in order to get the job done. I have every respect for all in the military.

I'm with Sprigner.
 

I would hope that the Liberals think through this Afghanistan situation VERY CAREFULLY and VERY INDEPENDENTLY OF US INFLUENCE AND STRATEGY.

We SHOULD remain in Afghanistan and support the NATO actions there. However, the political leadership has it all wrong about the core strategy.

What is needed is NOT a US strategy of "search and destroy" against the Taliban, what is needed is the British approach in Malayia where they successfully put down a communist insurgency. We need to take a page from the Romans, and learn something about "laying seige" to the Taliban and their Al Quada allies and partners.

We also need to stay focused. When someone is prepared to die for a religious conviction that he should be dying to kill you, then you are left with no option but to dispatch him to his particular oblivion.

And as long as the Madras Conspiracy persists in covertly brainwashing its young to commit terrorist acts for political gain, we should be targeting and destroying this leadership covertly as well. Secret warefare was Osama's weapons of choice, and we are left with no option but to engage and destroy him and his kind, unfortunately there is no other option that I can see.

Europe and NATO together with Russia simply have to take off their rose coloured glasses and smell the coffee. All western countries need to first "innoculate" their own populations from which Islamo-fascists draw recruits in the name of Allah. We should be working overtime WITH Muslims in our countries, to help ensure that our own populations are much better protected from these sorts of security threats.

I think we need to face up to the fact that this is going to be a long haul, and that we need to isolate this bunch of criminals and either maintain that isolation until they die off, or alternatively destroy them when they leave you with no option.

A "cult deprogramming program" is also a top military spending priority, not more B2 bombers.

So the Liberals SHOULD FORCE AMENDMENTS UPON HARPER, and make sure that Canada does much more with "unconventional warefare" against the islamo-fascists, and much more to reduce troop casualities by having NATO change its tactics to those of the Romans, and their "seige" tactics.

It kind of adds a new dimension to John F. Kennedy's idea of a "quarantine".
 

Last night the National ran their newscast from CFB Edmonton.

They did some interviews with troops back from Afghanistan, as well as a feature on one lady who lost her son over there.

By the time it was over I was so choked I couldn't speak.

These people believe in what they're doing. Many are signing up to go back.

The lady recounted how her son told her once that "Canadians don't know what it's like to be poor. These people have nothing. Canada's poorest still have more than these people."

It seems that there are few things about this country that make me proud any more...but our Canadian soldiers are the best, and their honor and pride and determination to do what's right and decent brings me to tears.

Then I read the papers and listen to the news...

The Libs, Dippers and BLOC make me wanna puke in disgust. Self-serving asswipes aren't fit to wipe our soldiers' boots.
 

Dion is mindful of the unpopularity of the Afghan mission in Quebec, PRECISELY because the Tories committed Canada IN SECRET without proper DEBATE.

He has to "balance" the long term strategic interests of Canada, with those of current military strategies that are taking casualities at a rate roughly six times higher, then what Americans are suffering in Iraq.

Clearly, the problem is not strategic, that of destroying Islamo-Fascism. The problem has to do with American military doctrine in Afghanistan, which is not working as well as we would desire it to.

Canada NEEDS TO STEP FORWARD INSIDE NATO, and help DISPLACE American military doctrine with more traditional Canadian and British military doctrine, that of "flexibility", initiative, and surprise, and "covert operations" of the kind that Sir William Stephenson made famous during WWII.

Targeted assassinations work against fascists (to wit, the work of Joe Pickersgill in the assassination of the Butcher of Prague during WWII. That slowed down the German advance into the Soviet Union just enough so that the Russian Winter and the Red Army was able to decisively defeat them in Stalingrad.

The entire zone on both sides of the Afghan-Pakistan border the geographic area that produces and trains these operatives. So that is the area that must be quarantined and controlled.

Palistan and its military dictator needs to be forced off the fence, and encouraged to "engage". We need to be mindful of his limitations, and because he needs time, our military tactics must change to accomplish the mission.

Just look at how hard it was to arrest the cultist bigamist in the US who was being protected by his "Church" in the US. Osama is every bit as well protected by "believers".

But he shall not outlast NATO if we are able to prevail because "reconstruction" with a vast majority of Afghans, will neuter Bin Laudin politically. He is afterall, one of the worlds most wanted organized crime family bosses.
 

Springer, you really are dumb right wing work of art! READ MY LIPS! American military strategy DOES NOT WORK!

As for your puddle of blubbery s-h-i-t, save it for someone who is interested.

HARPER's misguided and uncritical support of Emperor George II, is what is KILLING CANADIAN TROOPS.

Harper should be VERY ACTIVELY WORKING INSIDE NATO to get the other countries to ABANDON American "military leadership" and get other advice from Germany, France and Britain, about "tactics" that will give Canadian troops a better chance of survival, and a better chance of achieving their very difficult mission against fanatics.

When I read your fawning garbage about Americans that have misled the entire WEST with their arrogance and ignorance, it does more than make me puke. IT MAKES ME DETERMINED THAT NEVER AGAIN ARE CANADIAN TROOPS GOING TO HAVE TO RELY UPON AN UNRELIABLE ALLY. Particularly one so inept and incompetent that an unacceptable number of Canadian troops have died through so-called "friendly fire" incidents.

Springer, you DUMMY, there is no such thing as "friendly fire"! Only "fire errors" that are corrected with Court Martials and firing squads.

Which is where the "neocons" strategy actually belong, in front of a firing squad.
 

"Canadians don't know what it's like to be poor. These people have nothing. Canada's poorest still have more than these people."

Man, is this ever true. Canadians talk about Americans being poorly-traveled, but more of us should really get out there and see what the world is like and how good - no, great - we have it here.
 

Fuck off Joe.
 

Jason, Canadians are one of the most disconnected, self-interested, and just downright spoiled societies on the planet.

All this naivity and smarminess isn't spawned from idealism, but rather selfishness.

It's, IMHO, what naturally emerges from nanny state mentality.

We're so used to freebies, life on a golden platter for the asking, and being absorbed in materialistic greed, we have no bloody concept whatsoever of what's going on in the rest of the world.

We are isolationist because it's easier that way. Then we don't have to deal.

My best friend in the world recently said to me, "I don't think I can support the Afghanistan thing any more."

"Why?"

"Because of our troops coming home dead."

I just about lost it.

"Hey! They're over there fighting vicious bastards so women and children can have more rights and freedoms than a fucking dog, for God's sake! Rights and freedoms you and me and our children take for fucking granted every day! rights and freedoms thousands of Canadians fought and died for!

NOBODY SAID IT WAS GOING TO BE EASY, DAMN IT! IT NEVER IS!

End of discussion.
 

"It's not the same mission at all now,"

"Mr. Harper requested a two-year extension without a clear mandate, without commitment from the other nations, without commitment from the government of Afghanistan, without knowing what we will do exactly."

--what's not true about these two statements?
 

springer said...

"Fuck off Joe."

Famous last words of a "neocon" whore that is completely fucked up with Ayn Rand's droppings, and without a clue as to what to do with the mess that he has created. Strange birds, neocons. Emperor George II is just as clueless in Iraq.

You are bankrupt Springer, in every respect, but primarily intellecturally. You are clueless and like Emperor George II, you are now is a steep death spiral.

Like the Harperons. Clueless.

Something like consulting with Gilles on Canadian Unity.

Is it any wonder then, that most Canadians regard "neocons" as lacking "integrity"???
 

Joe, can you please stop huffing gas before you post messages?

Thanks,

Deaner
 

THIS IS A LOAD OF CRAP!

"Hey! They're over there fighting vicious bastards so women and children can have more rights and freedoms than a fucking dog, for God's sake! Rights and freedoms you and me and our children take for fucking granted every day! rights and freedoms thousands of Canadians fought and died for!"

--what happened to the war on terror? after 911, shouldn't we be focusing on capturing/killing terrorist, and not spending our precious time and resources going after the Taliban?

--also, show me springer, where it says "officially" that the NATO mandate is to fight for other peoples rights and freedoms.
 

Joe, your next original thought will be your first.

Put your little red book down for a change and try using your own brain...assuming you have one.
 

joe, you're a nutcase.
 

Jac, if this ain't about rights and freedoms, then we're wasting our time and money on NATO, the UN, etc.

But then again, listening to Anan these days, where did I ever get the idea that the UN was about rights and freedoms, eh?

Fuck, what a waste of space that place has become.
 

jacobin said...
"It's not the same mission at all now,"

You are right to observe the inability of the Harpercons to steer the Ship of State in a fixed and clear direction. Like drunken sailers, they lurch from one heading to the next, depending upon which way the winds are blowing in from Washington.

The actual mission, at a strategic level, has not changed for Canadians in Afghanistan. Our National Security is intimately tied in with NATO and other European countries with the same stake in this matter.

What needs to change, is failed leadership of the NATO Alliance, coming from the US. THAT is the key problem, and that is what must be repaired AND SOON.

The mission remains valid in Afghanistan, just as the unilateral Anglo-American Invasion of Iraq remains invalid.

I believe that we need to step up to the plate, and figure out a way for Afghans to develop a real drug free economy. Once that is accomplished and they can properly pay their police officers and soldiers to protect their own citizens. And when that happens, we will permanently end the threat of islamo-facism to Canada and Canadians. Remember that Canadians ALSO died on September 11, 2001 in New York.

I favour a strong and open debate on Canadian peacekeeping missions abroad, and their length and duration. Afterall, at one time, we spent 30 years in Cyprus before Canadian troops could see the fruits of their labours, when Turks and Greek Cypriots could sit down and talk about their problems, rather then shoot at each other.

THAT is the crowning glory of Canadian military sacrifice and expenditures abroad, and its the gift of peace, order and good government, that is the Promise of Canadian Confederation.

Too bad that Amerikan Republikans with Canadian Passports (like Springer and Chucker) do not appreciate our own history more.

If they did, they would not be saying the dumb things they do on this website.
 

Dion got all righteous in May deriding Harper for playing crass politics with the mission over the two-year extension vote.
Dion played politics in that vote by voting against the mission extension to protect the Parliament.

Now he is playing crass politics in flirting with bringing down the government over the mission.

He has yet to offer up his true position other than to say he is keeping a close eye on casulties and offering up a Marsh(m)all(ow) plan for the region, when it isn't even secure. He isn't keeping his eye on things, he's licking his finger and holding it up to see which way the wind is blowing.
 

peaches said...

"joe, you're a nutcase."

If you love nutty things, you are going to LOVE Harper's Foreign Policy. What is crazier, or nuttier, than Mr. Harper going to a NATO summit conference and requesting MORE TROOPS for failed American leadership in Afghanistan???

Because, THAT IS WHAT THIS COMES DOWN TO.

I say "Fire the American Leadership in Afghanistan". The US generals remind me of the Colonel Blimps during World War I, that saw entire Canadian Regiments lost (Like the Royal Newfoundland Regiment, for example for whom Memorial University was built).
 

Chucker,

Your first thought was also mine. This has nothing to do with Afghanistan and everything to do with Stephane Dion.
 

deaner said...
"Joe, can you please stop huffing gas before you post messages?

Put a meter on it.
 

"Jac, if this ain't about rights and freedoms, then we're wasting our time and money on NATO, the UN, etc."

--yes, this is exactly why we should pull our troops!

"But then again, listening to Anan these days, where did I ever get the idea that the UN was about rights and freedoms, eh?"

--Anan and the UN aren't in afghanistan, it's a NATO mission.
 

come on springer, your a smart guy, answer these two simple questions.

--what happened to the war on terror? after 911, shouldn't we be focusing on capturing/killing terrorist, and not spending our precious time and resources going after the Taliban?

--also, show me springer, where it says "officially" that the NATO mandate is to fight for other peoples rights and freedoms.
 

Jac, the Taliban and al-Qaida, as far as Afghanistan is concerned, are virtually one and the same.

NATO is involved because of security, i.e., putting an end to al-Qaida's training base and keeping it that way.

And the way to do that is to bring about stability, security, and some sort of organized government on the ground in the country.

In doing this the people of Afghanistan can finally have a chance at a real country instead of the chaos and tyranny that has been their lot for decades.

I don't know why this is such a mystery to you.

Bottom line is that you're splitting hairs in order to hold onto your otherwise untenable position.

Nobody likes war, Jac.

But for the west to sit back and let murderous bastards exploit our disinclination to engage in a fight when that's the situation at hand is not an option.

Chamberlin played that card, as the US tried to play it, at the onset of WW2.

And it only cost 50,000,000 lives when it failed and Hitler went on a rampage, along with Italy and Japan.
 

springer, you're kind. jac doesn't give a crap. he knows exactly why the Taliban - we have to stop indulging these people.
 

"--Anan and the UN aren't in afghanistan, it's a NATO mission."

Not quite. The ISAF mission is authorized by the UN, but led by NATO. Since the UN has no troops of its own it always has to conduct operations by finding members willing to contribute, one of whom will be designated as the leader (either permanently or temporarily). In this case the leader was not a single member, but NATO as a whole.
 

"Progressive Conservative leader John Tory points out that at the end of the last fiscal year, the Liberal government went into an unplanned spending frenzy. They spent so much money, according to the auditor, that they wiped out $1.6 billion in what should have been a surplus.

“None of these transfers were originally planned for; that is none had been included in the government’s budget for the 2005/06 fiscal year, and in many cases, normal accountability and control provisions were reduced or eliminated to ensure the transfers would qualify for immediate expensing prior to the March 31, 2006 fiscal year-end,” said the auditor."


Liberal govts are terribly dishonest as a rule.The McGuinty one is in a class of its own.
 

If McGuinty has a surplus, he can't whine to Harper about needing more dough.

There's only one solution to this.

And Harper's on the right track.

Limit federal intervention in provincial spending jurisdictions.

Then transfer the points.

And then tell provincial governments that, if you need more money, you can justify higher taxes to your electorate.

Handled.
 

Troll much Joe?
 

Springer:

You are forgetting that Harper has to deal with bright lights like NB's premier Graham who this week suggested the solution to getting NB off welfare(equalization)is...get this....more welfare.If we get the leadership we deserve,we must of been verry,verry bad.
 

Jacobin,

Martin and Graham et. al. changed the mission and sent those troops south into combat knowing full well that many NATO countries will not follow and without any mandate from Parliament.

It's a bit rich hearing folks who sent them south without a mandate saying their fingers were crossed when Parliament gave a mandate to the extension.

If you want them out, fine. If the Liberals want to say they'd do it differently or even bolt, fine. But no need to pretend that Bill Graham and other Liberals didn't give Harper a mandate to extend.
 

Just so you know:

"Guess who successfully occupied Afghanistan?"
http://www.damianpenny.com/archived/008333.html

Mark
Ottawa
 

Might as well threadjack and invoke Godwin's Law on myself all in one go.

It's 1938 all over again. The Fuhrer is running a conference about how the Holocaust won't happen. The Czech state is about to crash and be wiped off the map. The folks who created that state must stop supporting it in the interests of world liberty. And the KKK even came back from retirement to send an envoy.
 

Better get those boys 'n girls home way before Valentines Day dude- us Torontonians ain't gonna shovel ourselves out if we are hit with another blizzard now are we?

Get your priorities straight.
 

springer

"the Taliban and al-Qaida, as far as Afghanistan is concerned, are virtually one and the same."

--you mean as far as your concerned, but the reality is that the U.S government and the rest of the world doesn't, because there not the same, and this is why people like you fudge the issue and pretend it's about rights and freedom.

"NATO is involved because of security, i.e., putting an end to al-Qaida's training base and keeping it that way"

--it's been done, bases destroyed, mission accomplished, bring our troops home, before more of them get killed for a lie.
 

Right, Jac.

And when we leave we can send a message to Bin Ladin: "It's all yours again, Sport! Sorry for the inconvenience."

Gotcha.
 

Duceppe no dick-tete.

People like to underestimate Stephane, but nobody underestimates Gilles.
There's gotta be some way an equal intellect like Harper can win him over.
 

springer

"And when we leave we can send a message to Bin Ladin: "It's all yours again, Sport! Sorry for the inconvenience."

--Are we suppose to stay there forever killing afghan women and children, to make sure terrorist don't come back?

and ironically there were "NO" al qeada in Iraq until the americans invaded in 2003, now 3% of the insurgents in Iraq are said to be al queada, and there newly elected so-called democratic government is pro-iran.

What a fucking mess!

WHY ARE THEY IN IRAQ ANYWAYS? there suppose to be going after bin laden and the terrorist, not Iraq

fuck springer, I swear sometimes you're your own worst enemy!
 

Jac, sometimes I wonder what planet you live on.

Canadian soldiers are over there "killing women and children"???

No, the terrorists are. In fact, killing women in the public square for such serious crimes as, oh, say daring to show their faces in a public place was their form of sport and entertainment.

And little girls?

You tell me, Jr., how would you like to raise your little girl knowing that she had a future of being treated with less respect than the dog out on the street?

But, hey! That's not your problem, eh?

You live in Canada.

Your biggest worry is how you're going to get a degree so you make six figures each year and keep yourself in two-car garages and beer.

...and still have time to post on internet sites like this about what a fucked up world this is with all these wars 'caused by...you know...us.

Right.

I hear ya.
 

springer

most Americans don't even know where Canada is on a fucking map, but they sure would luv to turn Iran in to a glass parking lot.Idiots.

what people forget is that people in general are good. most Iranians are good people, most Canadians, American, Chinese, African, European are good people ITS THERE GOVERNMENTS THAT ARE CORRUPT AND EVIL.There the ones that mobilize there people to hate one another, don't you get that?

The Taliban are Afghanistanis, it's there country, deal with it, it's who they are. They even form part of the so-called newly democratic government. In time will they adapt to a more western type culture, maybe, but killing someones Dad, uncle, brother, sister, mother and labeling them "taliban" isn't going to help achieve this! and that's what our soldiers are doing, IT'S A WAR, our soldiers are trying to kill Talibans, they are trying to kill Canadian soldiers.

Get them out NOW!!! No one should be ask to Die for a lie!
 

"--Are we suppose to stay there forever killing afghan women and children...
"...and ironically there were "NO" al qeada in Iraq..."

jaco - how does a question about Canadian involvement in Afghanistan turn into a rant about the US presence in Iraq? You wouldn't intentionally be muddying the waters, would you - or is it just your usual clarity of thought showing through?
 

Well, we'll all see how many people finally "die for a lie" when that psycho in Iran gets his hands on some nukes, eh?

And the Taliban is merely their form of government?

I guess that's easy for you to say.

No skin off your ass, right?

You might want to log in at CBC and watch the replay of the National from last night.

Fast forward to the section from CFB Edmonton and see if those troops who have been there, done that, share your apathy.
 

Deaner

"You wouldn't intentionally be muddying the waters"

--nope, clear things up for me Deaner

why are we in Afghanistan in the first place, and why is the U.S in Iraq today?
 

Dean, we're in Afghanistan today because GWB wanted to get even with Saddam.

So he had the Trade Towers blown up via a black op within the CIA.

Then he blamed it on a fictional group called al-Qaida that he made up.

And then he sucked in governments from around the world, including ours, to go kick the shit out of Bin Ladin et al in Afghanistan in his pretend war on terror.

Just thought I'd clear that up for ya.

You know?

All those films of terrorist training camps?

Shot on a secret sound stage just outta Burbank.
 

springer

"when that psycho in Iran gets his hands on some nukes, eh?"

--what about the psycho in North Korea, he already has nukes, and a long range missiles to deliver them!
and what about psycho's in China, Russia and dare I say it..."W"

And the Taliban is merely their form of government?

--Iran is govern the same way most Muslim nations are, including Saudi arabia uno the ally on the war on terror, the same nation that produced 15 of the 19 hijackers on 911.

"I guess that's easy for you to say.
No skin off your ass, right?"

Don't question my patriotism, just because I don't buy little plastic sticker flags that were made in china that say "support the troops"

you know how you support the troops, you bring them home, that's how you support the troops.
 

Jac, again...

Go watch that National clip.

Those doing the dirty work would not think you're supporting them at all.
 

a Marsh(m)all(ow) plan

Okay, now that's good. Really good.
 

springer

the soldier's are trained to do what there told to do, no questions asks, and the few that are in the clip probably think there fighting for a noble cause, just like every other military men/women on the planet.

what, you actually believe that when the soviets occupied Afghanistan in the 80's that they taught they were the bad guys? or when the Japs invaded the pacific you think they taught they were the bad guys?

hhhhhhhhhhaaaaaaahahahahahahaha

like I said earlier, on average 90% of the people are good, It's the governments that are corrupt and evil.

If you can't distinguish between the two forget it.
 

Jacobin, much as I agree with you on many occasions, I have to help out with a mid course correction.

The facts are that there really was a Holocaust. It happened, and there is so much evidence, that no sensible or reasonable person could deny it and still respect himself as a person who cherished the truth.

The facts are that Pearl Harbour really did happen. And the facts are that Beruit's civilian areas were bombed into oblivion killing thousands of civilians, women and children.

But when the President of Iran convenes a conference to "deny" "history", to deny the "truth", then this signals something very onerous, something very sinister, something that is deadly and dangerous.

When Emperor George II propagates a Big Lie that says that a country has nuclear weapons when it does not, when he invades a peaceful country and kills hundreds of thousands of civilians women and children, that also is JUST as onerous, just as sinister, just as deadly and just as dangerous.

There really are monsters out there that poison others with radioactive Polonium, that carry bombs into crowded theatres, that are so brainwashed, that they cannot even discern right from wrong.

Now for you Jacobin, you need to focus on "cause and effect", and make sure the "feedback" loops do not mislead you.

But at least you are trying. With Mark Kan Harpercrites like Springer and Chucker, they are pure works from the Gobbels Word Factory.

Then there is their entire sordid love in with Separatists, which is still another story of their complicity.

It only takes ONE to make WAR.

It takes TWO to make PEACE.

And it takes an entire community to make ORDER and GOOD GOVERNMENT.

How do you build a community with Osama Bin Laudin, or with Springer, or with Chucker, or with the Emperor???
 

yes joey, your words are so true, they make my soul tingle and my skin all goosebumpy, i've always said you and i should propagate making sweet love not war, our community would be the best and we could name our first born "polonium" please joey could you coocoo "cause and effect" in my ear tonite?

lovingly yours, eunice
 

joe green

pearl harbor didn't happen like they show in the movies. In the U.S the president doesn't have the authority to declare war, only congress can declare war. while the allies were fighting in Germany/Italy/Africa for years the u.s stayed out of the war, they needed to be attacked in order to get congress to declare war, and since japan and Germany had a mutual protection pact, when japan attacked pearl harbor, America entered the conflict against both Germany and japan.

here's the kicker, American for years tried to provoke japan to attack it. In fact the u.s had broken the Japaneses naval communication codes (purple codes) months before pearl harbor, FDR knew in advance the day and the time of the attacks but never warned the pacific fleet (however all aircraft carriers were conveniently at sea that day)

you joe green need to focus on (problem/reaction/solution)
in democracies, corrupt governments to achieve there solution need to create a false problem in order to get there people to react, thus this allows them to be the heroes in tabling legislation that provides a solution to the false problem that they created in the first place to achieve there goal.

think about it, this is chess not checkers, "cause and effect" is what moves people like springer
cause = 911
effect = Afghanistan and iraq

but in reality, the neocons wanted to go into Iraq and Afghanistan even before 911, enter (problem/reaction/solution)

create a problem -911
people react
solution-invade Afghanistan and Iraq

chess joe green, not checkers, chess!
 

yeah, three cheers to Canadian soldiers killing Afghan children.

That's what I want. More killing of Afghan children.

The debate really is that simple: on one side, clear headed Joe Green and Jacobin who want to stop killing Afghan children. On the other side, Chuckercanuck et al, who want to keep on killing Afghan children.

Hey Canada, decide already: do you want to kill more Afghan children? Yes or no.
 

Wouldn't it just be cheaper and more humane to abort them in advance?
 

Chucker asked thus

"Hey Canada, decide already: do you want to kill more Afghan children? Yes or no."

No!

Do we want to kill more Iraqi Children?

No!

Do we want more war?

No!

But it takes TWO to make Peace.

THEM and US.

Something like you and me Chucker.

I am not sure I WANT PEACE with a "neocon".

That is something like asking a NAZI to guard a Synagog, or asking Jerry Falwell to protect Muslims.

Getting into bed with a cobra, is just not very wise.

If a mongoose will not do it, neither will I.
 

Jesus, with every comment Sheena just gets better - and yet, each time I think she's become un-toppable. Genius.
 

Just doing my bit to stick up for the rights of oppressed women overseas, Jason.
 

yeah, but do they pay GST On Tampons?
 

Only after we sacrifice to bring them democracy, jacobin. One step at a time, eh?
 

what the? i've been displaced by a cobra and a mongoose...really joe, that is sooooo neokon of you!
 

Somewhere along the line in history we lost our guts. And no, not because we drank too much in the 60s and 70s.

Why is it that left wing governments these days view the death of a single one of their soldiers as an unmitigable tragedy? Irregardless of the situation?

Clinton withdrew from Somalia believing that it wasn't worth US lives or political capital. As a result, for the last 13 years we've had a failed state. And now, when it finally crawls out from it, it is run by Taliban-like Islamists.

The mission in Afghanistan should never have been sold as a mission to hunt down Osama. It should have been about saving the millions of Afghanis from the uncontested brutality of the Taliban regime.

For Liberals and NDP to call the Harper government anti-women but then suggest that we withdraw from Afghanistan and allow the Taliban to return to power shows how shallow they have truly become.
 

SO: "For Liberals and NDP to call the Harper government anti-women but then suggest that we withdraw from Afghanistan and allow the Taliban to return to power shows how shallow they have truly become."

Have truly become? Or have always been?

Chucker: threads were more interesting when Joe was non-grata.

Joe: You are a bore. Furthermore, you are a bore that refuses to learn from history: "at the airport in London, Chamberlain reads from the document that, he says, assures the "peace of Europe" and is a promise by both Germany and the United Kingdom "never to go to war with one another again."

Jaco: give your head a shake already. The fact that you are eligible to vote scares me.

Sheena: you rule, as always. Oh, to go back to the days when rags (literally) were not taxed. *sigh*
 

Candice wrote

"Joe: You are a bore. Furthermore, you are a bore that refuses to learn from history::

And you Candice are ugly.

And of course, NOW you know the rest of the story!
 

SouthernOntarioan

you think governments should "sell" war like advertisements on the tube?
Hey buddy, if Afghanistan isn't about Osama/al CIA duh/911 let's get the fuck out now!

Liberals/NDP/BLOC/CPC represent the people of Canada, they are elected by us, to go to parliament in order to get things done for us, they are not elected by the Afghan people.

and Candace, the feeling is mutual sista ;)
 

"Something like you and me Chucker.

I am not sure I WANT PEACE with a "neocon"."


Exactly Joe Green - you're a merchant of death and the only liar in town.

you wrap yourself in peacenick clothing only to get closer to people to slit their throats and steal their gold.
 

jacobin said...
SouthernOntarioan

"you think governments should "sell" war like advertisements on the tube?"

Actually, under some circumstances democratic governments do have to "sell war".

Churchill had to "sell" the war to the US and to FDR; that resulted in "lend lease" where America became the "arsenal of democracy" to use a phrase from the past.

Everyone forgets just how close the democracies came to losing the war against the Nazi.

Sir Wm. Stephenson, who ran British Intelligence during WWII, made that point on numerous occasions.

And one of the best kept secrets of the war, the British code breaking of "Ultra", was a major factor that the Allies had in defeating the Nazi.

During WWII, Eisenhower has SUPERIOR INTELLIGENCE. During the Iraq War, the Americans had ONLY BAD INTELLIGENCE.

In the US it legally takes an ACT OF CONGRESS for a DECLARATION OF WAR, and to get all the elected representatives to vote FOR war requires that this idea must first be "sold". Likewise, PEACE also must be "sold" in a democracy. When the US Congress "bought peace" in Viet Nam, the elected representatives also "bought" the idea of PEACE.

But in the past we used to have something called "truth in advertising" and that has gone by the boards.

Just look at Springer and Chucker. The LAST thing these two birds seek is the "truth".

That is the real difference between Democrats and Liberals on the one hand, and fascists and "neokons" on the other.

Stephen Harper and Brian Mulroney have absolutely NO INTEREST IN THE TRUTH. Canadians called him Lyin Brian for good reason. And of course we all understood that Herr Gobbels was a propagandist, not a reporter.
 

I dunno, as entertaining as reading Crazy Joe's posts can be at times, I don't feel like I'm getting much out of it.

I prefer to read that kind of stuff on sandwich boards strapped to weirdos on the street. That way, I can just read it, avert my eyes, then cross the street and get on with my day.

Joe, you're relentless, I'll give you that, but enough already. We get it.

Anyone else get the feeling that the second the troops DID get home, Joe would just complain about the fact that the dark overlords aren't doing enough to put an end to the humanitarian crisis going on in Afghanistan?

Say we did just send aid workers there to help out with reconstruction, education, etc... as a do gooder nation, and they started getting killed by the Taliban. What then?

But then Joe would then say he wouldn't have sent anyone there in the first place because of other outrages going on elsewhere in the world that are more worthy/pressing/whatever and that it's all an outrage for some other reason...

Just seems noone can ever do right by you Joe. You can't please all the people all the time I guess, but come on man!
 

Chucker the Propagandist wrote:

"you wrap yourself in peacenick clothing only to get closer to people to slit their throats and steal their gold."

Your very choice of words betray your utter contempt for peace, for civilians, for people. Who uses words like "peacenick" except for war mongers like you, Herr Gobbels, and Emperor George II???

Now we see Lyin Brian telling the media that the "environment" is the key to winning the next election. Just a little late don't cha no?

As for warfare, and fascists, and Nazi, and capitalist imperialists a la the Empire of Japan; the ONLY SANE policy was the demand for "unconditional surrender".

The ONLY SANE policy vis a vis Al Quada and the Taliban, IS, UNCONDTIONAL SURRENDER. AND THAT is the ONLY SANE policy when we look at fasicsts within our own borders.

We really need to have Springer and Chucker declared "dangerous offenders" and then incarcerate them permanently.

Propagating lies is not unlike crying out "fire" in a crowded theatre. "Freedom of Expression" has nothing to do with that.
 

Propagating lies is not unlike crying out "fire" in a crowded theatre.

Actually there's worse words you can yell in a crowded theatre. Ask Michael Richards.
 

"'You wouldn't intentionally be muddying the waters'

"--nope, clear things up for me Deaner"

Two different conflicts, with different reasons for engagement. It is possible to agree or disagree with either of them, independent of your view on the other, although in practice I suspect that those who support the US-led action in Iraq also support the UN/NATO action in Afghanistan. Arguing against the Afghanistan mission on the basis that the Iraqi engagement is wrong, poorly founded, illegal, etc. is deliberately muddying the waters.
 

The mission in Afghanistan should never have been sold as a mission to hunt down Osama.

Personally, I think that should have been Job Number One, in my personal view.

to call the Harper government anti-women but... allow the Taliban to return to power

Absolutely concur - they're really displaying a poor moral compass with these two disparate positions.
 

Oh, to go back to the days when rags (literally) were not taxed. *sigh*

Wait a minute - there was a time in the past when tampons etc. were not taxed?? If so, when did that change? I regard tampons and pads as grocery staples; if muffins and cookies aren't taxed, neither should tampons.
 

Er, I didn't mean anything suggestive by "muffin" and "cookie", I was just trying to find an untaxed edible treat.
 

And... I meant nothing suggestive by "edible treat" either. I can't win here!


However, thinking it over, "If muffins and cookies aren't taxed, then why should tampons be?" could be a killer slogan for a movement. I think I just struck gold, baby.
 

Now we see Lyin Brian telling the media that the "environment" is the key to winning the next election. Just a little late don't cha no?

Wrong Joe Green. Anyone who supports the environment would support enviro initiates at any time. By your logic, Stephane Dion is also a 'bit late' for attempting to ditch his previous record with a new and improved environment policy and some green scarves.
 

Peaches wrote"

"Anyone else get the feeling that the second the troops DID get home, Joe would just complain about the fact that the dark overlords aren't doing enough to put an end to the humanitarian crisis going on in Afghanistan?"

Look Peaches, I think you should READ what I wrote and I think you should develop a little respect for the truth.

I NEVER advocated that we "pull out" of Afghanistan. For one thing, that would be a violation of the NATO Charter to which we are a signatory.

We today are in Afghanistan as a DIRECT result of the attack upon the United States on September 11, 2001 by covert operatives that were based in Afghanistan.

We need to accept nothing BUT UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER from these fanatics. Its precisely the same proposition we faced in WWII. And it calls for exactly the same "policy".

However, in order to win, we require sound leadership, and the Americans are NOT providing it. That is why the NATO Council MUST displace the American position within NATO sufficiently to allow alternative leadership from Europe or Canada, to change the tactics on the ground that in fact DOES secure an UNCONDTIONAL SURRENDER.

THAT, Peaches, is my position. We are in Afghanistan FOR THE LONG HAUL, like we were in Cyprus. I accept that is necessary. And so is the aid.

What I DO NOT ACCEPT is the Harpercon conduct of the war, and I do not accept that somehow the NATO Allies should lie prostrate before the Emperor's declarations in Washington that "father knows best". The American "leadership" is inept, incompetent, dangerous, and at times, as dumb as a sackful of hammers.

We need to CHANGE those that lead the NATO alliance to "victory" as we define it, and that means that Al Quada and Taliban covert operatives are either dead or in jail.

That means nothing less than capturing Bin Laudin, dead or alive, and his brother-in-law, the Taliban shiek Omar. The ONLY plausible end is the one that happened to Al Zakawi, that fanatic that moved into Iraq after Emperor George II, decided that the best way to fight islamo fascists was in an urban guerrila setting.

So he issued them an open invitation to come to Baghdad and to wage urban warfare with his troops, on the questionable grounds that his preference was to fight the Taliban and Al Quada fanatics on the streets of Baghdad rather than the streets of Washington.

The British model was superior, in that they prefered to fight the communist insurgents in Malaysia in the remote mountains in northern Malaysia, where the fighting was isolated from the civilians populations.

You see, its not that hard to understand the PROBLEM. The problem is "failed American Leadership".

Unfortunately, Stephen Harper is so enthralled with the Emperor, that he is not prepared to act in the best interest of Canadians and Canadian troops by demanding changes in the NATO Alliance leadership. There are elements of NATO that actually knows how to win the PEACE.

Its no different then winning the PEACE in the blog sphere. You must be relentless, until the Chuckers are resigned into a puddle of naval gazing introspection, and rendered utterly impotent from ever again mounting wars on the foundation of Big Lies.

The greatest enemy that fascists face is the "truth". The truth shall indeed, set you free.

And the simple unvarnished truth, is that Springer and Chucker are lyin "neocons" that are going to lose the "war" that they started with Liberal Democracy.
 

Jason wrote:

"Personally, I think that (i.e. hunting down Osama Bin Laudin) should have been Job Number One, in my personal view."

Jason, we agree. Totally.

Churchill and FDR, would NEVER have taken their eye off the ball, to start an unnecessary war in Iraq.

And they NEVER marched into a place for which they did not have good prior intelligence.
 

Oh, jaco, you are just too precious:
"In fact the u.s had broken the Japaneses naval communication codes (purple codes) months before pearl harbor, FDR knew in advance the day and the time of the attacks but never warned the pacific fleet"

You don't seem to appreciate that the site you linked to is a debunking site, which argues that the History Channel program you are relying on is dead wrong. The author's general opinoin of the show is summed up in his opening paragraph:
The program, as Arthur Balfour might have said, contained much that is trite and much that it true, but what was true was trite, and what was not trite was not true.

The author addresses each of the claims made in the show, and fairly easily dismisses all of them: the idea that FDR knew of the Pearl attack is laughably incorrect. Unfortunately, it is the sort of ultra-deep conspiracy theory that holds limitless appeal for the paranoid schizophrenics among us, like the 9/11 conspiracy theorists - so I guess I should not be surprised that you can swallow this hornswoggle, too.

I know that nothing anyone can say will convince you - it's all just evidence of how pervasive the plot is - but consider another quote from the site you linked to:
Duane Whitlock, unlike Mr. Nave, was there, on Corregidor, working on the Japanese codes. "I can attest from first-hand experience that as of 1 December 1941 the recovery of JN-25B had not progressed to the point that it was productive of any appreciable intelligence," stated Whitlock— "not even enough to be pieced together by traffic analysis....It simply was not within the realm of our combined cryptologic capability to produce a usable decrypt at that particular juncture."
 

Sheena said...

""Propagating lies is not unlike crying out "fire" in a crowded theatre.

Actually there's worse words you can yell in a crowded theatre. Ask Michael Richards."

Actually there are even better examples.

For example, stating that the Israeli leadership committed war crimes in Lebanon.
 

Jac...

True story.

Yesterday one of the company's employees from another branch and I were killing time over a coffee. Older guy, rough around the edges.

How a conversation progresses:

Starts off, he notes there was an earthquake in the Okanagan valley the day before, where he's from.

That leads to Cascade range volcanoes that are all going to blow any time now.

Okay, I'm informed on that subject.

Then he goes off the rails.

California is going to sink any time now, too.

Ummmm...yeah, I've read about those prophesies.

Turns out he's read a lot of the same books I have. That's interesting.

But...

Next he's into some of the wilder conspiracy theories out there...all of which I'm read up on.

Here's the difference between him and me:

It doesn't take long to figure out that all this "stuff" has become this guy's religion. He can't wait to let me know how tuned in he is to "what's really going on in this world".

I'm listening to him and I'm thinking, "Damn, I hope I've never sounded like this."

Ya see, he made all this "stuff" his "dogma". He recites it back to anyone who will listen like it's gospel. More to the point, he questions none of it.

When I get on such subjects I qualify it by saying it's merely one view of a subject that someone else, based upon evidence he/she's uncovered, has offered. Is it factual or true? Who really knows. Certainly it's interesting.

But that's all it is: Interesting.

Factual or true?

What do I know about that. Was I there? Did I personally witness any of it?

No.

So all I'm reading is someone else's account, which is almost always coloured by their own prejudices, and seen through their own shaded glasses.

I strongly warn you against making someone else's dogma/religion/worldview your own.

Any set of historical circumstances can be interpreted umpteen different ways, with contradicting material conveniently left out according to the author's personal axes to grind...and almost always is.

You, admittedly like just about everyone else in this world, are betting your own personal integrity and individuality on someone else's "stuff". And if you think about it, you have nothing more to go on than their "opinions" of the truth or facts.

Remember: Facts are fleeting. Only wisdom is eternal.

FWIW.
 

Canada so great?
Who told you that.
You ever live in Texas?

Canada is an antiseptic, smoke-free
Masonic gulag run by insane doctors and hospital administrators and their silent parners in Hydro, Transportation and the Mafia.
Canada works because under these Florentine princes who have almost total access to our tax money, everybody is either corrupt or incompetent.

It is a jerked-off country, an historical abortion that the Brits have somehow allowed to take place.
Only the smart French know what the hell is going down.
I am moving to Quebec and voting for Duceppe.
 

Jaco,

The Americans planned Pearl Harbour to manipulate the world?

The Americans planned 9-11 to manipulate the world?

The Holocaust? That's the one part of Joe Green's "mid-course correction" that you did not comment on.

If your twisted logic can only find monsters in one quarter you will be a useful idiot to every monster that comes along.
 

peaches,

think of it as doing community service. plus, on billboards you can't do the following.
 

joe green talks like he was sleeping with FDR he knows so much about what was going on. doesn't surprise me. best joe can do to keep me satisfied is lick up a storm, if you catch my drift. no wonder his only lover was a gimp.
 

I banish you Joe Green from this site.

You are boring. You do the devil's work by boring the crap out of everyone.
 

Other things the Amerikans planned:

The partition of Poland in the 1800s.

The Irish potato famines (that never happened).

The Black death.

The Spanish Inquisition.

And, scariest of all, Pontius Pilate was actually Pontius Bush - he just changed his name.
 

Ivan the Separatist wrote thus:

"I am moving to Quebec and voting for Duceppe."

Then you are going to lose. Again. And Again. And Again.

Some people have such thick skulls, that they will NEVER GET IT.

That is because a Quebecer, Stephane Dion is going to be the next Prime Minister of Canada.

He is going to bring our economy into balance with our environment, and he is going to bring our social policies back in line with our long term historical position of support for human rights, for the United Nations, for peace KEEPING, and against Russian, Chinese, and American hegemony around the globe.

And hopefully, he will offer half of Calgary, a one way ticket home, back across the border from whence they came.
 

Chucker got this wrong as well.

"And, scariest of all, Pontius Pilate was actually Pontius Bush - he just changed his name."

Governor Pilate, in fact was a ancestor of the Bush Clan that was in the Holy Land tuning up his imperial ways against the Arabs and the Jews of his day. Pilate was eminently practical and pragmatic. If the Official Church of his day cried out to cruxify one of its own, what was that to him? I mean, its was a small scale event compared to what Romans loved to do, which was to line the Appian Way for MILES with cruxified enemies as a kind of warning to others.

The think about Pilate, is that he suffered from King Lear disease. Seems he just could not wash innocent blood off his hands.

I think that this dibilitating disease also affects the Emperor in Washington. So the question is this. Will George II go mad before his term is finished?

As of this morning, he is talking about DOUBLING the killing efficiency of his assault upon the civilians, women and children of Iraq against the advice of his own family's best friends.

Whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad.
 

The Exorcist said...

"I banish you Joe Green from this site."

And I COMMAND YOU SATAN, to return to the fires of Hell, in the name of the Lord!
 

"Andrew Coyne cheered for the American hockey team in the Olympics."

Payback time.
 

Good move!
 

Bourque is reporting that Laperiere has packed it in.
 

awesome move, more like!

I can't wait -

did you catch Denis Dawson's question:

"who does this take power away from? The provinces?"

No, Mr. idiot Senator. You know very well who this takes power away from.

Can't wait until Mr. Social Conscience opines.
 

catch Rona Ambrose clamping down on mercury use?

let me guess: Jacobin and Joe Green don't give a shit about the toxic soups we live in. What matters are GHG to the exclusion of all else.
 

Well, Chucker and Springer want to take our eye off the ball and engage in another side show, a kind of Iraq War with chemicals.

I am always amazed to watch the Fractured Tory Mind at work. It simply cannot integrate or differentiate. Its the calculus stupid!

The problems are not the chemicals, the problems are the owners.

With Harpercons, we are going to be getting quarantines on draino.
 

Fuck off, Joe.
 

Dallaire's "Republican-style Senate"?

What no Democrats in there? If he meant Republic, Australia has an elected senate and isn't a Republic.
 

"The problems are not the chemicals, the problems are the owners."

What does this actually mean, Joe? Given that any "regulation of chemicals" is really "regulation of the owners of the chemicals (and their behaviour with respect to said chemicals)" there is nothing to your assertion but an irrelevant semantic distinction.
 

"Other things the Amerikans planned:

"...The Spanish Inquisition."

Yes - but no one expected the Spanish Inquisition!

btw, don't Joe/Jaco spell it InKKKuisition
 

Yeah, how do they something that actually has K's in it?
 

irrelevent semantic distinciton is what joe green does best.

it is time to take Canada back from these liars who parade a thousand concerns, but at the end of the day, for the joe green's of the world its just me, me, me and my way, my way, my way.

they are not democrats. they are not reasonable people. they have no good will towards humankind.

I am happy to see them collect around Stephane Dion. Its extremely revealing that Mr. Dion attracts a very hateful crowd of people.
 

"irrelevent semantic distinciton is what joe green does best..."

When you only do one thing, Chucker, by definition it is what you do best, isn't it?
 

Jac will get off on this.

Just finished "Talisman" by Bauval and Hancock.

a) Follows Hermetic/Gnostic philosophy down through history to the present day to attempt to discover an underlying process behind some of the most pivotal moments.

b) I had no idea how vicious the inquisitions run by the Vatican against first gnosticism, then the Cathars, and then against heretics in general. These people, comparatively, make current radical fundamentalists in Islam look like petty juvenile delinquents.

c) I also had no idea just how big a part Freemasonry played in the rise of "Republicanism" in first France, and then America. And just how interlinked all the players were back in the 1700s.

d) Of particular interest is Scottish Rite Freemasonry, which is predominant in the US. This branch identifies itself with the Knights Templar in a very big way.

e) While the author's don't claim to have proven anything, the evidence they uncover is, to say the least, intriguing. The book is not about revealing some evil conspiracy within Freemasonry. Indeed, the order has done a great deal towards the liberation of mankind in institutionalising ideals of freedom and human rights.

e) The influence of Freemasonry in the physical design of both Paris and Washington is remarkable.

f) I'm increasingly convinced that there is a philosophical connection/undercurrent that runs through the history of civilization from the earliest days of Egypt (even further back to Sumeria) to the present day. One which is at odds with all three main religions, Christianity (more specifically, Catholicism), Islam and Judaism.

And which all three, to one degree or another, have fought to suppress, even wipe out.

FWIW.

Interesting read.
 

Springer, thanks for the book review.
I'm very tempted to go pick it up.

And I feel deep and great embarrassment that my diktionary comment was so horribly missing the word 'spell'.
It's embarrassing to be unable to troll properly :(
 

deaner, you crack me up!
 

More on senate stuff, with video links

Dion: "irresponsible"

Liberals right on cue, eh? Must go all the way constitutionally...which nobody wants to do...which means nothing at all will ever change...which is exactly the way we like it...end of story.

Dion: "...I was for a limited mandate for senators before Harper ever was."

Yeah, right. Gimme a freakin' break for having at least some brains, eh?
 

Joe Green,
Good shot. I appreciate the intelligence.
But if you expect a Dr. Doolittle Push me-pull you to solve all of Canada's problems, especially economic problems, you have another think coming.
I'd rather sing with frogs who have good dulcitones than the castrati from Chartres.
 

ivan,

master of the high-art zing.
 

now: 'splain me this -

no. forget it. save it up for tonight's post.
 

Yeah, I know, Chucker.
My ex-wife did tell me I'm overrated. And abstruse. And obtuse.
Maybe Joe Green had the obtuse part right.
But he is abstruse.
LOL
 

Stick a fork in Bernard
 

When Guisseppe Verdi was Guisseppe Verdi he was all class. But now that he is just plain ole Joe Greeen... he ain't!
 

Joe is often over the top.

Then again, so are many others on this blog.


In my opinion, Joe sometimes hits the nail on the head.

Chucker,

There's plenty of Haters gathered around Harper.
 

oh my, guissippe verdi, that's sounds sooo darn sexy and thank you tim for defending my joey, he really is handy with a hammer as well as a shovel and a spade.
 

Layton's idea of getting our soldiers out of Afghanistan could potentially put his beloved "peacekeepers" in the same position as the Dutch faced in Srebrenica back in the 90's: untenable, unable to defend civilians, and impotent against attacks.

Anybody catch the Liberal senator on Rosemary Thompson Live so desperate to retain his sinecure that he actually said it would take 4 years to pass any piece of legislation if *gasp* both the House and Senate were elected? Yiples.
 

"In my opinion, Joe sometimes hits the nail on the head."

But most of the time, he hits the nail squarely on his thumb.
 

tim c,

joe green's second coming has been much more productive than his first.

lots of people are over the top everywhere:

Show the site that you think isn't replete with over-the-toppers and all you'll show me is your bias - know what I mean?

There are "haters" in all parties. But there's only one who has made a long fortune off pretending they had none and the other guy had nothing but.
 

ivan,

obtuse? i'd have said obscure.
 

deaner said...
"In my opinion, Joe sometimes hits the nail on the head."
But most of the time, he hits the nail squarely on his thumb.

==========


That, from a guy who's a Pinochet apologist.

tim c


==========

Ottawa Citizen:

Tyrant's death leaves dark chapter in Chilean history unresolved

He had the blood of thousands on his hands, but Augusto Pinochet was never tried for his human rights abuses, writes Don Butler.

http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=e39a1d4a-b4f2-4ec6-b8f9-dfb0b2607922

excerpt:

that the man once described as "one of the great murderers" of the 20th century died before being brought to justice for human rights abuses, including the execution by death squads of at least 3,197 people in Chile and the torture of tens of thousands more.
 

Chucker,
Ah, you are so right.
I am on the road to hell.
Even in Italian, it's "silva oscura."
 

call me heartless, but there's a least a whole bigger league of 20th century murderers.

"that the man once described as "one of the great murderers" of the 20th century died before being brought to justice for human rights abuses, including the execution by death squads of at least 3,197 people in Chile and the torture of tens of thousands more."
 

Chuckercanuck said...

"call me heartless, but there's a least a whole bigger league of 20th century murderers."

Right you are Chucker, Emperor George II towers over Augusto in the war crimes department, and in terms of raw number of victims. Even Augusto was more selective in his victims, which did not contain the staggering number of civilians, women and children that were lost in Chile.

And of course your casual dismissal of capital crimes involving multiple killings speaks right to the heart of your Mark Kan "values".

You should join the rest of that sad bunch in Calgary before you pack up your bags for good, and check out of this wonderful wilderness called Canada.

Baghdad these days should offer you everything you are looking for and crave. Starting with a reality that is so blurred that fact and fiction form a kind of alloy that only a "neocon" can fully appreciate for its gross perversions, and its picadillos.

There is a real difference between being as Mad as a Hatter, and being a Malignant Merchant of Merchandise.

So whose email did you read today Chucker???
 

geez joe, you're one to talk about gross perversions and picadillos, the stories i could tell about you, whoo boy! oh and i hope your happy with the mongoose and cobra, you two-timing loser.
 

hah! joe's ex-hamster, i've got stories about my joey's perversions and picadillos that would make your fur fall off but i'm not one to kiss and tell although i will say this: whiskey, a mongoose, a cobra, a spade, a shovel, a hoe and the rocking tunes of pat boone, we pulled an allniter...nuff said.
 

Chucker you are s-o s-l-o-w!

In case you have not figured it out yet (and its possible because cobras have very small brains), in confrontations between mongooses and cobras, mongooses almost never lose, even when the hooded cobra towers over them.

Just ask Rikki Tikki Tavi.
 

eunice plawiuk said...

"hah! joe's ex-hamster, i've got stories about my joey's perversions and picadillos that would make your fur fall off but i'm not one to kiss and tell although i will say this: whiskey, a mongoose, a cobra, a spade, a shovel, a hoe and the rocking tunes of pat boone, we pulled an allniter...nuff said."


You Wish!
 

"That, from a guy who's a Pinochet apologist.

"tim c"

Factually wrong, tim c (what, are you ee cummings, or something?) - I am not an apologist, but I think we have to consider both Pinochet's violent regime, including the death squads and the secret service, and the fact that unlike any other dictator I can think of, he turned over a stable, functioning democracy, and did so in deference to a democratic vote. Who do you prefer - Mugabe, Peron, Castro, Fujimori, Mao, Pol Pot?

If your reaction is simply that they are all "equally bad" then I think you have a tenuous grasp on the world around us. Such men exist - we can either recognize that and work to improve the situation, or close our eyes to it and hope (usually in vain) that it will all work itself out in time. If for no reason other than to know how to prioritize our concern (and even intervention) we have to know which of them are worse, and where their rule is most repugnant.

By the way, the death toll from guerilla warfare (and government reprisals) in Peru is running at 60,000 people (and we are nowhere near the end of that conflict); is that really preferable to Chile's experience under Pinochet? Your unwillingness to consider Pinochet's contributions as well as his excesses would have to lead you to say that it is. With all the respect due to your informed opinion, I disagree.
 

C is the first initial of my last name.


" Your unwillingness to consider Pinochet's contributions as well as his excesses would have to lead you to say that it is. "

Dean,

Are you on conservative crack or meth?

Pinochet lead the country while tens of thousands were tortured. And at least 3,500 executed.

That's the big picture here. That's what counts. At least to the families and friends of those mutilated, tortured and shot to death, and to anyone else concerned about such things.

The fact that this murdering torturing psycopath did other things politically is essentially irrelevant.

I stand by my statement that you are a Pinochet apologist.
 

Joe Green,
Cobras hypnotize.
Don't they?
And then they don't bite, they chew.
 

Dictators who are on "our side" are no less repugnant than those who are not. Indeed, the quality of some of our "friends" reflects very poorly on us and gives some credence to those who charge us with hypocrisy. Pinochet was a monster, just because he was an anti-communist doesn't excuse his monstrosities.
 

I have to agree with rgm's comments. You become known by the company you keep.

I would say that the global "anti-Americanism" that we see rampant today, is a direct result of the "company" that Amerika kept for decades.

That is because their flawed constitution allowed the Houston Oil Barons to run the Foreign Policy of the US, with Baker & Co. as their prime counsel. No wonder that the Emperor will not take their advice, he knows them better than we do. And to think, this is the same Baker that helped him steal the 2000 election in the courts by stopping the vote count.

Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive. And that is precisely what these "old economy" clowns were doing in the Middle East, in ENRON and at WORLDCOM. Crooks with Guns.
 

"Pinochet was a monster, just because he was an anti-communist doesn't excuse his monstrosities."

It isn't a question of whether he was an anti-communist, rgm, and I am not seeking to "excuse" his monstrosities. Just as high levels of literacy in Cuba don't somehow "excuse" repression and torture there, economic success and eventual political freedom and democracy don't "excuse" death squads in Santiago. At the same time, we have to look at the entire legacy of all leaders, and we have to be willing to understand and rank (and that does not imply "tolerate" or "condone") different levels of objectionable conduct by them. On balance, I think Pinochet was better for Chile than Castro has been for Cuba (or Mugabe for Zimbabwe, Fujimori for Peru, or Chavez will be for Venezuela) - not least because he was willing to peacefully give up power, which Castro (and most of the others mentioned) have been demonstrably unwilling to do, to the point of adopting increasingly repressive measures to maintain their positions.
 

"I would say that the global "anti-Americanism" that we see rampant today, is a direct result of the "company" that Amerika kept for decades."

And as usual, you would be wrong. I would say it is due to jealousy of success and resentment at economic advantage. What country has "kept company" that is pure enough for you Joe?
 

Deaner wrote:

On balance, I think Pinochet was better for Chile than Castro has been for Cuba.

----------

Seriously, your ideas and logic in this area sound entirely out of balance, Deaner.

What part of torturing tens of thousands of people and executing thousands of others do you understand?

Give your head a shake.


Pinochet was a psychopathic murderous fuck.


Shame on those who supported him during his reign, including the American government.
 

"Shame on those who supported him during his reign, including the American government."

--there probably the ones that help him to power, just like they help Saddam Hussein , just like they help overthrow the pro-American democratic Iranian president Mossadeq in 1953, just like they help the evil Iranians during the Iran-Iraq war, just like they help the murderous contras in south-America etc etc
 

"What part of torturing tens of thousands of people and executing thousands of others do you understand?"

The most commonly cited figures for Chile are 3,000 killed or "disappeared" by the government, 10,000 (or more) subjected to torture and 250,000 detained. What part of Cuba's record do you refuse to recognize? Various other estimates put the Cuban death in the range of 70,000 to 140,000 cited above. Consider that the population of Cuba is about 2/3rds that of Chile (11m to 16m) and the relative horror in Cuba is even more evident. Of course, even ignoring the possibility of a bullet in the head, life in Cuba is no walk in the park.

Consider as well that Pinochet managed a transition to a democracy that has never occurred to Castro, that Pinochet was in power for 17 years compared to nearly 50 (and counting) for Fidel, that poverty exacts its own toll on the Cuban people, and that following Castro there is no guarantee that Cuba won't turn into another Peru, or that brother Raul won't continue the family tradition...

I'm pretty happy with the conclusion that Castro has been and is worse for Cuba than Pinochet was for Chile. Again, I stress that this does not mean an unquestioning acceptance of what Pinochet did - but if you want to direct your concern (and limited capacity to intervene) appropriately, you have to rank between truly diabolical and (merely) horrible beyond our belief.
 

deaner asked...

"What country has "kept company" that is pure enough for you Joe?"

The list is a long one.

Lets start with Saudi Arabia, shall we. US Foreign Policy in Saudi Arabia is single mindedly focused on the control of the International Oil Trade, and NOTHING else matters in US-Saudi relationships.

Yet the wider questions of US Foreign Policy toward Saudi Arabia and the autocratic monarchy that runs it as a theocracy are beyond consideration. Indeed Washington has washed its hands from it, and handed over its jurisdiction as a government to the Oil Barons in Houston.

And they predicably did the same shit they do everywhere else in the world where they go. It got so bad in Saudi Arabia, that the Monarchy was forced to confine the Oil Barons and their minions to "compounds" for their own safety.

And what the former King of Saudi Arabia did not consume in alcohol purchased by the Barons just before it was time to renew contracts and leases, he gave away to the Wahabi fundamentalist sect, that naturally enough, resented the Houston Barons for degrading their country, and their King and their way of life.

And they adopted a very harsh form of "Sharia Law" to repress the entire Saudi population who resented to lack of a "fair share" of the nations resources and a fair opportunity that the Barons from Houston had hijacked from their country.

How about Chile, because its exactly the same story in Chile, except that the resource in Chile is not oil and gas, its copper.

What about America's love in with the Apartheidists in South Africa, where Maggie Thatcher and Dennis had a nice little stake in the diamond mines, where the workers of these sites were not even allowed to live in their own country, were were bannished to the Bantustans that were constructed by racists to maintain poverty and a permanently impoverished working class.

IF you dig a little deeper, you would know that South Africa at that time was receiving nuclear weapons development aid from Israel, of course with American Approval.

Why not ask yourself a better question, and that is, "can you think of ANY country where the Americans have tried to assist the local populations establish a functioning and independent economy along genuine free market lines, as opposed to merchantile lines followed by all the Imperial Powers since the time of Ancient Rome? I can't.

Even when you look at a far away places like South America, you will find examples of American hegemony in public utilities, where companies like Bechtel, were trying to sell water to the local populations at unjust, unreasonable, and unfair rates from the utility monopolies that they were seeking to establish and turn into a cash cow from US Bechtel.

Bechtel, you will recall was run by that American felon, Casper Weinburger, who together with George Shultz, inflicted Emperor George II upon the American people without their democratic consent.

Usually when things REALLY go wrong, its not the result of any single big problem; rather its usually the result of a mounting number of little problems that accumulate until you have a massive failure.

That is PRECISELY what happened to the unilateral policies of Americans in Viet Nam, its what is now happening in Iraq, and it first happened against Canada in 1812.

You would think that they would have learned by now.

Actually, to complete this picture, I can think of one good example of American foreign aid, and that was the reconstruction of Japan, after they obliterated large portions of the Japanese civil populations of two cities with nuclear weapons.

So on God's Universal Scales of Justice, does the reconstruction of Japan, atone for the murderous rampage in Hiroshima and Nagasaki against civilians, women and children???
 

Joe - you ignored my question, in favour of another diatribe about the evil AmeriKKKans. I accept everything you say: they are evil beyond belief because of their support of repugnant governments around the world. I am now eager to learn at the feet of the master: which country has no such stains on its honour; which nation has no episodes that we would look on with dismay? Let's keep it to countries that have the capacity to act and materially affect other countries - there is not much value in focussing in on the Andorras of the world.
 

Deaner,

You fall into the same partisanship myopia that happens to some of those on the left.

Screw Castro for his human rights violations. If those numbers are true, I strongly condemn those actions.

This thread began as a condemnation of Pinochet apologists. You still appear to be one of them.

"The most commonly cited figures for Chile are 3,000 killed or "disappeared" by the government, 10,000 (or more) subjected to torture and 250,000 detained."

Deaner wrote:

you have to rank between truly diabolical and (merely) horrible beyond our belief.

tim c:

I find it incredulous that you don't conclude that Pinochet's 3,000 + murders, 10,000 + tortures and 250,000 detentions are not truly diabolical.
 

Deaner,

You fall into the same partisanship myopia that happens to some of those on the left.

Screw Castro for his human rights violations. If those numbers are true, I strongly condemn those actions.

This thread began as a condemnation of Pinochet apologists. You still appear to be one of them.

"The most commonly cited figures for Chile are 3,000 killed or "disappeared" by the government, 10,000 (or more) subjected to torture and 250,000 detained."

Deaner wrote:

you have to rank between truly diabolical and (merely) horrible beyond our belief.

tim c:

I find it incredulous that you don't conclude that Pinochet's 3,000 murders, 10,000 tortures and 250,000 detentions are not truly diabolical.
t Pinochet's 3,000 + murders, 10,000 + tortures and 250,000 detentions are not truly diabolical.
 

"I find it incredulous that you don't conclude that Pinochet's 3,000 murders, 10,000 tortures and 250,000 detentions are not truly diabolical."
Let's note that a detention is an arrest for political purposes followed by a release. While it is a serious human rights concern, it is not in the same league as killing and torture.

As for "truly diabolical" - fine, Pinochet was "truly diabolical" rather than merely "horrible beyond belief" - does that make you feel better, while avoiding the issue? My point was that he was less damaging to Chile than Castro was to Cuba, and that stands no matter what terminology we use for his actions; on this scale Castro is no doubt "double secret truly diabolical" or somesuch.

"This thread began as a condemnation of Pinochet apologists."
No, this (portion of this) thread began as an ad hominem attack by you.

I am not "apologizing" for Pinochet. I am happy that Chile is in the condition it is in today. At the same time, I wish that it had been able to transition into that condition directly from its state in 1970; that would make me even more happy - but tragically it didn't happen that way. Given the conditions in Chile in 1972/73 the far more likely outcome was that it became Peru (the current death toll from government and guerilla conflict is 60,000 and counting - as far as I can see there is no resolution in sight) than that it became what it is today.

You may wish to believe that this was accomplished despite Pinochet's Presidency; that will make it easier to dismiss him as an embodiment of some sort of absolute evil who made no positive contributions. I don't think it coresponds very closely with reality, and therefore will not guide you well in future dealings with dictators or even with elected governments - but if it soothes your conscience you are welcome to it. The far more plausible interpretation is that Pinochet was at worst indifferent to the re-establishment of democracy and attendant freedoms in Chile and at best actively supported the process - and the known facts support the latter contention.

You assert that this is some sort of partisan issue - I don't see it that way. It is undoubtedly good news when a repressive authoritarian regime voluntarily dismantles itself, and even better when it happens peacefully. I have seen it happen in Chile, in South Africa (although the eventual outcome was less than one would hope), on the Iberian peninsula, in Eastern Europe, and to a limited extent in China. Irrespective of the (in some cases, nominal) political orientation of the regime involved, I applaud such developments - don't you? If not, just who is being partisan here, tim?
 

deaner asked ...

"I am now eager to learn at the feet of the master: which country has no such stains on its honour;"

Yes. Canada.