american in Can. has interesting things to say about terror "sting"

[donsu]

http://www.buzzflash.com/mailbag/06/06/mai06138.html


-snip-

Subject: Canadian Terrorism

I am an American who lives in Canada. I am well informed about the US Regime's activities.

Canada recently elected a "conservative" Government which has a Minority, i.e., it cannot do whatever it wants since it could be defeated at any time. This government has had contacts with the neocons over the years, notably Newt Gingrich. BuzzFlash recently carried a story about Frank Luntz, a GOP operative, having close contacts with the new Canadian Prime Minister, Stephen Harper. This "conservative" government pushes all the same hot buttons as the US Regime: terror, law 'n order, anti-abortion, anti-gay, but must also disguise much of its agenda from the Canadian electorate.

Keeping all the above in mind, then, one should examine any Canadian "terror" stories with a skeptical and cynical eye. And, in general, I would advise this as regards all Canadian political stories. This is particularly true since the recent "terror" operation was a sting, with the explosive material having been supplied by the police themselves.

There are some indications that Canadians themselves are questioning this story, particularly since MOST CANADIANS WANT OUT OF AFGHANISTAN. This may be one purpose of the sting, to get Canadians to move toward more involvement in the US War and Public Safety Rackets.

I hope this is of some use and I hope the US Alternative media will investigate these links of the neocons and the Canadian Conservative Party. It sure looks like we are in for a dose of good ole Regime propaganda here in the North.

Thanks.

Canada police used sting in terror arrests (Times of India)

A BuzzFlash Reader

-snip-
--------------------------------

[azurnoir]

1. That the US

was behind this "operation" was way beyond any question to me anyway. The "fortunate" timing was just too obvious.

[dufrenne]

2. That

American can kiss my Canadian Ass....he seems to know nothing about Canada. I've had enough of Americans who like to transpose their f***'d up regime to every country in the world. First, the liberals in Canada (which make John Kerry look like Bush), put the troops in Afganhistan. Secondly, this sting has been in the works since well before Harper. Thirdly, while Harper is "right" in Canada, his politics can't even compare to Bush's. He's to the right, but then that's the reason Harper was given a minority. Even still, if Harper was moderate enough to get himself a majority, any BS he did that came close to what's happening in the US would find him out of office in the next election cycle. The electorate in Canada is quite sophisicated and our media aren't political lapdogs like in the US. Furthermore, the PM is accountable and must answer to Parliament daily in question period. Dog and pony shows are much harder to pull off than in the US. Finally, Harper knows, if he has anyhope of long term power, he needs Ontario and the East, and he won't get that ever by playing "Bush". So please, don't try and equate the US with Canada. The authorities did a great job on these arrests, and I would give them the benefit of the doubt over some American who thinks he can teach other countries about their politics...How typically American.

[donsu]

3. however, the bushmilhousegang has it's sticky fingers into your govt.

look about, it is there to see

[dufrenne]

8. really?

Because we Canadians love Bush so much, that our PM would get a lot of votes by sucking up to Bush...really? Is that how it works? Again, just because it's called "conservative" in Canada doesn't mean it's American conservative. Please, you are out of your element when it comes to the Canadian system and political spectrum. You don't get a country where same-sex marriage is law, where affirmative action and pro-choice has been on the books, with universal health care etc...without having a strong liberal tradition. Sure, the path to these laws have not always been in a straight line, but we inevitably make it there. Sure, Harper is not a same-sex marriage fan, and would like to roll back the notion of decrimininalizing weed etc., but in Canada, we can at least have the debate in a civil, substantive manner.

[iverglas]

48. y'know what I sometimes think it is?

American imperialism turned inside out.

The bad guys exploit and oppress the rest of the world ... and the ones who fancy themselves the good guys insist that everything the rest of the world does couldn't have been done without 'em.

The world is just one great big giant looking glass, reflecting the US back to the USAmericans. It's just all about them.

But hey, let me not in generalizations indulge! I hasten to add that so it would sometimes seem.

[CJCRANE]

4. B*sh was a "compassionate conservative"

and a "uniter" before he came to power. The massive RW swing only happened after 9/11.

Also note that 9/11 was also planned before B*sh came to power, but it's pretty clear that it could only have happened on his watch.

[Vinnie From Indy]

7. Nice generalizations about Americans!

So I suppose you are wearing a touk and drinking a Labatt's as you type? How typically Canadian!

I do hope you guys never get Diebold and their ilk to count your votes!

Cheers Canada!

[dufrenne]

9. How did

you know I was drinking Labatt? ;)

[dufrenne]

12. I don't

know why I even bother? Posters here are intent on ignoring how Canada works polticially and culturally and instead focus on a simplistic, ignorant equation that Harper=Conservative Canadian; Bush=Conservatic American; Therefore Harper=Bush and now the two administrations are one big cabal. How narrow-minded. Yet so many people here, who are supposedly enlightened, play this silly game. As if the notion that terrorists exist at all is some sort of myth. If you guys ever bothered really studying Canada with an unbiased view or spent some time in Canada, listening to our politicans or watching our news, you would realize that this "Rove" controls our country attitude is silly and insulting. Again, please don't transpose your f'd up regime to other countries.

[CJCRANE]

14. Al-Qaeda is a meme

and neocon tactics are also memes that can be used by any govt.

Tony Blair, for instance, is a "Labour" Prime Minister but in reality he is the biggest neoconservative (in foreign and security policy) outside America. It's pretty clear that neocon influences can stretch across borders in many ways.

[dufrenne]

18. Yes

terrorists and their actions can be used to scare people and to push policies forward, but that does not mean that they do not exist. Unless, you're a MIHOP or a LIHOP type (which I am not), it is clear that threats do exist. Therefore, I do not give the benefit of the doubt (although they have a presumption of innocence) to those arrested. The neocon notion of foreign policy pre-supposes that you even have that miltaristic might to accomplish your goals, which Canada clearly does not. Bottom line, with respect to social values, Canada has absolutely nothing in common with much of the US, and if you don't think that our social values do not inform and effect our view of the world and our foreign policy, then you do not know Canada. Yes, the neocons have influenced other countries by forcing them to examine their role in the world and in relation to the US, but if you think for a moment, that 6 years of Bush have transformed Canada into a bunch of mindless, snivelling zombies who don't hold their polticians to account or who easily give up their values, then again, you don't know Canada. Again, please don't equate your mindless evangelical population and their values to anything that Canada will ever be. They got Bush elected and put him in power. What happened in Canada wasn't a vote for Harper...or for Bush. Rather, it was a vote for a break from 15 years of liberal rule and recent corruption. It was hardly a sea-change, but instead a vote "against" the party in power.

[WoodyTobiasJr]

24. Actually, it's spelled toque - I'm just saying is all...

I am very impressed that you said 'toque' and not 'woolcap'


:toast:

[Spazito]

10. Harper wants to be bush's poodle replacement as Blair is being

forced to step down. Harper IS a bush wannabe, he is the Reform icon in all it's racist, bigoted, homophobic, war mongering "best". I am Canadian and I AM skeptical of the timing of this, coincidentally just before the Supreme Court begins it hearings on the Security Certificates that are being used to hold people in jail without their rights. Add to that the fact that CSIS was recently pulling the terra, terra, terra meme to ask for more money and power.

I am skeptical and will remain so until all the FACTS on this are out instead of just those of the authorities and the Harper government.


Oh, and I welcome American comments on our issues, especially those that mirror the bush admins "issues"

[dufrenne]

13. were

you so skepitical when Chretien put our troops in Afghanistan or when this CSIS op began under Martin? Oh please, your notion that us Canadians can't do anything without the word from our American masters is so cynical and tired. Harper has been in office for not even six months and now the whole notion of terror in Canada is some conservatice boogey-man...were you not around for the previous 15 years of liberal rule? Give it a rest.

[Spazito]

17. Instead of being insulted by your post, I will answer it instead...

I was NOT skeptical when our troops went to Afghanistan under NATO, I was totally against the change in mission from peacekeeping to COMBAT and putting our troops under US command.

I said NOTHING about "American masters" so I have no idea where you are going with that.

I have been around for more than the 15 years of "liberal rule", I was even around during the Mulroney era where our country was taken down to almost third world status economically with Mulroney following bush sr. like a puppy dog.

I would suggest a tone improvement is in order if you actually want to debate the issue instead of generate heat without light as is happening now.

Where in Canada are you? I couldn't find anything about Canada in your profile.

[dufrenne]

19. I'm in T.O

as unpopular as mulroney was, many of his economic policies did help to usher in the 90s boom, which the liberals helped to continue with their sound budgets. I'm not arguing for Harper per se. I find his same-sex stance odious, as I fully support marriage and adoption. My only point is that to attempt to equate him with Bush or anything in the US is futile. Fact is, if Harper wants power, he needs Ontarians like me...namely the GTA and the Horseshoe...he's not going to get it by being Bush...

[Spazito]

22. I appreciate your response and it's tone but I do disagree re

Harper and equating him with bush. Harper would like to be able to do in Canada what bush is doing in the U.S. One has only to look at the Reform party and it's origins to see that. Harper is Reform, he is NOT conservative in any sense.

He would like religion to be part and parcel of policy decisions, he apologized to the United States when the Liberal government said NO to Iraq. He would have us in Iraq right now if he could.

I agree, he will not get a majority government by BEING like bush so he is pretending he isn't UNTIL he gets a majority, if he ever does, and then we will see how very much his government's policies mirror the bush admins, of that I have no doubt.

[dufrenne]

25. even

if your scenario were true, if he wanted hope of a second term, he could not go anywhere near bushes policies. You know as well as I do the strong progressive tradition in Canada. Hell, all our policies reflect that. Harper can fight them all he wants, but would lose everything east and west of alberta-manitoba if did.

[Spazito]

29. Once he has a majority, he can do whatever he wants for four

years and look what bush has done and he did it in three years. One should always watch others of like minds, such as bush, to see what someone like Harper is capable so as to forestall the same thing happening in Canada as has happened in the US.

Universal health care is under attack and the Reform party was/is very clear that their preference is privatization.

Same sex marriage debate is back on the table as it is in the US right now.

A no-bid contract is to be given to Boeing instead of our own aerospace industry, outsourcing like what is happening in the US now.

These are only a few examples of what is occurring now, never mind what would occur were Harper to get a majority.

[dufrenne]

31. I don't disagree

that their will always be bumps and backtracking toward our progressive policies. But by the same token, I don't react immediately to disagree with any new ideas, just because they come from the right. I like our unverisal health system, but am not adverse to considering notions of privatization or some sort of tiered system or some solution to address the obvious problems. This can be done in a civil way. As for same sex, even if he puts the vote on the table, the Supreme Court will strike down any re-definition of marriage - that's not a quesiton. The only question is if Harper would use the notwithstanding clause. This would be political suicide. The clause has become polticial poison ever since Quebec used it in the 80's...and anything Harper did would be promptly undone by a liberal government that would be in power long term - long enough to entrench laws to the point that subsequent governments could not overcome the inertia to overturn them. Harper can pander all he wants, but Canada is a progressive, liberal nation and he's limited by that fact. Bush on the other hand, as more leeway, because a large part of the US is quite conservative, much more relatively speaking, than Canada.

[Spazito]

35. Canada is essentially, a centrist country rather than a progressive,

liberal country, imo. If it were a progressive, small l liberal country, the two parties that would hold the most sway would be the Liberal party and the New Democratic Party rather than the two major parties that now hold sway.

Going back to the original subject in the OP, the RCMP is not pure, it, too, has acted wrongly on past occasions, and being skeptical about this latest action is healthy,imo,so I am waiting to see ALL the facts and being suspicious of the TIMING of the arrests and having seen previous cases go down the drain in the end because the evidence wasn't there.

It is not an impossibility that the arrests were made now to try and build up support for the Afghan mission at a time when support is rapidly draining. That certainly is not beyond any government and it's law enforcement agencies to do.

[dufrenne]

37. I disagree,

you can make whatever you want out of timing, but what does that mean? Conspiracies can be created out of whole-cloth just by trying to connect events in a convenient manner. This has been an operation in the works before Harper, so I give little credence to any of those theories. Yes, police agencies all of the world make mistakes, but to use those mistakes as a broad brush stroke to impeach everything they do is too far I think.

Finally, Canada is a progressive country. You don't get same-sex marriage, abortion rights, affirmative action, national health, etc by being centrist. Those are solidly progressive notions, to name a few. Those take years to develop and will get nowhere in any country that isn't sure about its politics. That's not to say there isn't argument and debate about them, but for the most part, the debate is on the fringes. The reason the Conservatives have held sway for so long is because they've always been rooted in the liberal east, and drew their strength from their. Mulroney wasn't a religious nut and wasn't a "values" guy. Harper is a new breed because his source of power is from the west. Problem is, that's not a lot of power - not enough to keep him in power. If he wants true power, he'll have to move left to placate conservatives in the east, which tend to be relatively liberal, if not progressive on social values, and conservative mainly in economic policies. The NDP don't hold sway because I think they've been a relatively local phenomena. And Bob Rae's experience in Ontario really soured people on them. However, if you notice in the last election, they had a huge showing - strongest in years. That says it all to me. Liberals got punished, Conservatives got a minority, and the most left party in Canda got huge numbers. What that says is that the country is solidly left, yet sick of corruption - so they booted the libs, put the conservatives on a leash and gave a lot of sway to the NDP. If we were truly seeing a change in the country, the electorate would not have rewarded the NDP - those votes would have instead have gone to giving Harper a majority.

[Spazito]

39. Progressive by some other countries' standards, perhaps, but

not as compared to others and not by those within our country. We have three mainstream parties, I am excluding the Bloc because they exist only in Quebec, the former Reform party, the Liberal party and the New Democratic Party. Which of those three would be considered progressive, small l liberal, which would be centrist and which would be right of center?

Again, the New Conservatives are NOT conservatives in the historic sense, they are an extremist group that left the Progressive Conservative party because it wasn't extreme enough.

Because the sting operation was active prior to Harper means little, imo. I would be skeptical if the Liberals were still in power until ALL the facts are in evidence and I do find the timing interesting given the current political climate.

I do agree Canadians were not voting to support the former Reform party but, rather, lodging a protest vote by a mix of parking their vote with the NDP for the time being, voting for a former Reform candidate or simply not voting.

We will not get a real sense of where Canadians are going until the Liberals choose a leader and what the polls say after that.

[dufrenne]

40. Well,

the new conservative party was a union of reform and old conservatives. Reform was, and would have been in the wilderness if not for such a union and if not for the lib scandal. But again, that being said, they will never maintain power if they are extremist, as they would have no real base to support them on a national level. However you categorize the parties, the fact is, over decades, those parties have produced a country with policies that would be judged progressive by any world comparison. You might take it for granted, but if you lived in the US or elsewhere, you might look back far more fondly on Canada, as I did when I lived in the US. Don't worry, I don't think Harper will last 18 months - as he only has a minority. Once the libs get their act together, they will quickly be back in power, as long as they can disown the corrupt bs of the past party. Volpe did not make a good start of that (lol). It's easy to assume the current political climate in Canada is similar to the US, when we inundate ourselves with American news. But it's not the case. The fact is, whether we like it or not, terrorists do exist and do want to attack. We don't have to scare ourselves by that fact, our allow ourselvevs to be scared by politicians, but neither should we ignore the threat because some yahoo in the WH loves to say 9/11 a hundred times over. I don't find the timing interesting at all. I see nothing wrong with what went down. They are innocent until proven guilty, but I do give kudos to our agencies for stopping what could have been a real threat.

[Spazito]

43. Fair enough, it has been a good debate and I appreciated it

Time will tell what is to happen both in the arena of the arrests and the next election.

[dufrenne]

44. agreed

had a great time with the discussion

[Greyhound]

27. Could it be that neither of you is seeing the real agenda?

I don't know shit from Canadian politics, but I do know a great deal about how the globalist - corporatist agenda works. The voters, of any country, are irrelevant. They serve their purpose every couple of years, that is, to determine which political parties get the lion's share of the $$$. Parliamentary governments are more difficult and expensive to direct, but that is an inconvenience only.

It is not about Canada or amerika or The EU, it is about the "New World Order" and has been about nothing else for the last quarter century. All else is simply distraction.

[CJCRANE]

33. I agree.

Just look at Tony Blair as an example. He was originally elected as leader of a centre-left party
but he has gone so far to the right he's left his whole country and his party behind. In fact there's no longer any room for the Conservative Party on the right, so instead Cameron is trying to remold them as "liberal conservatives".

Both Blair and Bush are despised by most of their populations but they're still their, happy as larry, trying to pull the strings.

[coalition_unwilling]

30. The flip side of any "sting" is "entrapment," as any competent

defense attorney will argue.

[iverglas]

49. we don't have defense attorneys in Canada

Now, defence counsel, or the accused's lawyers, might have something to say about "entrapment", granted.

Nonetheless, you appear, like so very many others, to have no clue whatsoever what this "sting" involved, and so your suggestion that there may have been entrapment is mere hot air.

A defence lawyer trying to argue entrapment would have to have a few facts to back the argument up. No one here emitting this hot air seems to have any at all.

[coalition_unwilling]

50. No clue, eh? Well, I'm relying on MSM reports (televised and

newsprints). Here's what they reported (paraphrasing and summarizing): RCMP staff delivered bags of ammonium nitrate to suspects BEFORE making the arrests. That smells like entrapment, if suspects were enticed to commit acts they would not have otherwise.

[iverglas]

51. got a quote?

That's a pretty fucked up version of the facts you got there.

Apart from that:

RCMP staff delivered bags of ammonium nitrate to suspects BEFORE making the arrests. That smells like entrapment, if suspects were enticed to commit acts they would not have otherwise.

-- that's one very great big "if" you've got there.

I'd be rich, IF I had a million dollars. But given that I don't, I'm just not going to go around theorizing that I just might, ya never know, be rich. I recommend that you consider this really very sensible approach to life.


Lordy. The attitude on display at this site in the last few days -- the apparently firm belief that Canadians are just plain stupid (including the many Canadians at this very site, a vast majority of whom have tried, really very patiently, to explain that CANADA IS NOT THE U.S.A., for starters), has only served to exacerbate one's own despair about the future of that great nation to the south of us.

There's one faction hereabouts that seems to be ready to believe anything it's fed, and it just ain't the Canadians who recognize a bunch of unpleasant goofs planning a crime when they see one.

[coalition_unwilling]

56. Canada, please liberate us! WE APOLOGIZE FOR ALL

THE MOOSE JOKES, EH? :)

On a serious note, I don't have cable, so rely only on broadcast news here in Los Angeles. They keep showing the same clips here over and over (of suspects being put in cars), and don't provide much in the way of new "news" to accompany those clips.

So it's true I'm ignorant of the finer details of Canadian law enforcement. If these suspects truly were a threat, then I'm glad they were apprehended before the fact.

In the U.S., we've seen Wen Ho Lee, Richard Jewell and Steven Hatfield all "convicted in the press" by Federal government leaks before each received due process. It was in that context that I offered my initial and subsequent remarks.

[iverglas]

57. fyi

In the U.S., we've seen Wen Ho Lee, Richard Jewell and Steven Hatfield all "convicted in the press" by Federal government leaks before each received due process. It was in that context that I offered my initial and subsequent remarks.

The actual problem here is the opposite.

So much emphasis is placed on the accused's right to a fair trial -- and thus on not polluting the jury pool -- that the kind of facts people want to know are seldom released immediately or soon after arrests.

[kitkat65]

5. Interesting . . . I had a LOT of questions after watching the news story

about the arrests in Canada. Number one was that if Canada allows spying over the internet, does it do so with a warrant and some form of oversight?

The news report said that they found out about the terrorist plot by monitoring the internet.

The report also gave a big emphasis on the fact that certain terrorist sites are a beacon for would-be terrorists.

The timing of it is curious and one could see it as propaganda aimed at people in the U.S. who aren't quite sure what position to take on illegal surveillance of U.S. citizens by the government.

On a somewhat geeky side note, I keep thinking of a line from a Star Wars movie: "So, this is how liberty dies - to thunderous applause."

[MadHound]

6. Yeah, I have my doubts about who was behind this "terrorist plot"

It all stinks to high heaven of a Rovian neo-con plot. "FEAR, TERROR, TERROR, FEAR!" A little too much if you ask me.

[enigma000]

11. Yes sir, Mr, American, sir!

golly, it's good of you to tell Americans about Canada. I'm sure Canadians are standing by to act on John Kerry's orders.

[Adelante]

16. Come off it

Canadians have a lot to say about the US and Americans on this site :shrug:

There is nothing wrong with talking about what's happening in another country. We do it all the time here, don't we?

[enigma000]

20. That's true - posters from around the world comment on the US here

I just feel Canadians should be commenting more on this story.

[iverglas]

52. and we who do usually know what we're talking about ...

But on this point:

I just feel Canadians should be commenting more on this story.

We have, but keep in mind we're rather outnumbered.

If you read the threads in LBN, you'll find a rather overwhelming consensus among the Canadian posters: this was not the work of Karl Rove, our police/intelligence services were not acting on orders from Washington, this is not fake news designed to turn us all into quivering compliant sheep, Stephen Harper is not George Bush, and whatever else we can think of to counter the enormous mountain of utterly uninformed and US-centric bullshit being directed at this story around here.

Canadians at DU whom I despise, and who despise me, are saying the same thing I am. Most of them are Canadians whom I consider to be hopelessly right-wing, of course -- but I don't think they're stupid.

But what we are getting from our USAmerican friends here is the distinct message that we ARE stupid, we Canadians. That not only do we have no politics or history or culture of our own, we're too dumb to figure that out.

It gets really tiresome.

[dufrenne]

21. agreed,

but much of the statements by Americans are frankly uninformed and show no attempt to understand the Canadian system. Fact is, since the US is the big swinging dick in the world, citizens of other countries can't help but to inform themselves of your politics and follow news stories intently. I lived in the US for four years (just got back a few months ago) and consumed everything I could about the US system and politics. I consider myself quite well-informed and a US polticial junkie. I don't think the same can be said for many here re: canada.

[flyarm]

15. i have lived parts of 22 yrs in toronto..i still can not believe the

canadians voted this guy in..i still think there were some kind of shenannigans..

the people of canada i know all hate little lord pissy pants..why would they vote in anyone like him?? doesn't make any sense!!

they hate pissy pants and everything about how this government of ours is being run today..so why would they self inflict this pain on themselves..

and this whole story is nothing but bullshit..supposedly the Pm spoke to pissy pants right before this whole thing came down..its bullshit!!

the canadian people want their troops home..period the end..they do not support this war or any other having to do with little lord pissy pants..i just bet our king..told the pm ..scare the bee gee bees out of the canadians..and they will let you do anything...

well i do not think the canadian people will fall for this bullshit!

fly

fly

[dufrenne]

23. oh come

on...is it such a mystery? After 15 years of Chretien and the recent scandals, the electorate wanted a break, yet they didn't want to give Harper a full majority. So they gave him a sort of test run...a minority government, that at the very least gave everyone time away from the lib party. Most of my friends are very very strong liberals, yet gave Harper a good strong look; so did I. And many of them voted for him...in TO. Again, it was not a vote for harper, but against martin, which makes perfect sense. There were no shenannigans. I don't know who you refer to by "they" when you say

"they hate pissy pants and everything about how this government of ours is being run today..so why would they self inflict this pain on themselves.."

but maybe you should look outside of your immediate news sources or circile of friends and talk to others about how they voted. You would see that many people, as much as they don't like Harper, didn't mind electing him as long as he was on a short leash...

[flyarm]

26. silly me..i should have just spoken to you..instead of

the so many people we know who ran the government in toronto for many years!!

fly

[dufrenne]

28. No offense

but if you have no clue why Harper was elected, then you don't really follow Canadian poltics enough or live in some sort of echo chamber. It was obvious that people were fed up with the libs and the scandal that they wanted a break, but didn't want to give Harper full control. What else where they going to do? Elect the Bloc(! lol) or the NDP?? Again, it wasn't a vote for Harper, but against Martin. You assume that everyone in Canada went crazy or there was a rigged election? No, it was a simple case of voting for change. It happens in Canada...The liberals have been in power for the better part of the century. Conservatives only get elected when people want a break, and typically, they don't last too long with obvious exceptions. This was not a case of the electorate suddenly shifting to the right. I would suggest you asking those councilors who you spoke to why Harper was elected. If their answer is again "I don't know"...then I understand why they're not in power any more.

[flyarm]

32. please don't get me wrong..i do understand how people were frustrated and

and pissed at martin..i do get that..but voting in someone of the ilk of little lord pissy pants..just never resounded with me of how the canadians i know feel about our criminal in the white house and our so called conservative assholes and hypocrites..!!

and i do understand how you have your new asshole on a short leash..but do you fully understand how evil our assholes are and how they will now manipulate and gain the power they want over your new asshole??..i don't care how short a leash you have ..our guys are evil and they know how to break your leash!!

i do understand how some were swayed ...i just will never understand the resolve to vote for this new asshole of yours.when you had the prerfect example of what assholes the conservs are here..and you knew your asshole would latch onto our asshole...it was inevitable...your boy will become our boys lap dog!! even if your boy has a short leash , our evil guys will beat you with your own short leash..thats how evil these guys are!!
this is the most evil government in the uSA i have ever experienced in my 54 yr lifetime..do you get that.,.they have manipulated the very intelligent tony blair and made him their lap dog...they will do the same to your guy..count on it!!

fly

[dufrenne]

34. I'll say it again,

conservative in Canada does not equal conservatic in the US. Most conservatives in Canada would be considered to be centrist Dems in the US, if not further left. Yes, they have some disagreeable policies, but they are not even close to comparable to Bush. Read some of my posts on this thread to understand the kind of country Canada is. Bush thrives in the US because there is a large population of conservates and a strong conservative undercurrent in the US. The same is not true in Canada. Harper, even with a majority, would not last in power if he played to his "base", as his base in Canada has nowhere near the power in Canada relative to the power Bush's base has in the US. It's like apples and oranges. You call him an asshole and think he's evil. I don't. I didn't vote for him, and disagree with many of his policies, but we're not shrill about it here as you are. We can have fundamental agreements without calling each other evil etc. Bush is what he is...call him what you want. But the politicans in Canada, to the right and left are of a different ilk than in the US. Again, really not to be compared.

[Spazito]

36. But the New Conservatives aren't conservatives, they are the Reform

party under their second new name. Real Conservatives like Joe Clark refused to be part of this NEW phony conservative party. The Reformers split from the Conservative party because it wasn't extreme enough for them. To equate the New Conservative party to what used to be the Progressive Conservative party of old is inaccurate to say the least, imo.

[dufrenne]

38. Spazito

my response above addresses your post...

[Geek_Girl]

54. Hmmm New Conservative party ....

Sounds allot like Neo-con to me.

[iverglas]

55. yes, well

you might want to note that there is no such thing as the New Conservative Party.

[flyarm]

42. WRONG ..*HES BASE IN THE USA IS PROB LESS THAN 30 %

OF THE POPULATION AND DO YOU SEE THE POWER THEY HAVE YIELDED?? DO YOU SEE how daily they are shredding our constitution against the majority of the will of americans?? don't you see that??

the minority is destroying our nation....don't you see that and a very small minority at that..

the majority of americans did not support going to this war..did you know that..,these fuckers do whatever they damn well please..they are right now destroying all our treaties , against our constitutional law..they ignore all our laws..in fact they relish destroying them and flinging the shit in our faces..
they shit on the congress and senate..they do not care about laws..get that??

they do not care about our constitution..get that??

and they will do it to you as well!

what part of this are you not getting??

fly

[dufrenne]

45. Nope

his base of power when it comes to social issues is not just 30%. I'm not talking about the war necessarily. I'm talking about things like affirmative action, abortion, etc etc. In those issues, conservatives can draw on a lot of support. The US is far more religious minded and driven than Canada, and that is reflected by the fact that parties cater to the relgious right by having to be filmed going to church (lol), among other things.

That's what you don't get about the US...it's not the minority as you say. It's not necessarily a majority, but those odious ideals hold sway with more people than you think.

This idea of they will "do it to you as well"...shows an ignorance of Canada, its poltics and its people. I lived in Chicago for 4 years. Chicago is a fairly liberal place relative to other places in the US, but I was still amazed by the amount of religiosity there compared to Canada. Live in Canada for a few years before making such statements. You seemed to indicate that you had lived here...Then, I'm incredulous that you would not see differences between Americans and Canadians when it comes to such values and the amount of support we will give to politicians who contradict those values...

We have our nuts, but they are few in number.

[flyarm]

46. nonsence..than you do not understand the USA as well as you think you do!!

[dufrenne]

47. Believe

what you want, but in addition to the 30% kool-aid drinkers and zealots, there are about another 20% if not more who strongly beleive in that family values tripe. The only reason their not backing him up now is because he's managed to f--- everything up in the country. But on a given day, a good chunk of your country would have no problem with anti-abortion and same-sex policies. Look at national polls on those issues. People don't like Bush because he's incompetent, but that doesn't change the fact that with respect to many "social values", many Americans would stay true to their religious roots. Listen, if for a second, you are trying to argue that Americans as a whole are no more or less religious than Canadians or Europeans, or would not act on those views, then you're living in fantasy land. I know you like to imagine your country as not being the kind that could support Bush with such high numbers on the popular vote (regardles of whether you beleive in stolen elections), but it did. If you want change in the US, then admit that fact and try to work with it and change it, rather than sticking your fingers in your ears, closing your eyes and thinking you life in Finland, Norway...or Canada

[butterfly77]

41. When i first heard this story this is what I was thinking..

watch australia and other european countries

[PWRinNY]

53. Those were exactly my thoughts as well

when I heard about the "terror" sting.