Press release On The US military Bullying Canadian Civilians

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Connie Fogal, Leader of the Canadian Action Party, says, “So much for  conspiracy theories! Now we have the ugly truth fully exposed. The US military really does now  run Canada. “

The US military is on Canadian  soil forbidding the Municipality of Papineauville from renting a hall to the Council of Canadians who planned a public meeting to be held the day before the Three Amigos meet in Montebello, Quebec, Canada August 20,  21 2007 to plan their next moves in the dismantling of  their respective countries of
Canada, USA and Mexico.

CAP’s leader said,”Bad enough that our RCMP and the Quebec provincial police force would apply offensive Canadian law  to prevent a legitimate meeting of dissenting citizens.  Totally untenable that a foreign army assumes jurisdiction  on our land. But this we knew from the Binational Planning Agreement begun in 2002 that saw Canada crawl
on its belly and permit the USA military to enter our land whenever it deems necessary. “

“Does anyone still believe that our federal leaders have not thrown away our sovereignty ? That  from Chretien (Liberal) to Martin (Liberal) to Harper (Conservative), the Prime Ministers of our land have not been committing  treason behind closed doors? How otherwise would it be possible that a proud, sovereign, and free nation would see a foreign army on its soil interfering with the right of Canadians to assemble and to speak?”

“And , Canada’s silent loyal opposition has meanwhile been neither loyal nor an opposition !  US military on Canadian  soil ordering Canadians did not happen overnight!”

Connie Fogal, leader of the Canadian Action Party, urges all
Canadians to say NO to the criminalization of dissent on our land.

She pointed out,”So they put up a fence! So they impose a 25
kilometer no go zone! So they halt vehicles with five or more
people  in them! So we be on the edge propelling the power of our inner energy to stare at them through their barriers! We can just stand and stare! There is something very ludicrous about three leaders of alleged free countries hiding from their citizens.”

Connie Fogal , leader of the Canadian Action Party, encourages all liberty loving Americans, and Mexicans, as well as Canadians to protest this third annual meeting of national leaders who are bent on destroying our constitutional and civil rights. She urges,”Let us join hands in peaceful right of protest, standing firm and tall,  determined and strong in acknowledgement that our nations belong to us the people, and that no shadow government, no military, no treacherous politicians or officials  are going to take them away from us. “

Contact Connie Fogal at 604 708 3372 or cell 778 891 4919

-30-

About these ads

150 Responses to Press release On The US military Bullying Canadian Civilians

  1. str8shooter says:

    OK, it’s official now, Connie Fogal is a complete BARKING MOONBAT! The US Military isn’t “bullying” anyone, much less forbidding anyone from doing anything, it’s the CANADIAN gov’t who elected to hold the conference on their soil, and it is the CANADIAN gov’t who elected to abide by our security requirements for President Bush to attend the conference. Anyone who doesn’t comprehend the concept of security for national leaders, especially when more than one are in the same place, at the same time, isn’t intelligent enough to be the leader of a group of tree squirrels, much less a PAC!

  2. verbena19 says:

    That’s CAP, not PAC.

  3. opit says:

    10-4. That makes it official. GWB requires no oversight.

  4. verbena19 says:

    Indeed, Opit, indeed… ;)

    Thanks for the comment and for putting me on your blogroll. Just checked out your site. Very informative! Cheers, annamarie

  5. str8shooter says:

    verbena19, it IS a PAC, as in Political Action Committee, and it still stands, she’s enitely too stupid to be running anything more complicated than frying pan.

  6. opit says:

    And that’s the Council of Canadians they are ‘defending’ Bush from : in this case as “ip’s”
    That’s a term for ‘native’ people I’ve taken from Anne McCaffrey – Inconvenient People. Politically aware students of realpoltiik are terribly scary to Master Bushit.

  7. verbena19 says:

    Well said, Opit!

    str8shooter, you must be an American, or an expat at the very least. No sane Canadian who cares about his/her country would make such idiotic pronouncements.

  8. str8shooter says:

    Well verbena19, I am an American, but more importantly to this particular discussion, I’m a retired professional security specialist, and have worked with the Presidential Protective Detail in the past, so I KNOW what they’re doing, and WHY. The measures being taken for the conference are no different than those taken in many others, the only difference this time is the number of conspiracy freaks and nut job obliviots running around screaming about things they know nothing about.

    As far as the sanity of ‘some’ Canadians, well, that’s a topic for an entirely different discussion, but since “ignorance is bliss” you really should be a lot happier than you appear to be!

  9. str8shooter says:

    opit, isn’t the phrase “Politically aware students of realpoltiik (sic)” just another way of saying SOCIALIST/COMMUNIST?

  10. opit says:

    Don’t forget that broad brush to tar people with when you leave the thread !

  11. str8shooter says:

    Would that be the same ‘broad brush’ some people seem to have no problem applying to President Bush, or anyone else who isn’t interested in being a gutless cheese-eating surrender monkey? Would that also be the same one that allows barking moonbats like Fogal (and others) to outright LIE about what is going on in any particular instance just to stir up the ignorant sheeple and foment discord among them for their own political ends?

    Don’t you just hate it when people throw your trash right back at you?

  12. verbena19 says:

    str8shooter: now I better understand from where you are coming — a “retired professional security specialist, eh?… While I understand that there are necessary security measures for a presidential visit, I still fail to see how a bunch of Council of Canadians academics pose a threat to your revered GWB.

    Obviously, we are on opposite sides politically. You think Bush is doing a wonderful job, I think he’s a total disaster. And you seem to use a very wide brush to paint anyone who doesn’t agree with your neocon views a ‘socialist/communist’. Btw, the two labels are not the same. Socialists are not necessarily communists, and anyone who disagrees with you or GWB is not automatically one of that group…

  13. Michael Pugliese says:

    GROAN, Far Right Meets Far Left>…plan their next moves in the dismantling of their respective countries of
    Canada, USA and Mexico.
    http://www.alternet.org/audits/54184/
    >…Debunking the North American Union Conspiracy Theory

    By Joshua Holland, AlterNet. Posted June 15, 2007.

    The North American Union, an increasingly popular conspiracy theory about a group of shadowy international “elites” who are planning to “replace the United States” with a transnational government, is a manifestation of xenophobia that would do the John Birch Society proud.
    Tools
    email EMAIL
    print PRINT
    401 COMMENTS

    Share & save this story:
    Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! icon

    Also in ForeignPolicy

    Benchmark Boogie: A Guide to the Struggle Over Iraq’s Oil
    Antonia Juhasz

    Are Israel and Syria Headed Towards Peace, or Will Tel Aviv Have Another “Accidental” Summer War?
    Khody Akhavi

    Opposition to American Oil Grab is Unifying Iraqis
    Ben Lando

    Bush’s Pakistan Paradox
    Robert Scheer

    U.S. Failing to Help Iraqi Translator and Family Targeted for Execution
    Maura Stephens

    Reflections of a Vietnam War Widow: It Doesn’t End When They Come Home
    Penny Coleman
    More stories by Joshua Holland

    RSS icon ForeignPolicy RSS Feed

    RSS icon Main AlterNet RSS Feed
    Get AlterNet in
    your mailbox!

    Advertisement

    Just what is the North American Union (NAU)?

    There are several ways to answer that question. First, the NAU is an increasingly popular conspiracy theory about a group of shadowy and mostly nameless international “elites” who are planning to “replace the United States” — in the words of Jerome Corsi, a key figure in the SwiftBoat Veterans for Truth project and a leading NAU conspiracist — with a transnational government. The theory holds that the borders between Mexico, Canada and the United States are in the process of being erased, covertly, by a group of “globalists” whose ultimate goal is to replace national governments in D.C., Ottawa and Mexico City with a European-style political union and a bloated EU-style bureaucracy.

    The North American Union story is an offspring of the John Birch Society right, with its attendant xenophobia and paranoia. It comes complete with a shadowy international cabal intent on stabbing decent, hard-working Americans in the back — Dolchstoss! Articles and websites condemning the NAU flourish in that political space where right- and left-wing populism become indistinguishable, along with a dozen other fundamentally reactionary theories of what’s really going on with our contemporary political economy.

    To fully understand the growing fascination with the NAU in various corners of the internet, one has to view it also as a cultural phenomenon; it’s an entirely logical reaction to a process of corporate-driven global integration that feeds into Americans’ very real and wholly valid economic anxieties. As David Moberg recently noted, Americans, “by a margin of 46 percent to 28 percent, [believe] that trade deals have harmed the United States,” and four times as many people surveyed by Pew said U.S. trade deals had lowered wages than the number who believed the deals had raised them. According to Public Citizen, opponents of NAFTA-style trade deals picked up 37 seats over defenders of the status quo during last year’s midterms.

    But, despite that political landscape, one of the first things the new Democratic majority did when it got into power was cut a new “Grand Bargain” with the White House to push through more of the same kind of trade deals. As David Sirota pointed out, the Democratic leadership did it in secret, behind closed doors. And it did it over the objections of many of the freshman lawmakers that gave them their majority in the first place.

    With that as a backdrop, it should come as no surprise that people tend to look for a wizard working behind the curtain. The idea that shadowy forces beyond our perception are really in charge of steering the most powerful country in the world is reinforced every time a bipartisan “trade” deal with little or no support gets jammed through Congress.

    Ultimately, though, the answer to the question “What is the NAU?” is this: It is absolutely nothing. The NAU exists only as a proposal contained in one of a thousand academic and/or wonky papers published each year that advocate all manner of idealistic but ultimately unrealistic approaches to social, economic and political problems. Most of these get passed around in their own circles and eventually filed away and forgotten by junior staffers in congressional offices. Some of these papers, however, become touchstones for the conspiracy-minded and form the basis of all kinds of unfounded fears.

    Such is the case with the monograph, “Building a North American Community,” which was produced by a group of eggheads at the Council on Foreign Relations and their counterparts in Mexico and Canada. It calls for a North American economic union to stretch from Canada’s northern border to Mexico’s southernmost point. It would basically be a customs union — similar to the old European Community before it became the European Union — with expedited travel between countries, a single market with standardized external tariffs, etc.

  14. Michael Pugliese says:

    OOPS, sorry about that bad cut and paste, again, here ’tis>…Debunking the North American Union Conspiracy Theory

    By Joshua Holland, AlterNet. Posted June 15, 2007.

    The North American Union, an increasingly popular conspiracy theory about a group of shadowy international “elites” who are planning to “replace the United States” with a transnational government, is a manifestation of xenophobia that would do the John Birch Society proud.

    Just what is the North American Union (NAU)?

    There are several ways to answer that question. First, the NAU is an increasingly popular conspiracy theory about a group of shadowy and mostly nameless international “elites” who are planning to “replace the United States” — in the words of Jerome Corsi, a key figure in the SwiftBoat Veterans for Truth project and a leading NAU conspiracist — with a transnational government. The theory holds that the borders between Mexico, Canada and the United States are in the process of being erased, covertly, by a group of “globalists” whose ultimate goal is to replace national governments in D.C., Ottawa and Mexico City with a European-style political union and a bloated EU-style bureaucracy.

    The North American Union story is an offspring of the John Birch Society right, with its attendant xenophobia and paranoia. It comes complete with a shadowy international cabal intent on stabbing decent, hard-working Americans in the back — Dolchstoss! Articles and websites condemning the NAU flourish in that political space where right- and left-wing populism become indistinguishable, along with a dozen other fundamentally reactionary theories of what’s really going on with our contemporary political economy.

    To fully understand the growing fascination with the NAU in various corners of the internet, one has to view it also as a cultural phenomenon; it’s an entirely logical reaction to a process of corporate-driven global integration that feeds into Americans’ very real and wholly valid economic anxieties. As David Moberg recently noted, Americans, “by a margin of 46 percent to 28 percent, [believe] that trade deals have harmed the United States,” and four times as many people surveyed by Pew said U.S. trade deals had lowered wages than the number who believed the deals had raised them. According to Public Citizen, opponents of NAFTA-style trade deals picked up 37 seats over defenders of the status quo during last year’s midterms.

    But, despite that political landscape, one of the first things the new Democratic majority did when it got into power was cut a new “Grand Bargain” with the White House to push through more of the same kind of trade deals. As David Sirota pointed out, the Democratic leadership did it in secret, behind closed doors. And it did it over the objections of many of the freshman lawmakers that gave them their majority in the first place.

    With that as a backdrop, it should come as no surprise that people tend to look for a wizard working behind the curtain. The idea that shadowy forces beyond our perception are really in charge of steering the most powerful country in the world is reinforced every time a bipartisan “trade” deal with little or no support gets jammed through Congress.

    Ultimately, though, the answer to the question “What is the NAU?” is this: It is absolutely nothing. The NAU exists only as a proposal contained in one of a thousand academic and/or wonky papers published each year that advocate all manner of idealistic but ultimately unrealistic approaches to social, economic and political problems. Most of these get passed around in their own circles and eventually filed away and forgotten by junior staffers in congressional offices. Some of these papers, however, become touchstones for the conspiracy-minded and form the basis of all kinds of unfounded fears.

    Such is the case with the monograph, “Building a North American Community,” which was produced by a group of eggheads at the Council on Foreign Relations and their counterparts in Mexico and Canada. It calls for a North American economic union to stretch from Canada’s northern border to Mexico’s southernmost point. It would basically be a customs union — similar to the old European Community before it became the European Union — with expedited travel between countries, a single market with standardized external tariffs, etc.

  15. Michael Pugliese says:

    (CONT.) http://www.alternet.org/audits/54184/ >…One should never say “never,” but barring a remarkable change in all three countries’ political cultures (but most importantly that of the United States), the kind of formal North American political union described by the theory’s proponents has zero chances of getting off the ground any time in the foreseeable future.

    A kernel of truth

    I am the last person in the world to argue that there’s no reason to worry about the push for more and more regional economic and security integration. At its heart, as is always the case with these kind of dark plots, are some real dots. The analyses go off the rails when those dots are connected.

    For those of us who have spent years trying to raise awareness of what’s really going on in the movement to blanket the earth in “free trade” deals — geared as they are more towards compelling countries to deregulate and protecting investors than by any genuine desire to free up trade — it’s somewhat satisfying to see new interest being paid to an issue that gets far too little attention. Like other conspiracies, the problem with the North American Union is that it is a distraction; it represents a massive energy drain.

    The NAU monograph explicitly rejects an EU-style political union and the kind of supernational institutions that have grown up like mushrooms in Brussels. One of the principles that guided the committee that drafted the proposal was that the NAU would not resemble the EU:

    North America is different from other regions of the world and must find its own cooperative route forward. A new North American community should rely more on the market and less on bureaucracy, more on pragmatic solutions to shared problems than on grand schemes of confederation or union, such as those in Europe. We must maintain respect for each other’s national sovereignty.

    Despite that rather clear statement of principle — and the fact that the paper lays out a series of recommendations that do not include the creation of some new continental supergovernment — it does call for new “dispute” resolution mechanisms, the free flow of people between the United States and Canada (but not between Mexico and its northern neighbors as long as a large disparity between workers’ incomes remains) and a unionwide regulatory framework.

    Another “dot” that makes up the supposed NAU is the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP), a chat-shop for American, Canadian and Mexican leaders to meet annually and discuss common security and economic issues.

    And then there’s NAFTA, and the so-called “NAFTA Highway.” These are not one but several truck “transit corridors” that backers hope will eventually connect Mexican, American and Canadian markets more effectively and facilitate trade. With construction funds authorized by Congress in dribs and drabs since 1997, and very little work completed south of the Mississippi, it’s unclear whether the roads will ever be more than a waste of a few hundred million in taxpayer funds.

    Robert Pastor, an academic specializing in elections at American University and one of the authors of the NAU proposal, also suggested the adoption of a common currency, like the Euro. That suggestion, however, wasn’t included in the NAU “recommendations.”

    The context in which these marginally related dots emerged is an important reason why they’ve taken on a sinister air in many people’s minds. NAFTA was part of a larger push for legal and regulatory “harmonization” between the three countries of North America. Business groups and other “trade” lobbyists have in fact advocated greater consistency in North America’s regulatory environment, and that always means decreasing, not increasing, labor, environmental, workplace and other standards. It is not the highest common denominator that backers want to see spread far and wide.

    Make no mistake, I’ve shed blood opposing corporate trade deals like NAFTA and the Free Trade Area of the Americas, and there are very real and very significant problems with the push toward harmonization and the relentless assault on national sovereignty represented by the arm-twisting that goes into forcing a trade “consensus.” Construction of key parts of the “NAFTA highway” have raised serious environmental concerns. We don’t need to expand NAFTA or the other institutions of international commerce; we need a pause in the march towards global (or in this case, regional) economic integration, not more of the same.

    And Canadian activists like Maude Barlow of the Council for Canadians have warned for some time that the SPP is part of a push, financed by Canadian and U.S. corporate think tanks, to essentially bring an end to Canada’s social welfare state through regional integration. (More detail can be found in this PDF posted by the Council of Canadians.)

    The right stuff

    These, and a number of other concerns, are entirely valid. But the NAU story is a creature of the far right, and, as such, those who have “connected the dots” have done so according to their ideological preferences. The North American Union they’ve conjured up comes with the assumptions embraced by the coterie of wing-nuts who have promoted it.

    Chief among them is World Net Daily, the “archconservative news site” responsible for such hard-hitting journalism as its recent exposé, “Soy is making kids ‘gay'” (no, I’m not making that up). In addition to SwiftBoat vet Corsi, right-wing talk radio hosts like Sean Hannity and CNN’s reliably nativist Lou Dobbs have featured stories on the imminent arrival of the NAU. Reactionary talker (and now CNN host) Glenn Beck lists it on his website as one of a dozen things that the un-named elites against whom he rails are using to stab good, hard-working Americans in the back.

    While there are exceptions, most essays about the NAU are, like Corsi’s now-famous treatise in the hard-right Human Events, intended to reinforce some of the most cherished right-wing narratives:

    * Multilateral diplomacy is inherently bad; dangerous
    * Americans’ economic insecurity results from the machinations of “liberal elites” and corporate America has no responsibility whatsoever
    * Foreigners are always competitors and can never be trusted — working on common issues is inherently bad; dangerous

    While the word “agenda” appears three times in Corsi’s essay, you won’t find the words “corporate,” “corporation” or “lobbyist.” Only murkily identified “elites” are to blame, not the actors — the K Street influence peddlers and Chamber of Commerce types; the smooth pundits with those cushy think tank sinecures and the corporate execs who get stacked up in their Gulf Stream jets circling Washington every time a new trade deal comes up for a vote — who are really pushing the corporate “trade” agenda. That’s consistent with the central deception of right-wing populism: it’s not Big Business and the politicians in their pockets that are responsible for gaming a system in which upward mobility no longer exists; the world is actually run by tweed-jacketed college professors and the “useful idiots” in the human rights and environmental communities.

    And, recently, the NAU myth has become tangled up in the already acrimonious immigration debate in the United States, although not in any coherent way (they are completely unrelated, but the NAU mythology appeals to immigration hardliners for obvious reasons).

    A bright, shiny distraction

    What is the difference, then, between the kinds of analysis of corporate-led globalization offered by progressives and what I describe as a conspiracy theory? After all, both share the basic premise that deep-pocketed elites are threatening to run roughshod over the democratic institutions enjoyed in most nation-states, and both posit that the process is at least somewhat stealthy. Both hold that global economic integration along the lines of what we’ve seen so far have redistributed wealth upward, from workers to investors (although those on the right tend not to express that in so many words).

    The differences are fairly straightforward. First, while there’s no question that business elites in all three countries have long pushed for greater economic integration, central to the NAU theory is that there are forces working behind the scenes to build a political union. Those are two very different things; it’s more than a semantic point.

    Second, there is a NAFTA treaty and there are institutions like the WTO, but there is no North American Union and, because of a political culture that still cherishes political (if not economic) self-determination, especially in the United States, the chance of a North American Union that resembles the conspiracy theories becoming a reality anytime in the foreseeable future are about as likely as my being named Miss Universe.

    Ultimately, that’s also because nobody is calling for a political union like the EU. Whereas critics of corporate globalization can “follow the money” and name the specific registered lobbyists pushing a trade deal, the NAU’s alleged supporters are always abstract (except for those in the wonky world of academic and think tank circles where these ideas are at least discussed seriously). That’s because they don’t exist. Progressive critics of corporate globalization take issue with the product of the diplomacy that takes place in venues like the WTO; for NAU theorists, representatives of the three North American governments sitting down and discussing regional issues is cause for alarm — never mind that nothing substantive has come of those talks.

    Finally, creating an NAU would require piles of legislation: billions of dollars in new budget allocations, the creation of new agencies and new institutions and the revision (or enactment) of literally hundreds of laws governing all sorts of activities in the political economy. The NAU conspiracy theorists would have you believe the impossible: that all of that will be done under cover of the metaphorical dead of night, while Americans are sleeping, and nobody will notice until it’s too late. That is, nobody but those who are “wide awake” enough to embrace their conspiratorial worldview.

    Consider how Jerome Corsi describes the White House’s role in the NAU:

    “President Bush is pursuing a globalist agenda” … a “hidden agenda” that explains “the Bush administration’s true open borders policy.” “Secretly, the Bush administration is pursuing a policy to expand NAFTA politically” …”What the Bush administration truly wants is the free, unimpeded movement of people across open borders with Mexico and Canada” … “President Bush intends to abrogate U.S. sovereignty to the North American Union, a new economic and political entity which the president is quietly forming.” “Secretly,” “quietly,” “hidden agenda,” “true …policy” — all are markers of what the political scientist Richard Hofstadter called The Paranoid Style in American Politics.

    The truth is that none of the three governments on the continent have endorsed the idea of an NAU and none of the NPP’s discussions are binding on the countries in any way. If there were a real movement to create an NAU in the form envisioned by the reactionary oddballs at WorldNetDaily — there isn’t — it would quickly be rejected not only by most Americans, but also by every member of Congress who likes the idea of serving another term.

    In the meantime, in the real world, those corporate Gulf Streams are about to circle D.C. again, as Congress debates giving Bush “fast-track” trade authority and the Chamber of Commerce looks to seal trade deals with South Korea, Colombia, Peru and Panama. And, as always, only a very small group of activists will be watching those deals progress. They’re not as sexy as a secretive cabal of covert globalists trying to destroy America from within, but they are far bigger issues because they are real.

    Pity that the NAU crowd won’t be paying attention.

    Joshua Holland is an AlterNet staff writer.
    © 2007 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved.
    View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/story/54184/

  16. verbena19 says:

    Michael, thanks for the article. I read Alternet fairly regularly, but seem to have missed that one…

    My concern is about the SPP as illuminated by Maude Barlow and the Council of Canadians. (a sovereignty group of which I am a member) I do not consider myself one of the moonbats who are part of the convergence of ‘far right-far left’ as mentioned above.

    While some aspects of the NAU may be a myth, the SPP is not, and it is not something that would be beneficial to Canadians. Quite the contrary. Just visit the Council of Canadians website to know what I mean. You’ll find their link in my sidebar…

    btw, I was against NAFTA and feel that it grossly tipped the scales against Canada in fairness… Remember the softwood lumber dispute? We still have not received all the money owed us by the US and I doubt we ever will… Our Bush-lite PM Harper jubilantly signed off on an amount several millions less than what is rightly owed us according to the World Court.

    So yes, I certainly am against anything that will further integrate us into the US empire, for I know that we will get royally screwed. If that qualifies me as a ‘moonbat’, so be it.

    best regards,
    Annamarie

  17. str8shooter says:

    verbena, you make a hell of a lot of assumptions without bothering to ascertain any facts beforehand, but given the fact that you would even attempt to defend Fogal after her insane pronouncements, it seems that you’re two peas in a pod. Nobody considers Canadians to be much of a threat to anyone (when was the last time anyone took a shot at one of your leaders?), it’s INFILTRATORS that we’re worried about, and given the present level of terrorism in the world today, excluding large groups from the area is only PRUDENT.

    As to your lame attempt at a personal attack, what makes you think I “revere” the President, or even agree with him on anything? Just because I point out the FACT that Fogal is a tin-foil hatted barking moonbat doesn’t reveal anything about my own political beliefs, only that she doesn’t have the first clue in the world how Presidential security works (and no, it doesn’t change based upon that Presidents political party). She accused the US military of being involved in some denial of Canadians Rights, which is an outright lie, as any activity our military undertakes while on Canadian soil is done so with the PERMISSION, and under the AUTHORITY, of the Canadian government. Simply put, she’s not even bright enough to comprehend the fact that it’s her OWN government who is keeping people out, so she wants to blame the US military.

    In conclusion, if pointing out the simple TRUTH makes me a “neocon” in your eyes, so be it, at least I actually KNOW what I’m talking about. As for your concern about making distinctions between Socialism and Communism, don’t bother, Socialism is merely Communism Lite, and everyone with an IQ higher than room temperature readily acknowledge that fact. Did you ever go to the former East Germany, or Chekolosvakia, or any of the other countries of the former Soviet Union DURING the Cold War? Been there, seen that, and the only people who refuse to acknowledge that Socialism IS Communism Lite are the ones that have been ‘educated’ beyond their intelligence level, and their Communist masters.

  18. str8shooter says:

    Edit for above, I mis-spelled “Czechoslovakia”

  19. verbena19 says:

    str8shooter: I do not agree with everything Fogal says, I merely printed the Press Release I received. I do not necessarily — wholly — agree with everything in a piece I put up that is sent by others, however, I put it up anyway for info of those who may be interested. Sometimes I even put up very contrary pieces, mainly to show a different viewpoint, and to provoke some thought…

    As for my assumptions about your political leanings, you are correct. I should not have done that, so please accept my apology. Sometimes in my haste, I ‘say’ things that go against my usually fair-minded grain. My bad!

    Regarding living in the former Eastern Bloc: I have been there and done that. I was born in Hungary and lived there during the height of the Stalinists reign of terror. Family members were imprisoned for speaking the TRUTH… Although I was a little girl back then, I remember much…

    Consequently, although I consider myself a Democratic-Socialist/Social-Democrat/Humanist, I am far from being a Stalinist-Communist. I believe in the struggles of the working people and the down-trodden, and that hard-core capitalism benefits only the ruling elites and their minions, to the great detriment of the rest of us. (And no, I do not come from a ‘poor’ background. My family owned businesses before the Stalinists took them away. We were the only ones in our neighbourhood to even have a telephone. But that did not keep me from trying to help my poor classmates, and it does not keep me from fighting for the cause of workers and the poor now.)

    Finally: Yes, I know that it was the Canadian Government that allowed the US Army to dictate security measures. It still does not make it right, imo….

    best regards,
    annamarie

  20. verbena19 says:

    P.S. to Michael: While I like the stuff on Alternet, I disagree with them on this one. The NAU and SPP are indeed valid issues about which we should be very concerned. NAFTA was not a good, equitable trade deal for any other country but the US. Mexico got shafted too, their corn being just one prime example. Americans sell this Mexican staple far cheaper than the Mexican farmers are able to, hence cutting them out of the equation. Of course, this means that even more desperate, hungry Mexicans are risking life and limb to cross the US border… What would you do if you were unable to feed your children? You’d go look for work wherever you could, no??

  21. str8shooter says:

    Verbana, fair enough, we all err from time to time. As to posting articles from others, perhaps a bit of commentary on your behalf as to your thoughts on the article would be helpful in avoiding ‘misunderstandings’.

    My experience in Eastern Europe was merely as that of a ‘tourist’ while I was in the US military, working to bring down Communism, but what I DID see was enough to convince me that Socialism of ANY stripe is completely antithetical to basic Human Rights, period, end of discussion. I find your observation that “hard-core capitalism benefits only the ruling elites and their minions” to be more than a bit erronious. From my own experience coming from humble beginnings and having built my own business over the past 30 years, Capitalism is the only real way for anyone to achieve true freedom, and it benefits far more than any “ruling elites”. If you really do care about the little guys then try promoting them owning their OWN business’s rather than working for someone else! I’ve personally trained literally dozens of people over the years that now own thier own business’s, and THEY are now training THEIR employees so that some day THEY can own THEIR own business’s. When someone is an employee, they are worth, precisely and exactly, no more and no less, what it will cost to replace them, period, so it is up to the employee to pay attention, learn as much about their craft, trade, and business as they can, so that they too can join the “ruling elite” by starting THEIR own business. The simple fact is that too many people lack the drive and intelligence to do so, and find it far easier to depend on someone else for their subsistance and then spend their time complaining about being held down by ‘the man’, WHAT HYPOCRACY! They’re too fat, dumb and lazy to do the hard work of being responsible for themselves, but then all they want to do is bitch about it, well, if they want to be broke their whole lives, that’s on them, but don’t ask me to waste MY hard earned money taking care of their sorry butts when they get too old or sickly to work any more.

    As for your observations to Michael, the problem with the market in Mexico isn’t due to NAFTA, it’s due to so much of the corn crops being converted to ‘bio-fuels’ that the average Mexican is having a difficult time affording that basic staple of their diet. Combined with the extreme corruption in Mexico, the extreme disparity in their ‘classes’ and that joke of a gov’t down there, it’s little wonder that their poorer are coming North in droves.

    As to the last part, what aspect of the situation “isn’t right”? That a group of people with so little grasp of the current geo-political situation that one of their ‘leadership’ would author as much drivel as Fogel did (and the fact that she actually signed her name to it absolutely astounds me) should be ‘excluded’ from speaking their piece? Listening to the constant volumnous bleating of sheep never served anyone any good. Perhaps if they actually had something intelligent to say, their own political leaders would take the time to listen, but the conference is neither the time, nor the place for so many people to publically demonstrate their incredible lack of intelligence for the whole world to see.

  22. verbena19 says:

    str8shooter: Thank you for your intelligent reply. Yes, I agree with you that people should be helped to work for themselves. I’ve always been an avid proponent of small businesses, and do my best to support them here in my city, whenever possible. I also encourage people to do likewise, and help others start their own enterprises however small they may be. But there are people in society that are not fat & lazy, but their circumstances require a ‘helping hand’. Some of them are ill, severely handicapped; some are struggling with circumstances beyond their control. For these people, a caring society should provide basic ‘safety nets’… (In my opinion, one of the measures of a society is how it treats its less fortunate citizens…) It is not enough for a society to have material goods, it must also have a collective conscience… To function, a society needs workers who are its backbone. It is ludicrous to say that everyone should be in business for him/herself. We would all be much better served if business-owners would not merely look at their bottom-line profit margins, but also look at how their workers (who carry out necessary tasks) are faring. If you treat workers well, they will perform better, making your company function more optimally… It’s a symbiotic relationship. One can’t function without the other. So do not denigrate the ‘workers’. They are a vital part of a functioning society.

    Does this make me a Socialist or Communist?

    I have seen too much tragedy, and have witnessed exploitation in the work-place by some of the large corporations and/or unscrupulous employers. And there are those whose intelligence/capability level precludes them from ever going into business for themselves. However, this does not make them lesser human beings.

    This issue is very complex, and time does not permit me to be more detailed right now. Suffice it to say, that while I agree with much of what you say, I still think there are many factors and variables. Societies have been dealing with these issues since humankind left the safety of their clans to join other clans and form larger communities. Rulers were elected or appointed or they simply usurped power by force. After that, all is history…

    Mexico’s problems are many, I agree. Not least of which is caused by corrupt officials: the ‘elected’ or the usurpers… But NAFTA did have a negative effect, according to many articles I’ve read on the subject. The bio-diesel use of corn is but one problem…

    I can understand Fogel’s concern too. The very fact that the SPP was being held in ‘secret’ puts up the antennae of many people. If our government was not so damn secretive about the whole thing — and actually invited representatives from some of the groups to attend — it would have likely made a lot of difference. You see, our Stephen Harper already has a reputation for being secretive, selective, and downright disdainful of anyone who doesn’t fully agree with him to the point of nastiness, even those of his own Cabinet He eschews debate on any issue. He acts totally unaccountable, yet during his election campaign, this very ‘accountability and transparency’ is what he promised Canadian voters who were fed up with the Liberals’ corruption & cronyism. As well, Harper’s closeness to the Bush Administration is not supported by most Canadians. So when the US Army is thrown into the equation, well, you see what happens….

    You can’t blame people for being alarmed, even Fogel. The Three Amigos and invited Corporate CEO’s knew about this meeting for awhile. So why not let people know, be up front, and let the Municipality of Papineauville know in advance of the extensive security measures and that they should not take any reservations during the SPP meeting? This way, the Council of Canadians academics would not have booked there in the first place. (And I still think my suggestion of inviting reps of this group of citizens should have been done. It would have quelled much of the dissent, I think.) What they’ve accomplished by all their secrecy is to alienate more people and sound alarm bells. We Canadians cherish our distinctiveness from our US neighbours while at the same time, enjoy our similarities. We are fierce about our sovereignty, especially in light of more and more of our traditional institutions being bought up (or gobbled up via ‘hostile takeovers’) by US conglomerates (Hudson’s Bay Co. : The Bay, etc.) …

    Those are some of the aspects of the situation that aren’t right…

    I shall try to remember your advice about putting up a little something before I post items from elsewhere on which I may not be in full agreement… Often I try to do this, but sometimes, in my haste….. (you already know the rest… )

    regards,
    annamarie

  23. str8shooter says:

    There are those, who, through no fault of their own, find themselves in need of assistance, and it is our duty to provide what help is needed; where the rub comes in is when systems and programs are implemented that are as easily abused as the current systems and programs are. There are entirely too many people with no ‘infirmity’ other than sheer laziness who have become professional “welfare junkies”, and in fact, in the inner cities, our benevolence has created entire generations of a permanant underclass who have become incapable of caring for themselves due to our “help”.

    Mexicos problems are precisely that, MEXICO’s problems. NAFTA gave them the opportunity to access the markets throughout the region and they failed to capitalize on that opportunity. At this point, since so many of their people are already here, I’m beginning to wonder if it wouldn’t be in all of our best interests for the US to simply take over and make Mexico our 51st State!

    As for your Mr. Harper, I can understand why he is so disdainful of your activists, especially if they’re anywhere near as ignorant and annoying as ours (and from what I’ve seen, your’s are MUCH worse). Take the current situation in Iraq for instance, we’ve got US Senators and Congressmen standing at their lecturns telling the world that we’ve somehow ‘lost’ the war on terrorism when we’ve taken fewer casualties in the past 6 years than in almost any single major battle of WWII, and to what purpose do these traitors make their pronouncements, to satisfy their quite vocal, blithering idiot constituancy! I learned a very long time ago that most people are entirely too stupid to realize how stupid they really are, unfortunately though, they have the same “freedom of speech” as everyone else, and take every opportunity to “speak to power” even when what they’re saying doesn’t make a DAMN BIT OF SENSE!

    As far as the “take overs” of Canadian business by US corporations, what difference does it make who owns the company? If it was such a great company to begin with, and it was such an “institution”, the why didn’t a Canadian buy it? Sentimentality is all well and good, but it doesn’t feed the wife and kids. So many of our own US ‘institutions’ have been lost to overseas competition simply because of all of the protectionism and bad management, and now they’re being overshadowed by foreign competition. When Detroits auto makers bowed to the demands of the Unions, they themselves opened the door for Japanese auto makers to come in and take over the market share that had traditionally been ours and ours alone. This is another example of “helping” people to the point that they can no longer take care of themselves. Their own greed has put them out of a job and now they’re on welfare and all the rest, all on our, MY, tax dollars!

  24. verbena19 says:

    str8shooter: you’ve made some good points, even though I tend to disagree on some of them. I won’t go into the Iraq War now, as it’s another long story. The US invaded a country on manufactured ‘evidence’, then kept changing the story: ie, Saddam’s WMDs, then when that didn’t pan out, equating him with the terrorists of 9/11 (most of whom were Saudis!!), then when that would no longer wash ‘regime change’ became the reason. I happen to think that the reasons were entirely different… And yes, it did add fuel to ‘terrorism’, and no, the GWOT can not be won by decimating Iraq, or any other country for that matter…

    You and I seem to be on opposite sides of the political spectrum. However, that does not preclude us from having a discussion. (I actually have acquaintances whose opinions are similar to yours. So whenever we get together, we keep the political topics light, focussing instead on our similarities. That is the way we get along…)

    I welcome your comments anytime, whether or not you disagree/agree with me. As long as the tone is civil, exchange of ideas is good. It helps us see another viewpoint and make us think. We are not mirror images of one another. It’s our diversity that enhances dialogue, opens up discussions, keeps things interesting, helps us learn and understand. This diversity of views and ideologies should not divide people. Rather, it should be our common ground as human beings…

    Take care and have a good night.
    Annamarie

  25. opit says:

    I’m just passing by and won’t have time to contribute much as I’m mostly offline these days. One thought.
    Canada is stretched out along the U.S. border in a thin ribbon of population. The first forty years of our establishment as a country there was a constant fight to keep a tariff wall for one over-riding reason. Leaving it open would have mean geography would be free to be the most important factor in trade – in which case north-south movement of goods would predominate and we could kiss our country goodbye.
    The determination to institute ‘free trade’ with Canada – suitably jimmied so it would not be equitable- was on the CIA agenda in 1945. Almost 50 years later the Progressive Conservative government fell when the election platform of Free Trade and Government Sales Tax was the election platform. The opposition won handily – and instituted the policies they were elected to defeat.
    The U.S. is not Canada’s friend – neither is the C.I.A. It’s really not that hard to figure out.

  26. verbena19 says:

    Opit, thanks for stopping by and for commenting. Well said, as always!

    best regards, annamarie

  27. str8shooter says:

    Verbana,

    If I may be so bold to suggest, you really need to quit getting your (dis)information from the lamestream media and left wing groups who’s only agenda is discrediting President Bush (as opposed to telling the TRUTH), and start looking at primary documentation if you’re serious about understanding OEF and OIF. Nothing was “manufactured” except for all of the biological and chemical weapons that Saddam had, in his possession, after Desert Storm, including the ones that he used against his own people, right under the noses of those completely incompetent UN ‘inspectors’ (you know, the ones that couldn’t find those same said weapons before he DID use them). Also, let’s not forget the fact that Saddam not only allowed Al Qaeda to train in Iraq, before OIF, but that he also funded and supplied them with arms and expert military instructors to train them. All of this has been very clearly documented repeatedly, and is undisputed since before, and following the invasion of Iraq in 2003. There’s also that funny little sticking point about Saddams people not only having direct contact with the terrorists who attacked us on 9-11, but funding and supplying them long before they even arrived in the US, this is also undisputed by any but the most ardent Kool-Aide swillers or the willfully ignorant.

    As far as the GWOT, and how to win it, fighting them whenever and where ever they happen to be is how that’s done, just like it was in fighting the Baider Meinhoff Gang, Red Brigade, Red Army Faction, Action Directe, Black September, and any number of other terrorist groups that we were dealing with back in the 70’s. If they want to go to Iraq to fight us, and attempt to prevent the Iraqi people from being able to determine for themselves what type of government they wish to have, and who will run that government, then by all means we welcome them to go, especially since it means we WON’T be having to fight them on the streets of Chicago, Atlanta, New York, San Francisco, Ontario, Toronto, Calgary, or Vancouver. It’s also much easier to kill them outright in the open terrain of Iraq than in the heavily wooded terrain of North America which is one of the reasons that contrary to all of the BS from the lamestream media, our casualties have been so light over the past 4 years. Our mission is not now, nor was it ever to decimate Iraq, it was to remove Saddam from power, assist the people of Iraq to establish their own government in whatever shape they chose to craft it, and provide security for that government until their Police and military are able to do it for themselves (Marshall Plan anyone?), and that mission, to date, has been more or less successful (not always pretty or necessarily the most efficient, but successful none the less). Let us not forget that it took our own (US) government 11 years, AFTER the Declaration of Independence, AFTER fighting an 8 year war FOR that independence (which when one considers the infighting between the Colonials and the Loyalists wasn’t that dissimilar from the present day situation in Iraq), before we had a Constitution that all 13 Colonies could agree to and adopt (and the fact that we shipped all of the Loyalists out of our new country after the war was over too, which is where a lot of your fellow citizens came from!).

    I agree that a civil discussion if far more advantageous to understanding than the constant vitriolic epithets that is so prevelent today, but I find that discussing contrary view points is generally the best way to acquire that understanding as not much can be gleaned by ‘preaching to the choir’. The thing that bothers me the most though is when people espouse a viewpoint by regurgitating what the talking heads on the idiot box say without attempting to ascertain the validity of those talking points. Such inane parroting is all well and good for cocktail parties and mindless office gossip, but it merely serves to amplify ones lack of serious intellectual curiosity, especially when attempting to discuss those issues with someone who HAS bothered to ‘do their homework’.

    Here’s hoping you have a good evening.

  28. str8shooter says:

    Opit,

    The main reason that your population is strung out along OUR northern border is so that they could avail themselves of OUR goods and services while attempting to delude themselves that they really were a proper ‘territory’, and later, a ‘soveriegn nation’. If it weren’t for our largess throughout the late 18th and early to mid 19th centuries, Canada, as a country, would have folded like a cheap suit and it’s citizenry been forced to return to Mother England. Your entire country exists only due to our good will and financial support (and our intention to maintain good relations with Great Britain despite the Revolutionary War and the conflict in 1812), so if you’re under the impression that WE’RE the problem, I would suggest that you take a much longer, and harder, look in the mirror. The United States can exist quite nicely, and easily, without Canada thank you very much, but the converse cannot be said.

  29. verbena19 says:

    str8shooter, I really must disagree with all your statements about Saddam, Iraq, Bush and the War, including GWOT. OIF was not started for the reasons you say. I read much, diverse material, not just the ‘lamestream’ media which I consider to be mainly obtuse and indeed ‘lame’. I suggest you read Tom Engelhardt’s material on Tomdispatch.com (http://www.tomdispatch.com) among others. Dahr Jamail also has lots of ‘reality’ on his MidEast Dispatches (http://dahrjamailiraq.com) website. He is an independent American journalist who travels extensively to Iraq and the Middle East, and has firsthand, unembedded accounts of the situation.

    And yes, although we seem to be on diametrically opposite sides, we still manage to carry on a civil discourse. That is good.

    You have a good evening too.
    Annamarie

  30. Frank says:

    Dont let history repeat itself. We need to protest this NORTH AMERICAN UNION. It is design to give up your land and freedom to a world gov. Then the amero will come in and it will be a total scam to our economy. Same thing that did happen in europe with the euro. WAKE UP PEOPLE BEFORE ITS TO LATE. THE BUSH DOCTRINE IS AT OUR DOOR!

  31. verbena19 says:

    Thanks, Frank! Please help spread the word by telling everyone you know about the SPP. Otherwise, it will be further implemented before we realise what happened.

    As far as I know, so far only BC (Burnaby-New Westminster) MP Peter Julian of the NDP is doing something about it. He has a Motion to be debated in Parl’t this fall. Check out his website for more info, download the Motion, and print out & sign his petition. Wherever you go this summer, try to get people to add their signatures so that Peter has something more to take back with him in the fall…. Our government must know that we, the Canadian people, do NOT approve of this insidious ‘partnership’. They were trying to hold the Montebello planning meeting in SECRET, but the Council of Canadians — and a few others — got wind of it.

    ~annamarie

  32. Sue says:

    str8shooter, YOUR A MORONIC SHEEPLE! And don’t know what the HELL is REALLY GOING ON! Fact, TREASONOUS BUSH got us into NAU, SECRETLY in 2005, without our’s or Congress’s consent! IT WILL WIPE AMERICA AND OUR PRECIOUS FREEDOM’S OUT, YOU MORONS! FACTS! We would NO longer be called American’s but North Americanists! We would NO longer have our precious Constitution, you idiots! NO longer would Canada and U.S. nor Mexico have their soverighty! FACTS! IT WOULD WIPE AMERICA OUT! AND F*CKING BUSH AND OTHERS IN CONGRESS WHO SUPPORT NAU AND SPP ARE OUT AND OUT TRAITORS, FACTS! And IF you still support Bush after him getting U.S. into NAU and SPP YOUR A F*CKING TRAITOR TOO! FACT! Go to http://www.stopthenau.org and read up on how it will WIPE OUT AMERICA, YOU STUPID ASSES! And Bush is using our troops like Hitler used his! As pawns in needless wars and to suppress other citizens in other nations! WE MUST EDUCATE OUR TROOPS AND NOW HOW BAD NAU IS AND HOW IT WILL DESTROY AMERICA FROM WITHIN AND ALSO TO HAVE THEM REFUSE TO BE POLICE TO TYRANNY,OPPRESSION AND TREASON! AND NOW! And to my fellow protester’s in Canada against NAU and SPP, I am soo very sorry for treasonous Bush doing this! How can I help you out?

  33. Sue says:

    Right ON Frank! Spread the word FAST IN CANADA AND U.S. TOO! And right letters to editor’s in BOTH COUNTRIES ON THIS! STOP THE NAU AND NOW BEFORE THEY WIPE OUT U.S., CANADA AND MEXICO AND IT IS PURE EVIL NEW WORLD ORDER AGENDA DOING THIS FOR ONE WORLD GOV’T WHICH IS TYRANNY, OPPRESSION AND TREASON! PERIOD! AND ANYONE SUPPORTING BUSH’S AGENDA OR ANY FOREIGN LEADER’S AGENDA THAT IS PRO-NAU IS A TREASONOUS TRAITORS, FACT! Spread the word widely and FAST! WE MUST GET THE WORD OUT AND NOW! Go to http://www.stopthenua.org and get DVD’s and bumpersticke’rs too and NOW! Write letters to editors and like and NOW! GET UP OFF YOUR LAZY ASSES IN AMERICA AND DEFEND AMERICA FROM TREASONOUS BUSH AND COHORTS IN BOTH PARTIES AND NOW BEFORE THEY DESTROY AMERICA AND OUR PRECIOUS FREEDOMS FROM WITHIN! And just so you know too, and need to wake up to also, that 9-11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB TOO! FACTS! ALL TRUE!

  34. str8shooter says:

    Verbana,

    If you would care to expoud a bit further on exactly what it is you don’t ‘agree’ with concerning Saddam, OIF, and GWOT, I will be more than happy to provide you with any and all information to support what I have previously stated, not only from the ‘lamestream’ media, but also from un-, and declassified gov’t sources. Simply put, we went into Iraq because Saddam not only was still in possession of WMD, but had planned on reconstituting the programs the UN had managed to disband and disable the minute they left the country, and this has been evidenced by the transcrips of his own recorded conversations with his sons! There is also the fact of the convoys of suspected (I use the word suspected advisedly since satellites cannot ‘prove’ what was in those convoys) WMD’s that were spirited across the border into Syria, and later into Lebanon, on the eve of the invasion, and we still know where ‘whatever’ was in those trucks is in Syria and Lebanon. Also, as an aside, do you dispute that Saddam used Biological and Chemical weapons against his own people?

    As for the sources you provided, I will check them out later this evening, but the vast majority of information I’ve been getting about Iraq and Afghanistan since 9-11 has been coming from the first hand accounts of Soldiers and Airmen (both Officers and Enlisted) who have returned from tours in those fetid parts of the world (I live near a major military installations and have many friends and associates who are on Active Duty in the Army and Air Force), and I give their assessments of the situations there much more credence than the vast majority of what’s coming out of the liberal controlled “news” agencies who are attempting to use the GWOT as a cudgel against the President.

  35. Big Billy Bob says:

    str8shooter, i hope you rott in HELL. Your a globalist. One day the Mexican army could be patroling your AMERICAN streets (all in the name if terrorism). You are one ignorant man.

  36. [...] as many as 10,000 people could assemble in Quebec to demonstrate. One particular activist group, Canadian Action Party , has taken issue with US troops coordinating operations for the confab on Canadian soil while [...]

  37. Cedarsprig says:

    Verbena19 I am also an American but believe that U.S. Military should not be on Canadian soil against Canadian citizenry anymore than they should be on U.S. soil against their own people. Unfortunately Posse Comitatus is no longer honored here. Also unfortunate is the fact that we have German, Belgian soldiers already within our borders to do exactly what our military is doing in your country. The Mexican army crosses our Southern border with great regularity and has been seen armed several hundred miles past the border in Texas. The Mexican army has also killed American citizens but you never hear about it on mainstream media. This is not a unique problem to any country anymore – and will not stop until citizens everywhere wake up and stand up. Good luck to you and others that think like you. Stay safe.

  38. Cedarsprig says:

    Amen Big Billy Bob you must be a fellow Texan!

  39. verbena19 says:

    Cedarsprig, thank you so much for your input. I was not aware that the situation is as bad as it is. Indeed, people everywhere need to wake up and take actions before we lose our countries entirely. Please help get the information out… and let others know… You stay safe too.

    best regards, annamarie

  40. Cedarsprig says:

    I think there is a common bond between many countries these days. A favorite quote of mine summarizes what GWB has used the war in Iraq for — “Beware the leader who bangs the drums of war in order to whip the citizenry into a patriotic fervor, for patriotism is indeed a double-edged sword, it both emboldens the blood, just as it narrows the mind. And when the drums of war have reached a fever pitch and the blood boils with hate and the mind has closed, the leader will have no need in seizing the rights of the citizenry. Rather, the citizenry, infused with fear and blinded by patriotism, will offer up all of their rights unto the leader and gladly so. How do I know? For this is what I have done. And I am Caesar.” This was also done by Adolf Hitler. There are older naturalized citizens I know that came from Poland, and Argentina that recognize what happened to their country is happening here. Our constitution is so neutered by “executive orders” that we are warned about talking against GWB, the war in Iraq, the government as being unpatriotic and under The Patriot Act (HAHA) and we can be taken into custody. When patriotism is just that – the freedom to be able to say “You are not doing things in the best interest of our country” Our Republic (and that is what America is, not a Democracy which is just two wolves and a sheep deciding whats for dinner) which is a system of checks and balances is being destroyed by our leaders lying to us, sending our military into places they have no right to be, and the incremental destruction of our constituion, our laws, our honor and our way of life. It is dark in America but there is an honest, patriotic belief growing and hopefully it will grow quickly to reinstate America back to its people where it belongs.

  41. Cedarsprig says:

    Also, str8shooter – My son was in Iraq and the story that he and others are bringing back are not the ones that you are being told. You are being misinformed. Either your sources are blindly following the lies or they are part of the problem. I suggest you broaden your information base. And look with your fresh eyes at the problem. You love Americ no doubt, but as it once was; take the time “just in case” to see what is happening today. Prove me wrong.

  42. verbena19 says:

    Cedarsprig, your honest, heartfelt words show that there are many good, true Americans who love their country and for what it used to stand. People like you give hope that perhaps it may still not be too late to turn back the tide… The power is in the people. The ruling oligarchs fear the common people if they stand united. History has shown this. But the people must awaken to realities, instead of believing what their corrupt leaders brainwash into them, aided and abetted by a neutered, compliant media… The corporate rulers care not about their country and its citizens. They care only about power which furthers their hegemonic agenda, their insatiable ‘appetites’, their quest for power for its own sake … They feel that the entire globe is theirs to do with as they wish… It is easy to feed the egos of corrupt, power-hungry politicians in order to advance these interests… To brainwash the citizenry is the easiest part. Divide and conquer, then play the ‘fear’ and ‘patriotism’ card. Instead of people, you now have ‘sheeple’ who will blindly follow any outrageous edict… But the power is in the people by their sheer numbers, if only they put differences aside and UNITE FOR THE COMMON GOOD!!!

    str8shooter — I have heard completely different stories back from Iraq too, told by soldiers who were there. I agree with Cedarsprig that you are misinformed. Please listen to your countryman/woman and broaden your information. As for what you say about Saddam: yes, he was a no-good sob, but he posed no threat to us. He forcibly kept the various factions of his country together. He committed heinous acts against his own people. He was also being aided by the US for a while, until he started getting too cocky and making too many waves. (Remember the chummy meeting between Saddam and Rummy a few years back? The ‘lamestream’ media described him as “avuncular” and “friendly” back then….) May I suggest you read a very illuminating book by Greg Palast called “Armed Madhouse”. You will find a link to it on my sidebar… btw, it has been proven that those WMD’s you’re talking about that were supposedly shipped to Syria in convoys were nothing. They were not WMD’s. Saddam really did not have them. When the truth finally came out about this, the official stance was changed to ‘we are in Iraq to stop al-Queda before they attack us again”…. but Saddam had NO CONNECTION TO AL-QUEDA!! He was a controlling despot and a secular Sunni!! He would allow NO DISSENT, let alone a group so fundamentalist as al-Queda. If you want al-Queda’s leader Usama bin Laden, why not go after him in the hills of Tora Bora where he was allegedly already cornered????? Why invade Iraq???? Ask yourself some questions, then seek to find the truth. Do not blindly believe. Your leaders are NOT ABOVE THE LAW!! DO NOT IDOLIZE or WORSHIP THEM!! THEY ARE NOT GODS, THEY ARE MERE MORTALS, and often VERY CORRUPT MORTALS, as evidenced by the present regime. (Not that there weren’t corrupt leaders/regimes in your country before, but this one is the WORST, most overtly corrupt! This administration doesn’t even try to hide the fact that it is corrupt. The regime’s mouthpieces shamelessly subvert facts, while it’s main puppet issues one insane Executive Order after another, all the while robbing you blind of everything, including your self respect… )

    Sadly, my country will not fare much better if we allow the present regime here to grow more powerful — unabated, unchecked. I am hoping that by the time the next federal election comes around, Canadians will have awakened from their stupor (if they can tear themselves away from ‘reality-tv’ and ipods long enough) and tune into the ‘true reality’ of what is taking place around us…

  43. verbena19 says:

    Cedarsprig: btw, I really like that quote you put up. Thanks for bringing it back to my mind.

  44. Stephen says:

    Kudos to you on trying to maintain a civilized dialogue with an initially hostile str8shooter. And to his credit, he seems to have countered in kind for the most part, though I disagree with most of what he said.

    However, what he said about Saddam is a whitewash. Saddam was a monster to his own people it is true, especially in earlier years when he was friends with Rummy, but in the time leading up to the US of invasion of 2003, it is well known that he was NOT a threat to any other country, he had NO wmds, he did NOT have a relationship with Al Qaeda (in fact he detested them). If any of this were in fact true, we all know full well that they White House, and Fox News for that matter, would spare no effort in spouting it.

  45. JDSmith says:

    Oil and Water

    If the US does not get lucky in Iraq, then they will be paddling up river to see if Canada has any.

    Liberal, NDP, Bloc and Green parties need to force discussion on SPP in the House of Commons.

    It is not more complex than this. There are no many words. We have a government it should be used.

  46. JDSmith says:

    Hmm… darn, keybooard… spelling…

    It is not more complex than this. There are too many words. We have a government it should be used.

  47. verbena19 says:

    Thanks, Stephen! Yes, I agree with you about Saddam… Indeed, he was a monster to his own people but he was not a serious threat to anyone else (unless you consider his manipulation of the oil bourse a ‘serious threat’). As bad as he was, most Iraqis agree that life under his despotic reign was still MUCH BETTER than now under the US/Coalition occupation. In their haste to advance their agenda when political manueuvring and voting fraud gave them the gullible, swaggering Texan puppet, the American neo-cons failed to do their homework. They know very little about the history of Iraq and even less about the factions and complexities that make up Iraqi society — or the complex history of the Middle East, for that matter…

    I also disagree with most of what str8shooter said but he seems like a good person, albeit a misinformed one…. His heart is in the right place and he is very patriotic, loves his country. Sadly, despotic governments unscrupulously conflate this patriotism with blind obedience. With help from the obeisant media, the traitor-leaders saturate their citizenry with misinformation campaigns and outright lies — which work best on those who consider themselves most patriotic for they tend to view their Chief as infallible… The more cynical a person is, the harder the work of turning him/her into a ‘believer-follower’. If misinformation takes too long to achieve the desired effect, then subjugate them by fear, edicts, executive orders, decrees, shocks, divisions, etc. This usually works so well that they don’t even have use the last resort: bringing in the military, hence a bloodless coup against Democracy…. That’s in a nutshell how tyrannical governments seize power before the hapless people know what happened.

    We in Canada can’t sit back on our laurels either. If the present neoCon regime continues unchecked, we will soon be facing the same fate as our southern neighbours. We can kiss our sovereignty, civil liberties, health-care, social programs and freedoms good-bye. We, too, must wake up. APATHY IS NOT AN OPTION!

    best regards to you, Annamarie

  48. verbena19 says:

    JDSmith: You hit the nail on the head. Oil and Water is what’s at the root of it all.

    Up to now, only the NDP’s Peter Julian (MP Burnaby-New Westminster) is showing concern about the SPP. He has a motion for debate at the Standing Committee on International Trade in the fall session of Parliament, He also has a petition to the Government of Canada from the Citizens of Canada. It is: “A CALL TO SUSPEND THE SECURITY AND PROSPERITY PARTNERSHIP OF NORTH AMERICA (SPP) ON CONTINENTAL INTEGRATION”.

    The Petition is for downloading, getting as many signatures as we can during what’s left of our summer, then send them back to Peter in the ppaid envelope (included with the download). You can find it all on his website: http://www.peterjulian.ca/category/id/16/all
    ~ Stop the Sellout of Canada: TAKE ACTION ~ Help Stop Deep Integration ~ Support the NDP motion and sign the petition!

    I strongly URGE ALL CANADIANS TO SIGN THIS PETITION AND GET AS MANY SIGNATURES AS YOU CAN!! Then remember to send them back to Peter Julian before the fall session of Parliament.

  49. verbena19 says:

    PS to Stephen: I meant to add the piece about Peter Julian’s motion and his petition, but left it off my earlier comment by mistake. Hit the wrong button without realizing it… seems like JDSmith isn’t the only one with keyboard problems… ;)

  50. str8shooter says:

    …{Big Billy Bob Says:

    July 26th, 2007 at 1:04 am
    str8shooter, i hope you rott in HELL. Your a globalist. One day the Mexican army could be patroling your AMERICAN streets (all in the name if terrorism). You are one ignorant man.}…

    Billy Bob, your tin foil hat has slipped off! I am no more a “globalist” than you are, but perhaps the polysyllabic collocation confused you. Each of our nations is entitled to is’s own sovereignty PROVIDED that they don’t interfere with the affairs of any other nation WITHOUT their consent. Our troops are in Canada at the INVITATION of the Canadian gov’t, and strictly to provide security for our President during his visit there, PERIOD!

    As far as your assertion concerning my alleged ignorance, perhaps if your own intelligence quotient were larger than your boot size (which, BTW, you appear to have on the wrong feet!), you would have been able to elucidate your specific objections to my expressed stance on the particular issue you seem to have taken umbrage.

    Also, BTDT, but was released because the SOB was afraid I was going to TAKE OVER!

  51. str8shooter says:

    Cedarsprig Says:

    July 26th, 2007 at 6:45 pm
    Also, str8shooter – My son was in Iraq and the story that he and others are bringing back are not the ones that you are being told. You are being misinformed. Either your sources are blindly following the lies or they are part of the problem. I suggest you broaden your information base. And look with your fresh eyes at the problem. You love Americ no doubt, but as it once was; take the time “just in case” to see what is happening today. Prove me wrong.

    Cedarsprig,

    I completely trust the men I get my information from, primarily as they are men whom I have known for years (many from long before 9-11), and each of them are members of the 82nd Airborne Division, Special Forces, or AFSOC. They are ALL out on the sharp end of the spear (several of them have MULTIPLE Purple Hearts for their trouble), so lacking your sons Bona Fides, I will continue to accept what my brothers are telling me. It would appear that you have fallen victim to the lamestream medias coverage, or should I say lack thereof, of all of the good that has been, and continues to be done over there including schools that are now operating in Iraq and Afghanistan (with, for the first time EVER, female students attending), the hospitals that are fully operational, the electricity that is now in towns and villiages that never had it before, CLEAN running water in towns and villiages that until our invasion were still getting their water from hand drawn wells, and the list goes on.

    As to your challenge to “prove me wrong”, perhaps if you could provide something specific TO prove wrong I might be able to do so, or perhaps I’d be readily willing to acknowledge that something is in fact wrong and in need of attention. I eagerly await your reply.

  52. str8shooter says:

    Verbana,

    I must say that after reading some of the replies in this thread, my suspicion that most Liberals are incapable of intelligently elucidating anything even closely resembling a cogent thought has been, once again, proven correct. Add to that, their propensity to resort to hurling invectives rather than facts or pertainant intelligent thought only serves to further convince me of my previous conclusions, I’m only grateful that even though we disagree on certain issues that you have been able to engage in thoughtful contemplative discourse (maybe you can suggest that some of your other ‘guests’ might follow your lead?).

  53. str8shooter says:

    Verbana,

    Perhaps you will find the following infomation helpful in understanding the FACTS about Saddam, which contradict what you’ve been spoonfed by the lamestream media (and the funny thing is that ALL of this is from that same-said lamestream media!).

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200499,00.html
    Report: Hundreds of WMDs Found in Iraq

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/01/25/wirq25.xml
    Saddam’s WMD hidden in Syria, says Iraq survey chief

    http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2004-07-07-iraq-uranium_x.htm
    U.S. transferred uranium from Iraq without U.N. authorization

    OTHER TIES BETWEEN SADDAM AND TERRORISM, INCLUDING DIRECTLY BETWEEN SADDAM AND AL QAEDA AND THE 9-11 ATTACKS (Each of these came from ‘Major’ news agencies and not the ‘fringe’ junk “news” sources)

    Iraqi Ramzi Yousef, the ringleader of the 1993 WTC attacks, entered the US before the attack on an Iraqi passport.

    Evidence recovered in Tikrit by US Forces clearly show that Indiana born, Iraqi raised and Al Qaeda member Mr. Abdul Rahman Yasin, who had mixed the explosives for the 1993 WTC attack that killed 6 and injured another 1,042 Americans, had not only been allowed to travel freely in Iraq and visit his father’s home almost daily, but that Saddam gave him sanctuary, a home and a monthly stipend as reward for his role in the attack.

    January 5, 2000 – Iraqi VIP facilitator Ahmad Hikmat Shakir was dispatched from Baghdad’s Embassy in Malaysia to meet Khalid al Midhar and Nawaz al Hamzi at the airport in Kuala Lampur where he was ‘employed’. He then took them to their hotel where these soon-to-be 9-11 hijackers met with their fellow conspirators Ramzi bin al Shibh and Tawfiz al Atash. Five days later Shakir went missing until his arrest in Qatar on September 17, 2001, where documents both on his person at the time of his arrest, and located in his apartment in the subsequent investigation indicated that he was not only involved in the 1993 WTC attacks, but also in the 1995 Al Qaeda plan entitled “Operation Bojinka” which was to simultaneously destroy 12 airliners over the Pacific.

    The Czech government maintains the veracity of it’s intelligence that on April 22, 2001, 9-11 terrorist Mohamed Atta met with Iraqi Diplomat/Intelligence Officer Ahmed Khalin Ibrahim Samir al Ani in Prague, a meeting that resulted in his expulsion due to his activities not being compatible with his diplomatic status.

    March 11, 2002- Tariq Aziz announces that Saddam has increased the bounties to be paid to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers from $10,000.00 to up to $25,000.00

    March 13, 2002- Carol Ritter of Knight Ritter, reporting from Gaza City said “In a graduation-style ceremony Wednesday, the families of 22 Palestinians killed fighting Israelis received checks for $10,000 or more, certificates of appreciation and a kiss on each cheek- compliments of Iraq’s Saddam Hussein.” She added: “The certificates declared the gift from President Saddam Hussein; the checks were cut at a Gaza branch of the Cairo-Amman bank.”

    Between March 11, 2002 when Saddam announced the increase in the “bounty”, and the March 20, 2003 start of Operation Iraqi Freedom, 28 suicide bombers killed 223, and wounded 1,209 people, including 12 Americans.

    Following his capture on April 25, 2002 Iraq’s former Ambassador to Turkey and suspected liaison between Iraq and Al Qaeda admitted that he had met with senior Al Qaeda leaders in 1994 at Saddam Hussein’s request.

    April 14, 2002, Special Forces teams operating outside Baghdad captured Abu Abbas, the mastermind behing the Achille Lauro hijacking, where he had been living under the protection of Saddam Hussein since 2000.

    April 18, 2002, Khala Khadr al Salahat of the ANO surrendered to members of the First MARDIV. The Sunday Times of London quoted a Palestinian source as saying that al Salahat and Nidal had furnished the Libyans with the Semtex used to bring down Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie in 1988, killing all 259 on board (including 189 Americans) and another 11 on the ground

    According to the May 21, 2002 report entitled Patterns of Global Terrorism, published by the US State Department, Abu Nidal Organization, Arab Liberation Front, Hamas, Kurdistan Workers’ Party, Muhahedin-e-Khalq Organization, and the PLO all operated offices or bases inside Iraq in direct violation of UN Security Council Resolution 687.

    In testimony before the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee on July 31, 2002, former Iraqi nuclear weapons chief Khidir Hamza testified that Islamic fundamentalist terrorists from Egypt, Saudi Arabia and other Gulf States had received training in terrorist tactics at the camp at Salman Pak which included training in assassination, explosives and hijacking. This testimony was corroborated an interview of former Iraqi Captain Sabah Khodada in an October 14, 2001 interview on PBS’s Frontline, in which Khodada, who had worked at Salman Pak stated that the training included kidnapping, hijacking of aircraft, trains, and public buses as well as use and concealment of explosives and suicide operations.

    Before killing himself rather than be taken alive by US forces in August of 2002, Abu Nidal had been a guest of Saddam Hussein since at least 1999. Nidal, was responsible for attacks in at least 20 countries dating back to the early 1970’s, killing 407 people and wounding another 788.

    The October 2002 assassination of US diplomat Lawrence Foley in Amman Jordan was arranged by Abu Musab al Zarqawi, the former director of Al Qaeda training bases in Afghanistan, who had fled to Iraq after being wounded during the fall of the Taliban and recovered from his injuries before starting an Ansar al Islam terrorist training camp in Northern Iraq.

    The November 14, 2002 edition of the Babylon Daily Political Newspaper, which was published by none other than Uday Hussein, published it’s “List of Honor” in which it listed the names and titles of 600 leading Iraqis including “Abid Al-Karim Muhamed Aswod, Intelligence Officer responsible for the coordination of activities with the Osama Bin Laden group at the Iraqi Embassy in Pakistan.” Abid Al-Karim Muhamed Aswod was the Iraqi Ambassador to Islamabad in November of 2002. This edition of the paper was found in Baghdad by Federal Court of Appeals Judge Gilbert S. Merritt while assisting in the rebuilding of the Iraqi legal system, and noted in an article in the June 25 edition of the Tennessean that two of his Iraqi associates remembered Iraqi Secret Police going to great lengths to remove the publication from newsstands and homes as it was feared that it could be used as evidence of ties between Iraq and Al Qaeda following the 9-11 attacks.

    February 13, 2003 – The government of the Philippines expels Hisham al Hussein, the Second Secretary at the Iraqi Embassy in Manila after discovering through his cell phone records that he had spoken with Abu Madja and Hamsiraji Sali, the leaders of Abu Sayyaf immediately before and shortly after their Al Qaeda sponsored group attack in Zamboanga City which resulted in the deaths of two Filipinos and US Special Forces SFC Mark Wayne Jackson.

    Manhattan Federal Judge, Harold Baer (a Clinton appointee) has held that Saddam Hussein, Osama bin Laden and others to pay the families of George Eric Smith and Timothy Soulas, who were killed in the 9-11 WTC terrorist attack, $104 Million dollars after hearing evidence “satisfactory to the court” that Iraq provided material support to bin Laden and Al Qaeda, and a Federal Judgment has been secured against them.
    =============================================================

    Now, if you have evidence to contradict any of this, from equally ‘accepted’ sources, I will be MORE than happy to consider it.

    Take care and God bless.

  54. str8shooter says:

    One last thing for this evening if I may be so bold, do ANY of you have ANY concept of historical perspective? President Reagan sent Donald Rumsfeld (then President and CEO of a private pharmeceutical company) as a Special Envoy to meet with Saddam Hussein, who was, by default, our “ally” in the region. It was nothing more than a case of the age old “the enemy of my enemy is my friend”. Following the release of our hostages from Iran in 1980, the year after Saddam officially came to power in Iraq, our relations with Iran were strained to say the least, and Iraq was at that time involved in open hostilities against Iran, so officially meeting with the relatively new leader of Iraq was only prudent.

    Suffice it to say, all of this “Rummy met with Saddam” ranting is intellictually bankrupt moral cowardess and a clear indication of the fatuity of anyone who attempts to broker such drivel in a serious discussion.

  55. verbena19 says:

    Str8shooter:

    You have given me much to ponder… I had not seen those articles to which you refer. However, ‘FoxNews’ is one that I do not take seriously. I’ve seen too much biased, logorrheic diatribe which passes for discourse, commentary or news on there… (I tend to refer to it as ‘faux news’).

    However, I will search around for more pertinent info and will post anything contradictory, as time permits…

    Your comment to Cedarsprig indicates that there are divergent views on the same issue. Cedarsprig’s son and his fellow soldiers are right in telling of things that they have seen (and perhaps done), and your fellow soldiers are also right in telling their stories. Different people, different perspectives. One does not necessarily negate the other. It just shows the complexities of a divisive, brutal war — as indeed are most wars. Personally, I am a proponent of peaceful, diplomatic negotiations and solutions. I feel that wars mostly offer band-aid ‘fixes’ to deeper issues, which simmer, only to resurface later with even worse consequences… Also, it has been shown throughout our turbulent history, that civilians pay the much higher casualty costs of wars. (I know that this likely will not be agreeable to you, being a military man, but there I go again, ‘assuming’… ;)

    As hard as it sometimes is, I do try my utmost to comprehend all sides of a situation, and to at least try to understand anothers’ views… None of us are entirely unbiased, for we all are products of our upbringing, schooling, circumstances, the community in which we live and the personal experiences that shape our lives. Our experiences and learning are ongoing and these shape our views. Humans are sentient beings, not static. We can not say with absolute certainty that the way we feel today, we will feel tomorrow…. Two people can witness the same event, yet their reporting of that event may paint a rather different picture…. (But I seem to have digressed…)

    Anyway, I’ll let you know when I find those contradictory articles, ok?

    Until then, take care and best regards,
    Annamarie

  56. Stephen says:

    “Suffice it to say, all of this “Rummy met with Saddam” ranting is intellictually bankrupt moral cowardess and a clear indication of the fatuity of anyone who attempts to broker such drivel in a serious discussion.”

    I’m going to take that as an insult directed at me.

    It is absolutely relevant. My enemy of my enemy is my friend is a copout, especially when you know that your enemy of your enemy is partaking in grave human rights violations. The intellectually bankruptcy is rather apparent on the part of those who ignored rave human rights violations in the 80s, and then condemned later on when it was convenient for them. I am transcribing the following from the Great War for Civilization by Rober Fisk.

    “Throughout the early years of Saddam’s rule, there were journalists who told the truth about his regime while governments — for financial, trade and economic reasons — preferred to remain largely silent. Yet those of us who opposed the Anglo-American invasion of Iraq in 2003 were quickly accused of being Saddam’s ‘spokesman’ or, in my case, ‘supporting the maintenance of the Baathis regime’ — this from, of all people, Richard Perle, one of the prime instigators of the whole disastrous war, whose friend Donald Rumsfeld was befirneding Saddam in 1983. Two years later Rumsfeld’s initial approach to the Iraqi leader — followed up within months by a meeting with Tariq Aziz — I was reporting on Saddam’s gang-rape and torture in Iraq prisons. On 31 July, Wahbi Al-Qaraghuli, the Iraqi ambassador in London, complained to William Rees-Mogg, the Times Editor, that:

    Robert Fisks’s extremely one-sided article ignores the tremendous advances made by Iraq in the fields of social welfare, education, agricultural development, urban improvement and women’s suffrage;and he claims, without presenting any evidence to support such an accusation, that ‘Saddam himself imposes a truly terrorist regimeon his own people.’ Especially outrageous is the statement that: ‘Suspected critics of the regime have been imprisoned at Abu Ghoraib (sic) jail and forced to watch their wives being gang-raped by Saddam’s security me. Some prisoner’s have had to witness their children being tortured in from of them.’ It is utterly reprehensible that some journalists are quite prepared, without any supporting collaboration, to repeat wild, unfounded allegations about countries, such as Iraq…

    ‘Extremely one-sided,’ ‘without presenting any evidence,’ ‘outrageous,’ ‘utterly reprehensible,’ ‘wild, unfounded allegatioons': these were the very same expressions used by the Americans and the British almost twenty years later about reports by myself or my colleagues which catalogued the illegal invasion of Iraq and its disastrous consequences. In February 1986, I was refused a visa to Baghadad on the grounds that ‘another visit by Mr. Fisk to Iraq would lend undue credibility to his reports.’ Indeed it would.

    Sofor all these years — until his invasion of Kuwait in 1990 — we in the West tolerated Saddam’s cruelty, his oppression and torture, his war crimes and mass murder. After allo, we helped to create him. The CIA gave locations of communist cadres to the first Baathist government, information that was used to arrest, torture and execute hundreds of Iraqi men. And the closer Saddam camre to war with Iraq, the greater his fear of his own Shia opoulation, the more we helped him. In the pageant of hate figures that Western governments and journalists have helped to stage in the middle East — peopled by Nasser, Ghadafi, Abu Nidal and, at one point, Yassir Arafat — Ayatollah Khiomeini was our bogeyman of the early 1980s, the troublesome priest who wanted to Islamicise the world, whose stated intention was to spread his revolution. Saddam, far from being a dictator, thus became, on the Associated Press news wires, for example — ‘a strongman.’ He was our bastion — and the Arab world’s bastion — against Islamic ‘extremism.’ Even after the Israelis bombed Iraq’s Osirak nuclear reactor in 1981, our support for Saddam did on waver. Nor did we respond to Saddam’s clear intention of driving his country to war with Iran. The signs of impending conflict were everywhere. Even Shapour Bakhitiar, the Shah’s last prime minister, was helping to stoke opposition to Khomeni from Iraq, as I discovered when I visited him in his wealthy — but dangerous — Paris exile in August 1980.” (pp. 207-9)

    Here is another passage from Fisk’s book:

    “What we had to forget if we were to support this madness, needless to say, was that President Ronald Reason dispatched a special envoy to meet Saddam Hussein in December 1983. It was essential to forget this for three reasons. First, because the awful Saddam was already using gas against the Iranians –which was one of the reasons we were now supposed to go to war with him. Second, because the envoy was sent to Iraq to arrange the re-opening of the US embassy — in order to secure better trade and economic relations with the Butcher of Baghad. And third, because the envoy was Donald Rumsfeld. One might have thought it strange, in the course of his folksy press conference, that Rumsfeld hadn’t chatted to use about this interesting tit-bit. You might think he would wish to enlighten us about the evil nature of the criminal with whom he so warmly shook hands. But no. Until questioned much later about whether he warned Saddam against the use of gas — he claimed he did, but this proved to be untrue — Rumsfeld was silent. As he was about his subsequent and equally friendly meeting with Tariq Aziz — which just happened to take place on the day in March 1984 that the UN released its damning report on Saddam’s use of poison gas against Iran.” (pp. 1115-6)

  57. verbena19 says:

    Stephen, thanks for your elucidating comment. Goes to show that many people’s hands were dirty with Saddam’s crimes. As we know, politics indeed makes strange bedfellows: enemies one day, ‘friends’ the next. It is a dirty, nasty, dangerous ‘game’ being played out on the world’s stage. Key players make decisions that affect the common people, often devastatingly. The common people are expendable to these ‘key players’ whose agenda are far more important to them than mere human lives. Tragic but true.

    And it thoroughly disgusts me, as does the subsequent self-righteous pontificating of these very same key players/leaders….

    Str8shooter: In your comment above to Big Billy Bob’s, I have absolutely no idea what you mean by this: “Also, BTDT, but was released because the SOB was afraid I was going to TAKE OVER!”

    Please explain. thanks!

    annamarie

  58. str8shooter says:

    Stephen,

    If you interpret my admonition as a personal insult, that’s entirely up to you, but it was not intended as such (mayhaps it merely hit a bit too close to the mark though?).

    You may consider “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” to be a copout, but it’s been the basis of amost every alliance since humans have resided on this little rock, and until we finally evolve past the very type of thought that would allow people like Hitler, Pol Pot, Stalin, Hussein et al to perpetrate the crimes upon the human race that they did, it will continue to be such.

    As to your references to the alleged ‘ignoring’ of human rights violations, nothing could be further from the truth. Nobody ignored anything, but the fact is that there was little or nothing that COULD be done outside of the measures that WERE taken. Saddam was an absolute master at playing both sides against the middle, and he told us, and everyone else, what we wanted to hear for years while doing precisely what he wanted the moment we turned our back. I mean, let’s be real for a moment; you condemn the US for ‘ignoring’ Saddams human rights violations, and you condemn us for finally taking him out, WTF DO YOU WANT? That’s one of the biggest problems most Conservatives have with Liberals, you condemn a Conservative Administration for ‘ignoring’ Saddam and what he did (while remaining suspiciously silent about the 8 years that President Clinton ‘ignored’ the very same thing), and then, after allowing the UN to use their pathetic resolutions and sanctions for 12 years, when we finally have had enough of him and his games and forcibly remove him from power, you condemn us again (also completely ignoring the fact that damned near each and every Liberal in Congress voted to authorize President Bush to us that force). Would you PLEASE make up your minds as to what you want, and then be man enough to stand by the decision you’ve made even when it’s not going as smoothly as you’d LIKE it to go? People all over the world are absolutely SCREAMING for SOMEBODY to do SOMETHING about the situation in Darfur, but here’s the rub, why SHOULD we (the US) do anything when we know damned well that the minute we DO, the Libs are going to be screaming bloody murder that we’re killing people. Well guess what, that’s what the military does, we kill people and break all of their stuff, PERIOD. If that’s not good enough, then perhaps you’d like those incompetents at the UN to keep making resolutions and issuing sanctions for the next 2 or 3 decades until there’s nobody left TO save.

    As to your references to Dr. Fisk, I’ve read some (not a lot, but enough) of his work to realize that while he sees things as they SHOULD be, and how we would all LIKE them to be, his analysis of REALITY is more than a bit skewed to be taken too seriously when dealing with the here and now. For all of his bluff and bluster, he has taken the facts of Rumsfelds meeting with Saddam completely out of context, and has ignored the fact that Rumsfeld wasn’t even a member of the Reagan Administration when the meeting took place, and he was sent there strictly to meet with him and ascertain if there was any possibility of us establishing normal relations with Iraq under Saddam (which would require Saddam to STOP using WMD’s), and we quickly determined that it wasn’t going to happen much beyond the perfunctory pleasentries and using them to deal with our problem with Iran. The simple fact of the matter is that the extreme left wing of the Liberal parties are so torqued that the US has a man in the White House that won’t bend over and kiss anyones butt, that dealt decisively with a situation that the previous administration fostered (and IMNSHO caused 9-11 by allowing the world to believe that we weren’t willing to respond to direct attacks against us), and has refused to back down or acquiesce to the Liberals incessant whining and crying, in short we’ve got a REAL man in the White House and his presence there, and his actions as President has only served to amplify the complete pansification of so many of the males on the Liberal side of the isle, and they can’t stand it. They have therefore turned all of their resources (especially the lamestream media) against the President and are determined to find fault with anything and everything he does for no other reason than to advance their own political goals despite any harm that doing so may, and will bring. In my mind, the worst thing that the Liberals are doing is stabbing the Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines, from whatever country, in the back, and then twisting the blade, by not only refusing to be even remotely fairly, dispassionately and HONESTLY reporting about what is going on in Iraq and Afghanistan, but by also flat our LYING about it, and by doing so, are shaking those troops confidence and faith in their leadership, which GET’S GOOD MEN KILLED, and I for one hold those same said Liberals, including your Dr. Fisk, DIRECTLY responsible for those deaths!

  59. Stephen says:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1160666,00.html
    David Kay’s final report

    http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0129-07.htm
    Published on Thursday, January 29, 2004 by the Toronto Star
    Truth Catching up to Bush
    by Haroon Siddiqui

    http://mediamatters.org/items/200606230008
    Despite all evidence to the contrary, media conservatives continued to hype Santorum’s “weapons of mass destruction”

    http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/38011/
    Three Iraq Myths That Won’t Quit
    By Scott Ritter, AlterNet. Posted June 26, 2006.

    http://antiwar.com/blog/?p=1127US
    DoE steals Iraqi uranium

  60. verbena19 says:

    Stephen, thanks for the above links. I’ll go read them now.

    ~amd

  61. str8shooter says:

    Verbana,

    I’m sorry you find Fox to be ‘biased’, as I find them to be the closest to honestly “Fair and Balanced” of ANY of the major news organizations. I don’t say this lightly, as I consult not only Fox, but also CNN, Reuters, ABC, Deutsche Welle, BBC, and Le Monde on an almost daily basis, and of all of them BBC is usually the furthest to the Left (with Le Monde a VERY close second) with Fox only being considered ‘Right Wing’ because everyone else is so far to the left! Perhaps you’ve missed the literally hundreds of articles where they’ve taken the current Administration to task for the mis-steps that have been made (even when the true fault lay so far beneath the Office of the President that no reasonable person could ever honestly hold the President responsible). The main point though is that NONE of the sources I cite will ever be from any of the ‘fringe’ sources (on either side of the political spectrum) and FoxNews is the highest rated Cable News source in the world, so obviously they’re doing something right, including running the same stories, from the same journalists, that all of the other news agencies run, and routinely bringing in guests from both sides of the political spectrum to discuss those issues.

    I have many more stories similar to the ones I posted earlier (literally hundreds of them over the past 6 years), and will provide more if you wish.

    Your point is well taken concerning different perspectives. It is true that we’re dealing with two different groups of Soldiers, most likely in two completely different Areas of Operations, engaged in two completely different Missions. I have heard stories from troops who spent time in Iraq and Afghanistan who groused as much, if not more, about their time there than any you’ll hear about in the news, or see at a Code Pink rally, but the fact is that most of those are REMF’s (Rear Eschelon Mother F******) who never got outside the wire, much less actually engaged in the day to day interaction with the population, and that’s not counting the literally hundreds of guys who have claimed service in Iraq or Afghanistan who upon further inspection, it turns out have never even been in the military. I am not in any way even attempting to say that this is the case with Cedersprig’s son, merely pointing out that the men I know are still on Active Duty, and most have at least 3 tours in Iraq and Afghanistan and I trust them implicitly.

    I too much prefer peaceful negotion to War, as any Soldier does, but the fact is that the UN gave Saddam 12 years to get his act together and he failed to do so. Not only did he fail to abide by the UN’s impotent sanctions and resolutions, he openly flaunted his willfullness at the world, allowed terrorists to train inside Iraq, supplied them, funded them, facilitated them, and some of those same terrorists hijacked 5 airliners on September 11, 2001 and slaughtered over 3000 of our citizens. Even after that, our President waited 18 months, in which time he was given what he had every reason to believe to be sufficient intelligence to prove that Saddam was still in violation of the UN resolutions, that he was still had WMD’s and was prepared to make more as soon as the UN left, and that he was, while not directly involved, at the very least guilty of conspiracy before the fact, in the attecks of 9-11, AFTER consulting with the UN, AFTER consulting with our Congress, and this was sufficient provocation for us to take direct military action against Iraq, period, end of discussion. Is it your contention that had the same thing happend in Toronto and Quebec, as it happened in New York and Washington D.C., that Canada would have done (or at least TRIED to do) less? Had the situation been reversed, not only would we have fully supported Canada, we would have probably fielded more troops than the numbers of your entire nations military to support you, without question (that’s what good neighbors are SUPPOSED to do)! Talking is all well and good, but there comes a time when there’s no more point in talking (especially when the one you’re talking to is giving you the bird) and it’s time to just kick their asses, and that time for Saddam came in March of 2003.

    I am well aware of the fact of civilian casualties in War, which is one of the main reasons that our military has gone to such extraordinary length in training ALL of our servicemen and women to strictly abide by the Rules of War, even if it means hazarding ourselves and our mission to do so. That is precisely why we have spent literally TRILLIONS of dollars designing PGM’s (Precision Guided Munitions) so that we can be as sure as possible to hit ONLY what we intend to hit, and nothing else. Collateral damage still occurs, and it is regretable, but at least now we can take out our intended target with a single small bomb instead of having to destroy a dozen blocks in all directions with hundreds of large ones causing hundreds, if not thousands of casualties. Are there mistakes, are their defective munitions, do some Soldiers forget their responsibilities and go “off the reservation”? Of course, but those are the RARE exception and not the rule (which is why it’s “newsworthy” when it DOES happen!).

    I applaud your honestly, as well as your concerted efforts to remain as unbiased as possible, thank you. I also take great pains to inform myself, as much as time allows, of as many sides of an issue as I can (whether I agree with them or not) so as to be able to come as close to the ‘truth’ as any human can, but I must admit more than a bit of frustration with those who merely parrot the party line (whichever party it may be) without any level of comprehension of the reality behind those issues. I look forward to reading your response, as well as your supporting sources.

  62. verbena19 says:

    Stephen: I just read all the articles in the links. Very illuminating! Thanks!

    Str8shooter: I trust that you will read the articles as well. Of special interest to you may be David Kay’s final report. He is a ‘hawk’ and an admirer of your Pres. Bush, so perhaps you will be more mindful of what he said. He was the US chief weapons inspector, looking for Saddam’s WMD’s. You can bet that he really wanted to find them. And he was a supporter of the war…

  63. verbena19 says:

    Str8shooter: Sorry, I guess we were cross-posting here, so I did not see your last comment before I posted mine,,,

    I haven’t had time to find my supporting sources, but I saw that Stephen has done very well in that regard, so I was busy reading his links… (In-between, I’ve had a few things to do around the house, like search for wandering cat before I lock up for the night…)

    I disagree with you about Fox. They were ok when they first started, but then they got too carried away and had Hannity and his clones spouting nonsensical verbiage, IMHO. I also disagree with you when you imho seem to tarnish those soldiers who tell different versions of events in Iraq and Afghanistan than what your friends are telling you. One of my daughter-in-law’s cousins is in Afghanistan, and let me tell you, he’s as far from a whining, simpering sissy as you can get. He’s proud of what they’re ‘accomplishing’ in Afghanistan. I beg to differ with him too on some aspects…. The soldiers to whom I talked actually did serve in Iraq, and they did tell me of actions they took that definitely did NOT abide by the ‘Rules of War’. I will not go into detail now. Suffice it to say that they were not proud of what they had done and seen. They are also not ‘sissies’.

    Your loyalty to your President is admirable, although in my opinion, it is misguided. Had G.W. Bush simply stated something to the effect of: “We were mistaken and I am determined to find out why”, I would have respected him for his unwavering honesty. Instead, when all the claims of WMD’s were proven false, he changed the reason for the invasion. That reason was changed several times thereafter, as each ‘claim’ was either unproven or lacked credibility. Please read the above links that Stephen provided.

    ‘Left’ or ‘Right’, ‘Liberal’ or ‘Conservative’, Democrat or Republican — or somewhere in between, or non-partisan — should people do less labelling and perhaps more about finding the truth? And more about finding the common ground of dialogue and working together to right some of the wrongs? Iraq is a worse disaster than anyone could have imagined. Afghanistan is not faring too much better, regardless of small positive steps. Permanent mega-bases in Iraq are not the answer: they are seen as further signs of permanence and exacerbate an escalating, volatile situation. I find it hard to believe that the US is in that region for altruistic reasons. They are there because Nature gave the region the bad luck of sitting atop some of the globe’s biggest (known or perceived) resources of black gold. (I know you will disagree with me on this one!)

    I find it worse than objectionable to trade human lives for resources that will mostly benefit a few. Most of us won’t be able to afford to keep our cars on the road much longer. Good thing I’ve kept my horse and buggy… (lol, that’s a joke, but I almost wish I had one… lol… as biking is too hard on my arthritic legs, but I do walk a lot … )

    Now that I’ve indulged in such silliness, I can’t get back into serious discourse, so that will have to wait till another day… take care and God bless. — annamarie

  64. str8shooter says:

    Stephen,

    David Kay is the very one who was telling us from the very beginning that Saddam had the WMD’s, and then he went on record saying that he didn’t, and now we have proven the he did. Perhaps you would care to read the Comprehensive Report of the Special Advisor to the DCI on Iraq’s WMD (otherwise known as the Duelfer Report) since it came out after Mr. Kays appearance before Congress. I realize that the Duelfer Report comprises 3 rather large volumes, and that it’s a rather dry read, but it clearly indicates that Saddam DID in fact have WMD’s, and even though the vast majority were destroyed, their destruction was not documented and therefore unverifiable by the UN, that he continued to persue his WMD program through dual use sources even while the UN Inspectors were there (including Ricin, VX, Sarin and Anthrax. You can read more here ( http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/report/2004/isg-final-report/isg-final-report_vol3_cw_key-findings.htm ) and here ( https://www.cia.gov/news-information/speeches-testimony/2004/tenet_testimony_03302004.html )

    Your link to the story by Haroon Siddiqui has a couple of problems; firstly, nobody considers CommonDreams.org to be a legitimate news source, and secondly Mr. Siddiqui is a known and unabahsed anti-American and pro-Islamist, which automatically casts large clouds of doubt on any anything he ‘reports’.

    MediaMatters?? PLEASE! They don’t even make an attempt to appear un-biased, and if this is an example of what you consider to be serious reporting, we have nothing further to discuss. I’ve already made it abundently clear that I refuse to acknowledge ‘fringe’ sources (on EITHER side) and MediaMatters is about as far out on the fringe as it gets.

    Ah yes, Scott Ritter. Again, AlterNet is hardly what anyone could even remotely consider mainstream, un-biased reporting, and then there’s the problem with Scott Ritters credibility. Scott Ritter is the very one who sent up some of the very first Red Flags about Saddam by claiming VERY publically on PBS that Saddam could reconstitute his WMD program within months, and he then resigned in protest when the UN refused to take immediate military action against Saddam in 1998! In 1999 he went on to write a book in which he most vociferously lemented Saddams threat to the entire civilized world and disparaged the UN’s refusal to remove that threat from the face of the planet. The thing that brings his credibility into question is the fact of his rather sudden about face on the issue once he received $400,000 for his movie from an Iraqi American businessman in 2000, and suddenly he’s tripping all over himself to ‘clarify’ his official statements while he was a serving UN Weapons Inspector. The boy is bought and paid for, pure and simple.

    AntiWar.com? Stephen, if you wish to be taken seriously, you’re really going to have to stop going to the lunatic fringe for your information. The story about us removing the radioactive materiel from Iraq was widespread all over the REAL news agencies (besides the fact I already noted it in my earlier post) who aren’t a bunch of tin-foil hatted conspiracy nuts.

    To be honest, until you can come up with some LEGITIMATE information, from some LEGITIMATE sources, who at least make an attempt to appear unbiased, we really have nothing further to discuss.

  65. verbena19 says:

    Str8shooter: I see that again we are ‘cross-posting’, sitting here at the same time… And I see that you don’t consider Stephen’s sources credible, so I guess I should take the time to find you others… But you’ll likely dismiss them as you did the good, unbiased sources he gave… So you are contrary to whatever info is put out there for you to read… I somehow thought you had a more open mind. Guess I was mistaken…

  66. str8shooter says:

    Verbena,

    I find it interesting that you dismiss the FoxNews report without noting that the story included a still active link the an OFFICIAL gov’t report concerning the weapons mentioned. You mention that you don’t care for Sean Hannity (even though he sits right across the table from Alan Colmes, a notorious Liberal, can they really be MORE “fair and balanced”?), but you failed to mention the unabashed Liberals like Anderson Cooper, Keith Olbermann (who won’t even allow debate of any kind on his show), Chris Matthews, Paula Zahn, Diane Sawyer, Katie Couric, and let’s not forget Dan (I’d really) Rather (lie about the President). So, you’ll have to forgive me for feeling that the one NON-leftist news agency is “fair and balanced” considering they’re the ONLY one not regurgitating the same drivel that’s been sanctioned by the DNC and George Soros.

    Yes I did dismiss his ‘sources’, but you’ll note that I explained, in detail WHY I dismissed his particular ‘sources’, and didn’t do so out of hand simply because I don’t consider the ‘sources’ of his reports to be credible (in other words, I read them anyway and THEN dismissed them FOR CAUSE, and I was very careful to fully explain WHY I dimissed them).

    Perhaps I wasn’t clear enough concerning other Soldiers reports, so let me be abundently clear here, I haven’t heard their reports so I cannot speak to the verasity OF their accounts, I can only pass along that which I do know, from what I have been told by those who have been there. It was in NO way intended to cast dispersions upon those men, nor to call into question the verasity of their observations, merely to point out that what I’ve been told, by those I know is generally radically different. The few negative accounts I have heard weren’t from front line troops, only from those who were, as we used to say, “in the rear, with the gear”, and as such I gave their grousing it’s due weight. That is not to say that the men I’ve spoken to who WERE out there on the front lines was all roses, only that the good that is being done FAR outweighs the negative, and considering that the military isn’t trained to be performing many of the mission that they have been tasked with, and that they are performing those missions as well as they are, under the most trying conditions imaginable, is an absolute miracle in and of itself. There’s a HUGE difference between failing in a Mission, and it simply not going 100% according to how some lifelong silly-villians idea of how they’d LIKE it to go. There’s an old maxim in military circles called Murphy’s Law, and every Soldier knows about it. Some will try to fight it, but the really smart one’s do everything in their power to make Murphy thier friend so that when a SNAFU (Situation Normal, All Fouled Up) does happen, it won’t be as bad as it could be. Unfortunately, some troops never get the word, or are under some delusion that War is going to be a neat, orderly affair in which everything goes according to plan. Experienced troops on the other hand KNOW that NOTHING is going to go as planned, and they adjust accordingly.

  67. opit says:

    Fox ‘fair and balanced’. That has to be the funniest line I’ve heard from a ‘concern troll’ in a looong time.
    Who owns the mainstream media ? Big business. Are they therefore organs of ‘liberal’ opinion ? Only if that means unfettered abuse by the owners.
    Some time past Larry Johnson picked up on Jurassic Pork’s photo list of Fox ‘headlines’ with leading innuendo in the headers – it was shameless. J.P. is at Welcome to Pottersville and Larry at No Quarter.
    I don’t have much respect for ability to assess reliability of sources from anyone who cites Faux News as an authority.

  68. verbena19 says:

    Opit: As always, I thank you for your comment. I think that Str8shooter is not really a bad guy (for a conservative) and he’s quite intelligent, although his views are quite contrary… But why anyone would take Faux seriously is beyond my imagination…

  69. verbena19 says:

    P.S. Str8shooter: I don’t consider any of those people on CNN liberal or unbiased. Quite the opposite. They all tripped over themselves with glee when reporting about the first bombs falling on Baghdad. They are NOT liberal! Wherever did you get that impression? When they interview anyone noteworthy, they are so careful about the questions they ask. Self-censorship at its finest, like most of the corporate-owned msm, especially the US ones. We have our share of them too. They are the best tools of government propaganda and misinformation, using sound bytes and talking points to get something across. That’s ludicrous and laughable. I don’t expect any worthy, REAL, unbiased news & commentary from those actors-cum-news-people. That would be beyond the capabilities of these sorry excuses for reporters/journalists. Whatever corporations own, corporations control. Don’t you know that?

    As for the soldiers, I will not debate that. You obviously have your opinions, I have mine. (You likely think that the Abu Ghraib and other incidents of detainee abuse were
    ‘normal’ conduct by ‘stressed-out troops’. Oh well.)

  70. str8shooter says:

    Verbena,

    My ‘impression’ of the reporting coming out of CNN goes back well before the FIRST Gulf War when they were barely more than a little known upstart cable news agency and a distraction for Ted Turner to play with, and they ARE as Liberal as they come (while retaining the ability to be granted ANY credibility), but then it’s awfully difficult to note any real differences when the inmates are running the asylum.

    As to your Abu Ghraib comment, you once again make accusations and assumptions without bothering to ascertain any facts (here’s a tip for all Liberals, try asking a QUESTION instead of making an ACCUSATION and you won’t be held in quite such contempt!). The incident at Abu Grabass was a primary example of a complete failure of the local Commanders to maintiain proper Command and Control over their troops, as well as a glaring example of the common soldiers being thrown to the wolves while the Officer Corps closes ranks to protect itself. The soldiers at Abu Ghraib (a Reserve MP unit) had never received ANY training in running a Prison, they were completely undermanned, under supported, under constant attack, and finally their Commander (Karpinski) abrogated her responsibilities by allowing outside groups to take command of her troops. They were ORDERED to do whatever they could to make the prisoners as uncomfortable as possible, to keep them awake, and prep the for interrogations but when they told the Intel pukes that they didn’t know how, and had never been trained for that, they were told to “figure it out”.

    P.S. I could make all kinds of ‘assumptions’ about you, and sling completely unfounded and unwarranted accusations as well V, but I’ve tried to maintain a civil discourse with you, am I to assume that you no longer wish this to be the case?

  71. opit says:

    I would understand why he would be a little irate at me, in any case. “Hit and run’ is not a fair way to have a discussion. If I may infer you are not a veteran of what may be best thought of as ‘culture wars’ between proponents of ‘talking points’ designed to seem reasonable but to hijack discussion, I might suggest you check out both “Political Animal” for its intense comments thread and my intel link “Why the right wing gets it…” – dealing with influencing the nuance of discussion rather than refutation and honest sharing of ideas. Political Animal commenters have set up shop at “Watching Those We Chose” and “Out of Iraq Bloggers Caucus”.
    Actually, Ezra Klein and Obsidian Wings would give you one kind of commenter outlook : changing over to Advice Goddess quite another worldview ( I originally found her on Ezra’s Blogroll )
    One bit to note. “Projecting” another’s views is a common unfair tactic which will meet with well deserved scorn no matter who employs it. Doing that on a lively thread is an invitation for everyone to ‘pile on’ to the offender.

  72. opit says:

    Come to think of it, one can be a bit overwhelmed by the niceties of usage like citing sources at the big sites, rather than simply stating an opinion. Google helps in such cases. Try looking up ‘logical fallacies’ and ‘strawman arguments’ for practice.

  73. verbena19 says:

    Str8shooter: Yes, I’m still trying to maintain a civil discourse with you. So please do not assume the contrary… And yes, I know that the Top Brass hung the troops out to dry, as usual… Nothing new here, as I’ve said in my previous comment. Those inexperienced soldiers should not have been used for interrogation purposes in the first place. But those at the top knew that these interrogation techniques were dubious at the very least, so they made sure to cover their asses.

  74. Stephen says:

    We all have biases. I am a left-liberal on foreign policy issues and proud of it. I have no problem with an open debate amongst those from different points of view. I find it rather illuminating. I’ll be honest, it does bother me that str8shooter does not seem to be willing admit that he comes from a biased perspective as well, seems to have kind of a my way or the highway attitude. Perhaps I’ve missed something, but that’s how I see it.

    I think something else can shed light on left vs right media sources. American society in general, and by extension its polity and media, tends to be quite a bit farther to the right than the rest of the industrialized world, including Canada. Thus, whereas US conservatives could get away with giving the likes of CNN the liberal label, in Canada, and even moreso in Europe, CNN would clearly fall on the right of the political spectrum.

    You can hold Dr. Fisk responsible for the deaths of soldiers in Iraq; that is your prerogative. I think I’ll stick with the men who sent them to a completely unnecessary war in the first place, Messrs. Bush and Blair.

  75. verbena19 says:

    Stephen, I fully agree with you. I too have to admit to some biases, being a ‘left-leaning liberal on foreign policy issues’, like yourself. And I am proud of it too. I would not want to be a narrow-minded, rigid, inflexible right winger, who generally hold simplistic worldviews and childishly divide their myopic world into ‘good guys/bad guys’ and our way or the highway… and see only black and white with no shadings in between, no finer points, nuances, etc…

    You have very aptly described a big difference in American society and its polity vs the rest of the industrialized world. America is a strange paradox: the republic was birthed in a revolution against the Mother Country (GB). The Colonists originally left the mainland fleeing religious and political persecution. They wanted the freedom to practice religion as they wished, and they were against the elitist British system of that time and its restrictive, limiting, feudal policies. They wanted a more egalitarian society. The paradox is that these very ideals of their Founding Fathers have been reshaped into something entirely different, and mainstream Americans are indeed viewed by the rest of the industrialized world as being very conservative, self-righteous and self-absorbed…

    While Str8shooter is a conservative, at least he converses without resorting to name-calling, and is capable of carrying on a civil discourse. That is more than can be said about many others in that group…

  76. str8shooter says:

    I readily admit that I’m slightly to the Right of Atilla the Hun and Ghengis Khan (even by American standards), and generally consider those to the Left to be either ignorant children or adults who have been educated beyond their intelligence level. Socialism, and by extension, Liberalism, are nothing more than Communism for greedy people. They want all of the benefits of Communism but they also want to keep their money while dictating how much someone else should be allowed to make and how much of that money they will take for themselves; hypocrits all! Haven’t admitted it? I seriously doubt that anyone with an ounce of common sense could come to any other conclusion so “admitting” it would be superfluous.

    You are correct about perspecitve though, but only because most peoples perception of reality begins with the day of their birth and they have little or no concept of HISTORICAL perspective, and history has proven that Communism, and thereby Socialism, are bankrupt systems that cannot endure, or am I the only one that noticed that the Soviet Union folded like a cheap suit and China has had to institute “market reforms” to stay afloat?

    Your final comment raises the question of whether or not you’ve ever served in the military?

  77. str8shooter says:

    Verbena,

    Your commetary on America is one that I’ve seen for years, mainly coming from citizens of coutries who make no effort to conceal their absolute jealousy of our freedoms and prosperity. We have maintained the highest standards of income, living, health care, education and nearly every other measurable point of comparison, and at the same time supported and rebuilt the economies of most of Western Europe and much of Asia, stabilized and assisted in establishing their political process, and, OH YEAH, BTW, protected them from attack by the Soviet Union! It really must suck to feel like the impotent half-witted bastard stepchild of the new kid on the block.

  78. verbena19 says:

    Those on the ‘Left’ are as varied as their numbers. Simply grouping them together as Communist does a disservice to your intellect. There are many ‘shadings’. So while I am perhaps a ‘liberal-social democrat’, I am NOT what you would consider a Communist. (Although that’s not an ‘evil word’ as you may infer…) The ideal system is one that can incorporate the best practices/ideologies of various other systems. Not something that is rigid, inflexible. Just as the people of any society hold varied views, their political system should reflect that, and not merely the views of the top echelon which have been propagandized to be the only acceptable system.

    btw, Atilla the Hun and Genghis Khan were my distant ancestors…

  79. verbena19 says:

    And no, I don’t feel like the ‘impotent half-witted bastard stepchild of the new kid on the block’, and I don’t agree with all the greatness you ascribe to America. Although the US did help many other countries, conversely, it also did much in other parts which was detrimental: eg. CIA-engineered coups against democratically-elected governments, waging unnecessary, illegal wars on sovereign states, covertly selling illegal weapons to rogue states, completely destroying two cities with the Bomb and causing generations of those cities (Hiroshima and Nagasaki) to suffer grave illnesses… and more, ad nauseam.

    No, I definitely don’t feel like the ‘impotent half-witted….’

  80. verbena19 says:

    P.S. And I am honestly NOT jealous of your precious ‘freedoms and prosperity’, your wonderful healthcare (lack thereof), or in any way covetous of your military might. I am perfectly fine without all those wonderful, enviable ‘benefits’, thank you. That’s why I live here, not there.

  81. str8shooter says:

    Absolutely correct, and the very system you describe already exists, and has existed, right here in the US for over 200 years! We are each able to decide, for ourselves, what direction we will take our lives, and our Constitution recognizes and protects our inalienable Rights, as granted to us by God Almighty for no other reason than we are born human beings. We have the right to be as rich or as poor as WE choose to be, regardless of our parentage, our place of birth, or any other factor other than our own stubborn will and persistance.

    My contempt for Communism comes, as we discussed before, from having seen it, up close and personal, and from having served and fought against it. I took an Oath, many years ago, to “protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, against all enemies, foreign and domestic, so help me God.” and although I may no longer be in the military, I have never been relieved of that Oath, therefore, I will uphold someones Right to say what ever they wish to say (regardless of how ignorant it may be) provided that they take no action against my country. At the same time however, I still consider Communism to be a direct threat against the Constitution and our entire system of government because it’s very precepts preclude the freedoms guaranteed in that document, and I will do whatever I can to abide by my Oath and continue to protect and defend the Constitution from those who would destroy it, whether those enemies be “…foreign or domestic, so help me God.”

    Perhaps you would be well served to study up on your ancestors a bit more and see how they would feel about your avowed political positions, I think you’d be a bit dissapointed in their take on things.

    Regards.

  82. opit says:

    Self-reliance and limits on government interference in private affairs are not high priorities today. I am constantly astounded by the effectiveness of nonsense threats in mobilizing people to accept the real inhuman government : the police state.
    Homosexuality, race, religion : no problem for the framers of the Constitution. Posse Comitatus and Habeas Corpus being set aside ? For any serious believer in Constitutional Law, the alarm bells should be going off loud and long. To hell with communist worries when the fascists have done the very thing they continually warn about the ‘left’ doing !

  83. verbena19 says:

    Yes, my ancestors would likely be disappointed.

    While your system started out nobly, I fear that it has been transmogrified into something quite different from what your Founding Fathers envisioned and enacted 200 years ago. If you read Eisenhower’s farewell address admonishing about the rise of the military-industrial complex, you will see what I mean. And Ike was not a Communist.

    If you don’t believe me, wait a few years and see, then we can talk about it. Once your precious freedoms, liberties, and pursuit of happiness are so eroded as to be non-existent… you will recall this conversation. (But I sincerely hope that won’t happen, as I wish you or your country no ill will..)

    Regards to you too.

  84. verbena19 says:

    Indeed, Opit, indeed… Communist ‘threat’ is the least of what Americans should be worried about… The wolf is at their door, and yet they worry about things that are not even remotely near…

  85. verbena19 says:

    Str8shooter: why don’t you take your head out of the sand and take a really good look at the changes around you. Can’t you see what is happening? It is your precious Constitution that you have sworn to defend that is being dismantled! Shouldn’t your loyalty be to that rather than toward those who are destroying it?? Wake up, man, for God’s sake! Can’t you for once remove your blinkers? Can’t you see the shape of things to come? Surely you are not that obdurate… Don’t you see what blind obedience to corrupt leaders is wreaking?

  86. str8shooter says:

    Verbena,

    It’s quite obvious by your statement that you have absolutely no comprehension of the War in the Pacific, or the numbers of lives that were saved by bombing Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Nor are you apparantly aware of the fact that far more people were killed in the fire bombing of Tokyo than in either of the atomic bombings. I would suggest that you study up on the subject a bit and then I will happily accept the full retraction of that assinine statement.

    As far as the rest of your ranting against our Foreign Policy decisions, if you will please cite specific incidents I will be more than happy to debunk those ill informed assessments as well.

    Concerning your desire to live in a Socialist country instead of a true Constitutional Representative Republic, I can understand that. Being from Hungary as you are, the pure culture shock of going from an oppressive totalitarian regime to one of true freedom would be a bit much for anyone just as the inverse would be the case. I suppose that it’s necessary for you to take it slow and learn to adapt to things slowly to avoid being completely overwhelmed. Take your time, learn what you can, and when you’re ready for REAL freedom, we’ll still be here!

  87. opit says:

    I was looking back at our ‘reasonable’ commenter’s quips. “Cheese-eating surrender monkey” is vintage nonsense from the framers of idiotic epithets to be used in lieu of intelligent conversation. I love cheese – having sold it and been in production of it for years in a dairy !
    But the ‘surrender monkey’ is the good one from the agents of the Chimperator : since ceasing an illegal occupation of a foreign country obviously has moral implications which should be obvious ( they are : just not the warmongering vituperation style, but nasty things like respect and fairness being desirable between people )

  88. opit says:

    I see we are cross- posting past each other. Invidious comparisons of the past make me note the obvious difference between Iraq/Afghanistan and the war with Japan. In that case, the government of a country made war on the US without warning. Re: 9/11 – even Bush has occasionally confessed Iraq had diddly to do with 9/11 – which was supposedly organized by …Saudis ( I say supposedly because the alarmists report that no Arab DNA was present in the bodies of those on the jet which was forced down ).
    So an unauthorized invasion followed by an unexpected occupation – kept busy while busily building permanent Iraq bases which were explicitly not authorized funding – is equated to ‘surrender’. Man, you really need a good dose of knuckle sandwich before you realize your attention is being solicited to ‘cease and desist’ notices. Can’t say I’m really surprised you get same.

  89. str8shooter says:

    Opit,

    I have no idea what “Police State” you’re referring to. You are correct that homosexuality wasn’t a problem for the Founding Fathers, they just took them out and strung them up, with no problem at all. The only problem we have with race today is when people attempt to claim some special dispensation because of their race, especially since doing so is completely contrary to the Constitution. Religion isn’t now, nor has it ever been a problem, and in fact is protected in our First Amendment. The fact that so few people understand that most salient document is the only place where confusion becomes an issue, but then most people haven’t ever bothered to read the Federalist Papers, the Anti-Federalist Papers, or most of the other primary discussion concerning the founding of our nation, so most anything they have to opine about it is from the standpoint of complete ignorance. And what are you talking about concerning Posse Comitatus and Habeas Corpus being suspended? Posse Comitatus hasn’t been suspended in America, merely amended by Congress (in accordance with Constitutional provision), and active duty troops haven’t been deployed in violation of Posse Comitatus in the United States, so again, WTF are you talking about? By asserting that Habeas Corpus has been suspended, I assume you’re refering to our guests at Club Gitmo. Here’s a tip, they’re not US citizens, they’re not even resident aliens, and they’re not lawful combatants under the Geneva Accords, ergo, not only are they NOT subject to Habeas Corpus protection, they can count themselves lucky that our guys didn’t simply walk up to them and put a bullet between their eyes when they had the chance!

  90. str8shooter says:

    Opit,

    I really don’t know whose dictionary you’re using, or what version of reality you dwell in, but the invasion of Iraq was fully authorized, by our Congress, and not prohibited by the UN, ergo, FULL AUTHORIZATION. Our so called occupation is nothing more or less than we did in Europe and Japan following WWII; it is prudent, and responsible follow through to ensure that the people of the country we just defeated have ample opportunity to not only establish, but maintain a fully functioning and competent government before we depart. Perhaps you’d prefer the model following our victory in Vietnam when our Congress prohibited our further assisting S. Vietnam in stabilizing their government, which resulted in their fall 2 years later by the Communist forces of the North, and the resultant slaughter of over 2 MILLION PEOPLE! Is that what you’re proposing? And you say that WE’RE blood thirsty? MY GOD MAN, think before you say things like that!

  91. str8shooter says:

    Opit,

    BTW, the last guy that tried to give me a “knuckle sandwich” is now sporting a nice set of dentures, and a nasty touch of arthritis from where I severely dislocated his shoulder.

  92. verbena19 says:

    By the references to Hiroshima and Nagasaki, I was merely pointing out some of the US’s ‘doings’, not in any way comparing the bombing of those two cities with 9/11.

    Str8shooter, when you mention how many lives were actually ‘saved’ by those bombings, well, that is not quite so. I haven’t the references in front of me now, but I’ve read quite a bit that said Japan was ready to surrender before that.

    These links may contain something:

    http://www.pgs.ca/ (Physicians for Global Survival)
    http://www.acp-cpa.ca/en/HiroshimaDayCoalition.htm/

    But these are not the links I’m talking about. Those were very scholarly, written by historians and political scientists. My memory fails me, so I can’t even find them on my Bookmarks right now…

  93. verbena19 says:

    “You are correct that homosexuality wasn’t a problem for the Founding Fathers, they just took them out and strung them up, with no problem at all.”…

    And you think that was acceptable???

    And what about the permanent mega-bases the US is constructing in Iraq? Also the largest embassy in the world (size of a small city!) inside the fortified Green Zone? How long does the US plan to occupy Iraq, until its oil runs out???

  94. verbena19 says:

    Interesting article on NewsTrust, originally from the NY Times:

    Federal Lawmakers From Coast to Coast Are Under Investigation:
    http://tinyurl.com/338bdw

    Excerpt:

    All of those under investigation, Republicans and Democrats alike, deny wrongdoing.

    Jan Baran, a Republican lawyer who specializes in ethics law, said he could not recall a time when so many members of Congress had been caught up in so many financial scandals drawing the attention of the Justice Department.

    Mr. Baran said it was not surprising that most of the lawmakers under scrutiny were Republicans, given that their party controlled Congress until this year and “money follows power: those that don’t hold power are less susceptible to corruption, because they don’t have anything to sell.”

    [...]

  95. str8shooter says:

    Verbena,

    The Japanese made it quite clear that they were not willing to acquiesce to our demand of unconditional surrender after the Hiroshima bombing hence the bombing of Nagasaki, and even after that, it wasn’t until Emperor Hirohito ORDERED Koiche Kido to regain control of the situation after the Soviet Union joined the US and declared war on Japan. Hirohito realized that any invasion of the Japanese mainland would result in the utter genocide of the Japanese race (not to mention an estimated 1 million Allied troops as was estimated by our own War Department) and chose surrender rather than face the destruction of his people. The Japanese Chief Cabinet Secretary, Hisatsune Sakomizu himself declared that the bombings were “a golden opportunity given by heaven for Japan to end the war.”

    No amount of anti-American historical revisionism is going to change the facts of what happened in WWII, and no amount of Socialist carping about the “evil Americans” can diminish the truth that were it not for America, all of Europe would to this day be goose-stepping and singing Horst Wessel Lied, and I won’t even beging to speculate as to what would be happening in Asia under an Imperial Japan.

  96. str8shooter says:

    I didn’t say that it stringing up the queers was right, only that it wasn’t a problem. Perhaps a bit of historical context would be in order? You seem to have missed the fact that I was answering absurdity WITH absurdity. Opit threw out a Strawman argument, and recognizing it for what it was, I responded in a manner befitting such an argument.

    Here we go again with the rediculous, historically deprived contentions about our current situation in Iraq. Have you never researched the number and size of the bases we “occupied” in Germany following WWII? GIVE ME A BREAK! How long do we intend to be there? I have no idea for certain, but at least as long as it takes to allow the new Iraqi gov’t to stabilize, unless of course, the current crop of gutless wonders in our Congress pull us out too early preferring instead to have unmitigated genocide. Dimocraps, as I prefer to call them, have a real nasty penchant for snatching defeat right out of the jaws of victory (hell, as much as they like to “pull out”, I’m surprised any of them have children!).

  97. opit says:

    My recollections are perfectly clear about CNN ‘news anchors’ proposing ‘cleaning up Syria’ and any other ‘problem nations’ while troops were available at the time of the invasion of Iraq : authorized only as a necessity – which was never proven.
    The stuff one can hear on US ‘news broadcasts’ would fit right in with anything ever heard from Tokyo Rose or Lord Ha-Ha for one reason : they are the braying of the brute who only knows one way to conduct himself. Congratulations – you fit right in with the rest of the violence obsessed.
    I don’t know which police state I’m referring to either. There was Communist Russia, Fascist Germany – and fast-tracking its way to incredible repression, the Fourth Reich.

    Iraq was and is about oil. Don Rumsfeld hid the plan from the Pentagon and forbade duplicating the study of Iraq after Invasion ( Desert Crossing ). And of course, Iraq is not all of it. The oil-bearing areas of the Middle East are all targets for US domination. The method ? Air strikes, assassinations, ‘unfortunate incidents’, ‘misunderstandings” – whatever comes to hand. Why use one method when many are simultaneously possible ? Murder, mayhem and misery can be handed out to inconvenient inhabitants of desired lands and their governments ‘blown away’ to be replaced with ‘American Puppet Theater” as the Iraqis call it.

    BushCo funded the Horst Wessel singing legions. It was a wonder treason wasn’t on the menu : shows you money can buy almost anything.

  98. str8shooter says:

    Opit,

    That tripe is nothing more than the completely unfounded ravings of the yellow bellied Red crested barking moonbat conspiracy theorist. It’s official, your tin foil hat HAS slipped off! Hell, the next thing you know, you’ll be claiming that “BushCo” was responsible for the 9-11 attacks and that the WTC towers were brought down by an engineered implosion to hide the evidence of his Skull and Bones membership.

    If OIF is supposed to be about the oil, then kindly explain why fuel prices have gone up so much over the past 5 years. If it’s about the oil, then why are we allowing the IRAQI PEOPLE to decide how to divvy up the profits from the sale of THIER oil. Better yet, just prove it, ANY of it!

  99. opit says:

    You have the habit of stating other peoples’ positions for them to save them the trouble as well, I see. You want proof ? Visit the NSA Archive site listed on my BlogRoll and go through my Intel listings : Desert Crossing.
    Saying the Bush administration was responsible for 9/11 ? At a minimum, by a glaring error of omission ( and yes, I do believe that deliberate ! ). Clinton laid it out – on Fox !
    Don’t bother impugning my dedication to researching my facts until you have a look at what I have put together : a website index of news and sources.

  100. str8shooter says:

    Just doing a bit of “turn about is fair play” Opit, if you don’t like it when it’s thrown at you, then don’t engage in it yourself. Also, I didn’t ask you to tell me to go do a bunch of research, I asked you to prove your own damned allegations. Now if you can’t be bothered to do that much, you’re as much a moonbat as Fogel is.

    Bush responsible for 9-11? And exactly how did he do that when he’d only been in office for barely 9 months when the attack came? What acts of omission, the ones where Bill Clinton completely ignored the growing threat for his entire 8 years in office? You’ve got your Presidents confused. As to looking at your site, been there, and it’s got to be one of the most disorganized pile of rambling Liberal tripe I’ve ever seen. You have facts, present them, but I’m not going to waste my time digging through your trash heap looking for them.

  101. opit says:

    Do you think I’m going to waste more time with you ? I’ve pointed you to an official US government document outlining the projected results of going into Iraq. You spout trash about 9/11 – a totally unrelated bunch of bullshit.
    I simply say that when the consequences of acts are known in advance, calling a deliberate program to follow that blueprint in defiance of the UN and world opinion – hell, US opinion – is not stupidity. Iraq is no accident, but a program enabled by deceit and murder.

  102. str8shooter says:

    And what “official US government document” are you talking about? I looked at your site and it’s so completely unorganized that after 10 minutes, I wasn’t going to waste any more time looking for it. Here’s an idea sport, if you’re going to use a document as substantiation for your position, PUT A LINK FOR IT IN YOUR MESSAGE INSTEAD OF TRYING TO DRUM UP BUSINESS FOR YOUR SITE!

    Your rambling conspiracy BS is nothing more than that, rambling BS. You’ve presented not the first shred of evidence to support anything you’ve said, and that last bit about “a program enabled by deceit and murder” is simply more proof that your tin foil hat has completely fallen off.

  103. opit says:

    You fatuous ass. Do you think a freebie site author gives that much for your assertions ? Have a look at what Rumsfeld hid from the Pentagon
    http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB207/index.htm

  104. str8shooter says:

    Are you completely insane? William Cohen was SecDef under President Clinton in 1999, not Rumsfeld. and exactly where in that rather biased article about Desert Crossing (or anywhere else for that matter) did you get the impression that SecDef Rumsfeld, or anyone for that matter, tried to hide it from ANYONE? For the record, I’ve already read the Desert Crossing report (as well as about a half a dozen others) and they all say essentially the same thing, that the overthrow of Saddam wouldn’t be easy, but guess what, neither was the overthrow of Hitler or Hirohito! You’re assuming ‘facts not in evidence”, and the evidence simply does not support your conclusions, so I suggest that you go back and try again.

  105. opit says:

    1999 ? Try when Rummy was SecDef and the Pentatgon wasn’t tuned in to the report and aware of its obvious – to me – implications. Doing something with known and studied effects which constitute mass murder – by negligence at the least culpable assessment – should be considered as a deliberate and studied act if judged by the presence of professional evaluation.

  106. str8shooter says:

    Opit.

    Now I KNOW that you’re either drunk, stoned, or just plain stupid. The war game (Desert Crossing) was conducted, and the after action report was writtin in 1999, by the DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, when William Cohen was SecDef under President CLINTON! Now perhaps you would care to kindly explain HOW THE FUCK the GODDAMNED DEFENSE DEPARTMENT hid a report of this size FROM ITSELF! Your implications only amplify your complete ignorance of ALL military matters, your complete ineptitude in comprehending any form of National Security precepts, and the fact that you’ve obviously been availing yourself of entirely too many mind altering substances.

    You, Sir, are a primary proof of the old axiom that too many people are entirely too stupid to realize just exactly how stupid they REALLY ARE! Now, go sit back down in the corner and resume playing with yourself, because you’re obviously not ready to make an intelligent contribution to conversations at this level.

  107. opit says:

    NSA is run by the Prez’s office : the reference for this document. If SecDef makes orders re: documents classifications I am far too ignotant to appreciate how he does not have the power to enforce his pleasure in matters of security and access in the running of his departments.And no, I am not of a mind to go back into the files for accounts of which retired general was scratching his head over the Pentagon planners instructions and knowledge in the matter.

  108. str8shooter says:

    Are you STILL trying to claim that Rumsfeld somehow concealed the Desert Crossing Report from the Joint Chiefs of Staff (the people who are actually IN CHARGE of their respective Services)? That’s kind of hard to do when General Shelton was the Chairman JCS from 1997 until 2001 when he retired, and under whose Command Gen. Zinni conducted Desert Crossing in the first place. Having served with then Maj. Shelton, I can tell you that the very possibility of any such concealment is completely OUT OF THE QUESTION! Or are you saying that the members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff that remained on during the transition from the Clinton Administration to the Bush Administration forgot everything they knew about Desert Crossing or simply didn’t inform Rumsfeld or anyone else about it? Unless of course you’re going to attempt to impune Gen. Zinnis reputation by asserting that he didn’t forward Desert Crossing to the JCS, or in some other way concealed it from everyone else in the entire CoC on the hopes that eventually Rumsfeld would be selected to be SecDef under a(n at that time indeterminate) new President who would insist that the contents of that report be completely ignored during a future invasion of Iraq. IS THAT WHAT YOU’RE SAYING?

    Go buy some more Reynolds Wrap son, better yet, get the big roll of the heavy duty stuff, because yours has completely come UNDONE! While you’re at it, leave the military planning and analysis to people who actually know something about it, because gutless wonder conspiracy freaks like you obviously DON’T!

  109. opit says:

    You do realize that you have basically asserted that the Pentagon knows and has known forever that staying in Iraq would be disastrous : therefore civilians pushing the policy through would have the benefit of their expertise and would know full well the predictable outcome.

  110. str8shooter says:

    WHAT DISASTER??? WTF ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? You frickin’ Libs love to scream about how much of a “disaster” OIF has been, but your assertions simply don’t square with any metric of historical data!

    Here, let me clue you in on some REAL disasters:

    July 1,2,3, 1863; Battle of Gettysburg, 46,000-51,000 casualties IN 3 DAYS!!

    April 25, 1915-January 9, 1916; Battle of Gallipoli, 140,000 ALLIED casuatlies and 250,000 Turkish casualties in 8 MONTS!!

    August 19, 1941, Dieppe Raid, over

  111. str8shooter says:

    August 19, 1941, Dieppe Raid, over 4,200 mainly Canadian casualties in ONE DAY!

    August 21, 1942-February 2, 1943, Battle of Stalingrad, over 850,000 casualties in just over 6 MONTHS!!

    The lists of military blunders and disasters is lengthy, but Operation Iraqi Freedom ISN’T among them, and if you knew DICK about the military you’d KNOW that, unfortunately you insist on proving to all here how much of an ignoramus you really are.

  112. opit says:

    i million Iraqis dead – UN figures 4 million displaced from their homes. Water supply fucked and power supply all but gone. That disaster, schmuck !

  113. str8shooter says:

    And just where do you get your figures from? One of your Liberal blogs written by someone who knows even less than you do? Even the jerk knee Liberal wogs at “iraqbodycount.net” only list a maximum of 74,900 Iraqi civilian deaths since the start of OIF (as of today), and EVERYBODY knows that their numbers are extremely high. Would you care to do some basic research into the number of civilians killed in WWII? How about the TENS OF MILLIONS killed by the JAPANESE ALONE in about the same timeframe?

    DO SOME REAL RESEARCH and CITE YOUR SOURCES!

  114. opit says:

    The Japanese were invading and occupying China and other parts of Asia. Today the U.S. is doing the same in the Middle East.This without the ‘justification’ of responding to an atack. And don’t bother with that tripe conflating ‘enemies’ so badly nobody on the planet could keep straight who is and who is not an ‘enemy’.
    The UN, Reuters AlertNet and other sources never seem to make it into the mainstream news these days.Assyrian News Aency either, for that matter.
    Little things like the Kurds causing so much shit that Turkey is chomping to give them some whup-ass don’t seem to be counted in those figures( Zaman), nor the Assyrian Christian genocide caused by the Kurds no longer being suppressed by a central government.
    I’m away from my main files at the moment but wouldn’t worry too much in any case. They sure as hell aren’t ‘my Liberal blogs’ – but nice try at framing anyone who doesn’t agree as misguided and unreliably informed.

  115. str8shooter says:

    AHHH, so the Japanese were invading China, and that’s some form of justification for slaughtering TENS OF MILLIONS OF CHINESE? Is that what you’re saying? And you have the nerve to even attempt to chastise the US? Seems that you’re always “away from your sources” , what’s the matter, your computor doesn’t have access to the internet? OH WAIT, it MUST because you’re still engaging in Bovine Scatology by posting your drivel here! You know, there’s this really neat thing called a CDR where you can save your precious “main files” and have them with you at all times.

    Look, your silly little attempts at misdirection may work on your Liberal butt buddies and the High School Republicans, but it doesn’t work with me, I’m STILL waiting for your response to the JAPANESE ATROCITIES, and how they compare to the deaths in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. BTW, I also noticed that you haven’t made any mention of the fire bombing of Tokyo or Dresden, WHY? We killed more people in each of those raids than we did in both Hiroshima and Nagasaki COMBINED.

    BTW, I’m not ‘trying’ anything, you ARE horribly misguided and extremely unreliably informed.

  116. opit says:

    You’re going to wait for Japanese cites till Hell freezes over. Nothing to do with anything that was being talked about.
    Flailing around with numbers lost in war has little to do with sucessful civilian kills in US Operation Iraqi Murder, an unprovoked assault.

  117. str8shooter says:

    Typical flaming liberal respons. You contrive falsehoods to ‘support’ your position, and when you’re called on it, and PROVEN to be wrong, you fall back to the old standby of telling even MORE lies, and doing it so badly that you can’t even form a cogent sentence!

    Successful civilian kills? WTF are you talking about? WHAT civilian kills? Do you mean the terrorists/insurgents? They’re hardly “innocent civilians”, since they’re the ones that are running around killing their own people. Has the US inadvertently killed innocent civilians? I have no doubt of it, and there’s nothing we regret more, but if you knew anything about anything you’d understand the extraordinary lengths we’ve gone to in order to AVOID that! The ‘people’, and I use that term VERY loosely, that we’re fighting over there intentionally target innocent people, and in fact go out of their way to conceal themselves among the innocent civilian population in order to attempt to shield themselves from us while they conduct their operations. No, it is THEY who are murdering the innocent civilians, not us; go look at iraqbodycount.net and read the causes of death of those civilians and you’ll quickly discover that it is those same said terrorists/insurgents who are killing the civilians, NOT us, it’s our troops who are putting their lives on the line to PROTECT the civilian population.

    Now, go away, grow a BRAIN, and learn how to USE IT!

  118. opit says:

    8 million Iraqis are currently in need of emergency assistance. Damn, but the US has a real problem if that defines some form of ‘nation building’.

  119. str8shooter says:

    Still trotting out totally unsubstantiated numbers? GO AWAY AND DON’T COME BACK WITHOUT PROOF.

  120. str8shooter says:

    ^^^^Even MORE Spam^^^^

  121. why the articles of confederation needed to be replaced

    Visit Today http://Www.fastuploadfiles.com MAx 1Gb file

  122. matrixoverkill says:

    We canadians will stop the SPP and the NAU in its tracks.Free trade is a failure as will be the regime of United states attempt to subvert Canada’s people through lies and deception as well as the plunder of our resources.The U.S economy is on the verge of collapse,as the Federal reserve seems to be content in allowing it to happen.
    Fact-U.S armed forces and Blackwater security MERCENARIES,are killing people at random with no regard or respect for human life.
    Fact-The U.S govt has engineered 9/11 for their own greedy needs,wage a war on Islam,and try to continue to decieve all about their true intentions.
    Fact-Paul martin has sold us out when he signed that trade agreement in 2005 without the consultation of us the people.
    Fact-U.S forces arent building iraq, they are building a vast military complex and have no interest in the Iraqi people.
    Fact-There is a growing movement in the U.S to stop corporate power from enslaving us in a web of debt.I have been wise to their actions and im not in debt,because i knew it was a scam.
    To anyone who continues to believe the lies fed to you by the U.S and Canadian massmedia,then you truly are lost.But i dont blame any of you since youve been decieved so it isnt your fault.
    On a final note ask yourself this,Where were the 2 F-16s responsible for the northeast sector defense grind on 9/11?

  123. matrixoverkill says:

    The mainstream media in canada and U.S ,who were SUPPOSED to be the checks and balances against this type of behaviour we are seeing now,have failed to inform the people in depth of the implications of the SPP and NAU.So the media has lied to us ,the govt has lied to us and it is our right and free people to remove such govt who have become nothing more than a corporate front and not of the people anymore.
    Justice is coming,her Sword of Truth drawn!

  124. verbena19 says:

    Thanks for your comment.

  125. str8shooter says:

    V, it would appear that matrixoverkill forgot to mention the most salient of his/her facts. FACT: matrixoverkill is a barking moonbat!! Anybody who would say that the US government engineered 9-11 is nuttier than a Christmas fruitcake, and needs to be placed into a WELL padded room!

  126. matrixoverkill says:

    Sure mr agent man whatever you say.US troops are now on canadian soil dictating what our citizens can and cannot do.Your insults are classic case of a disinformationalist.Ive studied 9/11 for 4 monthes now and the original story as well as subsquent video to debunk conspiracy theories,pose even more questions than answers.Im entitled to my opinion and this matter whether you approve or not.SO go back to playing your toy tanks and dreams of world domination,because this is one canadian that isnt intimidated by you in the least.Your govt doesnt intimidate me,your police dont intimidate me and your military doesnt intimidate me.Your military i might add also suffers from a lack of ethics and morality in war.Use of cluster bombs,chemical weapons,and uranium depleted shells and bullets, violate all rules of engagment and warfare.So the next you pick a blog fight make sure you can do more than throw insults around like a little child.

  127. matrixoverkill says:

    Just a further note ,some media online is unbias in reporting and by admission of U.S. troops returning from Iraq,say that shooting of unarmed Iraqis and prisoners happens everyday.One account of a U.S soldier on trial states that he was ordered by his sgt to shoot and unarmed Iraqi.As the Iraqi lay bleeding ,his sgt told him to finish him off and put a bullet in his head.After that was complete,he placed an AK47 on the body and said there now he was armed too.I also know that plenty of neo-nazis and skinheads join the military due to lack of volunteers at home.That in itself speaks volumes since these neo-nazis are a menace to the world because of their sick,disgusting views of others not of the Aryan race.I dont need to show you proof as your country has sent troops across our border in a deal which i never agreed to.It is also my right as a citizen of Canada to resist any foreign troops on our soil.Our govt does not speak for us anymore and your country will be stopped one way or another.

  128. opit says:

    This old thing is still going ? matrixoverkill – sounds good to me. Take a look at
    http://fma7.wordpress.com/ I’ve got a lot more than that on the go !

  129. str8shooter says:

    Well Mr. Padded Cell, for someone who isn’t ‘intimidated’ by us, you sure do spend a lot of time worrying about us! You’ve spent 4 months studying 9-11? That’s rich! I’ve spent the past 6 YEARS regularly debunking all of you barking moonbat conspiracy freaks, and not ONE of you has ever presented anything that even comes close to passing muster.

    Now, back to the original subject, would you care to document EXACTLY where US troops ARE on Canadian soil, and EXACTLY whom they’re telling what they can and cannot do WITHOUT the invitation, consent, and AUTHORITY, of the Canadian government? Your assertions concerning our returning veterans, as well as your assanine claims re: the munitions used by our military (and YOUR OWN) is clearly indicative of your complete ignorance of the subject, and only serves to amplify the necessity of your immediate removal from society and enforced placement into a mental care facility.

  130. str8shooter says:

    Opit,
    UN-minds? Sounds about right for the looney left, non-thinking crowd that swills up that un-mindful garbage! ROTFLMFAO!!

  131. Luc Vienneau says:

    Really, we need to accept it: NAU is happening. We must also admit that no one in this country will lift a finger until they actually feel the loss of Canada & freedom.

    So I ask this: Which side will you be on when they manage to pull this off & the continent explodes?? Liberty or Security.

  132. verbena19 says:

    Thanks for your comment, Luc. I know that groups such as the Council of Canadians are working very hard to NOT allow the NAU to happen. However, it still may, and then it will indeed be very bad for all of us.

  133. pjlu2 says:

    anyone who reads the article and then believes any of the filth and lies spewed by bullshooter..oops i mean str8shooter should get their head examined….. i’ll read all his posts again and look for ONE phrase of truth……. wow what a nut job!

  134. pjlu2 says:

    over a million Irakis dead and generations to suffer evermore from radiation… not to mention Gulf Syndrome affecting the rednecks…. and str8shooter in 2007 was still referring to oif (operation Iraki FREEdom) Free like a spider in a child’s jar…..

  135. verbena19 says:

    Thanks, pjlu2 for your comment. I think that str8shooter is likely an ok guy: just an average, hardworking, misguided, patriotic American who refuses to believe that his beloved country’s leaders could be so traitorous.

  136. Death of the Euro…

    [...]Press release On The US military Bullying Canadian Civilians « Verbena-19[...]…

  137. trivia games…

    [...]Press release On The US military Bullying Canadian Civilians « Verbena-19[...]…

  138. Web Hostings Reviews…

    [...]Press release On The US military Bullying Canadian Civilians « Verbena-19[...]…

  139. thank you says:

    thank you…

    [...]Press release On The US military Bullying Canadian Civilians « Verbena-19[...]…

  140. NEBOSH online training…

    [...]Press release On The US military Bullying Canadian Civilians « Verbena-19[...]…

  141. ремонт, строительство, декор…

    [...]Press release On The US military Bullying Canadian Civilians « Verbena-19[...]…

  142. CPA salary says:

    CPA salary…

    [...]Press release On The US military Bullying Canadian Civilians « Verbena-19[...]…

  143. parrot chat says:

    parrot chat…

    [...]Press release On The US military Bullying Canadian Civilians « Verbena-19[...]…

  144. out of body experience…

    [...]Press release On The US military Bullying Canadian Civilians « Verbena-19[...]…

  145. Naruto 577 Manga | Naruto 577 | Read Naruto 577…

    [...]Press release On The US military Bullying Canadian Civilians « Verbena-19[...]…

  146. celebrity gossip…

    [...]Press release On The US military Bullying Canadian Civilians « Verbena-19[...]…

  147. RCA Ieftin 2012…

    [...]Press release On The US military Bullying Canadian Civilians « Verbena-19[...]…

  148. Ebooks-and-free|Marketing Ebooks|Best marketing ebooks online|Get your marketing ebooks online|Get your marketing ebooks online now|Get your marketing ebooks today…

    [...]Press release On The US military Bullying Canadian Civilians « Verbena-19[...]…

  149. Iphone service, Web Site creation…

    [...]Press release On The US military Bullying Canadian Civilians « Verbena-19[...]…

  150. gta 5 download pc…

    [...]Press release On The US military Bullying Canadian Civilians « Verbena-19[...]…

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: