meggo Posted March 20, 2003 Report Share Posted March 20, 2003 even tho i'm a uni student and s'posed to know what's goin on.. it's been too upsetting lately to even try to find out... but just today i saw that our sweet country has (so far) opted out of the war... and that makes me so happy. even tho i know there's a lot LOT of bad BAD shit going down, that was a little bit of salvation... one good thing that can be taken from this situation, be very, very, very Grateful for being born in (or raised in, or whatever) this country.... i thank my lucky stars every damn chance i get... we have the luxury of being able to try and forget about the crap hitting the fan many miles away... whereas many folks so happen to live many miles away don't get the choice.... i'm sorry, i just had to say something.... say a little (or big) thank you today everybody. all my love. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swifty Posted March 21, 2003 Report Share Posted March 21, 2003 Sorry but i have to disagree on this one Meggo. I think we should definately be supporting our American allies on this. I don't care if its on the front line or in the kitchen cooking breakfast, I think we should do our part to support the liberation of Iraq. This man and his evil regime must be stopped. I know alot of innocent people may lose their lives but the eventual outcome will lead to a better Iraq. Just my.02 tho! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ms.Huxtable Posted March 21, 2003 Report Share Posted March 21, 2003 Well I have never been particularly impressed by any of Canada's Prime Ministers, but I am so proud of Jean Cretien right now and so proud to be Canadian. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weezy Posted March 21, 2003 Report Share Posted March 21, 2003 quote: I don't care if its on the front line or in the kitchen cooking breakfast, I think we should do our part to support the liberation of IraqWell, we are involved, but it is spread very thin. The Canadian warships currently in the Persian Gulf (for the war on Terrorism - not Iraq) will be escorting American and English warships in close enough so they can murder some Iraqis. That's equal to cooking them breakfast, n'est pas? And please tell me, why the fuck would we support an attack on another country that has done nothing to us or our allies? If his intensions are to liberate, then why doesn't he get the fucking Chinese bastards out of Tibet? Could it be that they don't have any resource-wealth (oil) Don't forget, GWB is a republican - republicans INHERANTLY seek wealth, and nothing else. Countries the U.S. has bombed since the end of World War II, as compiled by historian William Blum: China 1945-46 Korea 1950-53 China 1950-53 Guatemala 1954 Indonesia 1958 Cuba 1959-60 Guatemala 1960 Congo 1964 Peru 1965 Laos 1964-73 Vietnam 1961-73 Cambodia 1969-70 Guatemala 1967-69 Grenada 1983 Libya 1986 El Salvador 1980s Nicaragua 1980s Panama 1989 Iraq 1991-99 Sudan 1998 Afghanistan 1998 Yugoslavia 1999 Number of times "liberation," in the form of a democratically elected government that respected human rights within its borders, has resulted: 0 Sorry for the rant, but you should examine the real reasons for the war, and stop looking for a 'silver lining' because there isn't one. This is the USA we're talking about here... Iraq will not be liberated - don't believe the hype. just my $0.02 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paisley Posted March 21, 2003 Report Share Posted March 21, 2003 very impressed with Jean and Canada as well... the largest protests in Canadian history conveyed the Canadian people's feelings towards war in Iraq right now... the US is acting alone without UN and world consent (what country pushed to create the UN at the end of WW2 to promote a peaceful world, the US... who gave Iraq untold weapons and resources for over a decade when they wanted someone to fight Iran for them, the US) I don't want the world to be run by extreme right-wing cowboys who put their self interest before respecting life... yay Canada for not being bullied into compliance... 'Today we all weep for the world' By Thomas Ferraro, Reuters Newswire [uS] Wed Mar 19, 2003 WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The oldest voice in the U.S. Congress rose on Wednesday to denounce as misguided President Bush's march to war with Iraq. "Today I weep for my country," said West Virginia Democrat Sen. Robert Byrd. "No more is the image of America one of strong, yet benevolent peacekeeper. ... Around the globe, our friends mistrust us, our word is disputed, our intentions are questioned. "We flaunt our superpower status with arrogance," Byrd said, adding: "After war has ended the United States will have to rebuild much more than the country of Iraq. We will have to rebuild America's image around the globe." Byrd, who has been a leading foe on Capitol Hill of war with Iraq, spoke in a nearly empty Senate chamber about four hours before Bush's 8 p.m. EST deadline for Saddam Hussein to leave Iraq or face a U.S.-led invasion. "May God continue to bless the United States of America in the troubled days ahead, and may we somehow recapture the vision which for the present eludes us," Byrd said. As the white-haired senator concluded his remarks, a number of people in the visitor's gallery rose and applauded before they were admonished to be quiet. At 85, Byrd is now the oldest member of Congress as well as the longest serving. He was first elected to the Senate in 1958, after six years in the U.S. House of Representatives. The senator said, "We cannot convince the world of the necessity of this war for one simple reason. This is a war of choice." Byrd said that instead of negotiating, Washington demanded obedience or threatened recrimination. "Instead of isolating Saddam Hussein, we seem to have isolated ourselves." He said many questions about the looming war were unanswered -- including how long it would last, what it would cost, what its ultimate mission was. "A pall has fallen over the Senate chamber," Byrd said. "We avoid our solemn duty to debate the one topic on the minds of all Americans, even while scores of thousands of our sons and daughters faithfully do their duty in Iraq." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blane Posted March 21, 2003 Report Share Posted March 21, 2003 Agreed. I don't know how "liberated" the average Iraqi citizen will feel when this is over. I recently saw an interview with a military analyst who described the Iraqi National party leader (the guy the US has chosen to replace Saddam) as a "pro-West Saddam". It's a lot like the Afghanistan situation and many other past US "regime changes" I think. Get rid of a rotten dictatorial leadership and replace it with one that is equally bad, but will bend over for Bush and co. Sad shit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronda Posted March 21, 2003 Report Share Posted March 21, 2003 I can't say that I believe in everything that GWB has to say or do, but that's why I'm glad I live in canada and not in the us...however... I am in agreement with this coalition. I'm not saying that I agree with the lives that will be taken in the midst of this war, I don't agree with the distruction of their land, their communities or their heritage but I do agree that this "crazy bastard needs to get out of dodge". For so many years these people have been raped, tortured, abused and manipulated in to believing that this way of life is okay. 60% of iraqi's live in poverty and depend on food stamps, yet billions of dollars go into artillary, biological weapons and training of terrorists. I believe that most canadians, americans and parts of the rest of the world are naive and also brain washed into thinking that just because we live so far away and because this mad man, his family and his terrorist army has not directly hindered our way of living we should stay out of their business. So what do we do, do we wait until 3000 of our police, fire, ambulance and civillians die in terrorist attacks before we're brave enough to hold them accountable? Do we wait until he has tortured and impoverished 20% more of his people. Do you know why he does this, an educated community wouldn't let that happen to themselves. I once worked for an iraqi man and his wife five years ago. All of their children were born in their home land. After several months of getting to know them the husband opened up to me about their culture. He believed that canadian women were mostly "degrading". His exact words were that he thought it was disgusting that we walk around in our short skirts, that we co-habitate without marrigae, that we have so many children without fathers. That we are educated and are our own business owners. First I thought he was a total jerk until I spoke with his wife. She said that her husband had utmost respect for her. That her face was covered only becuase her husband viewed her beauty to be too magnificant to share with the rest of the world. She said that she walked behind her husband as a way of him protecting her and that she was not educated because she did not want to know about the cruel and abusive business world. They wanted to be able to protect their ethnicity and still have the rights and freedoms of a true democratic society and guess what...they couldn't find that in their home land. They found it here and since have moved to the us. Funny how that goes. My belief is that Hilter and his regime needed to be destroyed and so does Saddam and his regime, both are terrorists. Many innocent people will die and many won't appreciate the outcome for several years but one day, maybe 10 years from now when iraqi's like the one I knew can safely go back "home", that is when people will look back and believe that they have a better life and that those that were sacrificed with be known as martr's and their lives will be known as "free"!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dancingbear Posted March 22, 2003 Report Share Posted March 22, 2003 Ever so proud to be Canadian. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
\/\/illy Posted July 31, 2003 Report Share Posted July 31, 2003 Unfortunately secondtube, it's going to be Mr. Martin leading the Liberals for the next election and he's building his mandate around closer ties to the americans (bend over, apply lubicant, accept phallis into anal cavity). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarcO Posted July 31, 2003 Report Share Posted July 31, 2003 quote: Originally posted by \/\/illy: Unfortunately secondtube, it's going to be Mr. Martin leading the Liberals for the next election and he's building his mandate around closer ties to the americans (bend over, apply lubicant, accept phallis into anal cavity). Dr Hux? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon. Posted July 31, 2003 Report Share Posted July 31, 2003 I'm sure we would have sent our army into Iraq, but, one of them was out getting beer and the other four got bombed by the americans.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paisley Posted July 31, 2003 Report Share Posted July 31, 2003 quote:Originally posted by MarcO: quote:Originally posted by \/\/illy: Unfortunately secondtube, it's going to be Mr. Martin leading the Liberals for the next election and he's building his mandate around closer ties to the americans Dr Hux? Dr. Hux gets my vote over Martin... lets get him some Trudeau suits and start the campaign! Huxtablemania! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarcO Posted July 31, 2003 Report Share Posted July 31, 2003 And yet another reason I despise George Bush, a man who is foolish enough to listen to and agree with The Pope! Once again, thank you, Jean! Please continue to completely ignore the Pope's opinions on everything. Vatican releases rules on same-sex marriage By ALLISON DUNFIELD Globe and Mail Update July 31, 2003 The Vatican released guidelines for bishops and Roman Catholic politicians regarding same-sex marriages on Thursday, warning lawmakers that they must clearly express their opposition to the practice. Prime Minister Jean Chrétien has already indicated that he will not do so. "When legislation in favour of the recognition of homosexual unions is proposed for the first time in a legislative assembly, the Catholic lawmaker has a moral duty to express his opposition clearly and publicly and to vote against it," read a portion of the 12-pages of guidelines released by the Vatican. The 12-page set of guidelines, approved by Pope John Paul II on Thursday, warns Catholic politicians that it is immoral to support same-sex unions. It says that there are no grounds to consider homosexual marriages to be "even remotely analogous to God's plan for marriage and family" and that homosexual acts are unnatural. The statement comes at a time when Mr. Chrétien's Liberals are poised to pass new federal legislation that would provide a new definition of marriage, replacing the common-law notion of a union between a man and a woman. Earlier this month, they sent a draft of the proposed bill to the Supreme Court for comment. On Thursday, a spokeswoman for Mr. Chrétien said the Prime Minister feels responsibility more toward the Canadian public than toward his religion. He, along with Liberal leadership candidates Paul Martin and Sheila Copps, is Roman Catholic. "First of all, we all know Mr. Chrétien is a Roman Catholic. He obviously has respect for the views of the Church," Thoren Hudyma told globeandmail.com Thursday. She said, however, that as Prime Minister of Canada, he also has the moral responsibility to protect the equality of Canadians. "He's said there needs to be a separation between the church and state." Ms. Hudyma also pointed out that the vote on the legislation will be a free vote in the House of Commons, meaning MPs who vote against the government will not be punished. "MPs can vote however they want on this." She said it is also important to note that there is a clause in the legislation that allows any churches to bow out of performing same-sex marriages if they are opposed. Mr. Martin, who is poised to become the next prime minister after the November Liberal leadership election, also said this week it is "an issue which is giving everyone great pause for thought," but as an MP he must "take in a wider perspective" than his faith. Mr. Chrétien has already been criticized for his position on the Vatican's guidelines by at least one religious leader in Canada. Roman Catholic Bishop Fred Henry of Calgary warned Wednesday that Mr. Chrétien could be doomed to burn in hell if he allows same-sex legislation to become legal in Canada. But on Thursday, Rev. Dr. Brent Hawkes, senior pastor of Metropolitan Community Church of Toronto, who has performed several gay marriages, said the Vatican's move "only serves to inflame discrimination and add to the sad and sorry language used by other fundamentalist churches of the religious right." Across the border, U.S. President George W. Bush said Wednesday that he would look for ways to prevent homosexual marriage and ensure that it remains a traditional union. He said legal protections of marriage should apply only to the union of a man and a woman. Mr. Bush said U.S. government lawyers are exploring measures to legally define marriage in that way. "I believe a marriage is between a man and a woman," he said. "I think we ought to codify that one way or the other." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vermontdave Posted August 1, 2003 Report Share Posted August 1, 2003 I've been working this past week in the home of two women who have a civil union, which, in Vermont, is the same thing as marriage. They have two of the cutest most polite kids I've ever met. They live in a white-picket fence kind of suburban neighborhood where all the neighbors know each other. Listening to the Vatican take such a strong stand against gay marriage, 'This is something that is harmful to children', when for the past thirty years they cover-up and obfuscate when it comes to pedophelia is not only hypocritical, but down-right mean-spirited. But don't worry your Emminence, you've got ol'GW ridin shotgun with you on this one! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schwa. Posted August 1, 2003 Report Share Posted August 1, 2003 Swifty you're full of shit. Did Reekie tell you to say that? Right wing weinies! Canadians need to remember where we sit on the world stage. We have been and will continue to be peacekeepers. We have as many people in our entire country as Mexico City for Christ sake. We have a shit army with shit equipment and could not possibly help on a grand scale. Rest assured that we will do our part in the war, or rather after the war. We will let the U.N. tear down the country and then everyone will call on good ole' Canada to come in and pick up the pieces and provide care. Does anyone get pissed off when Switzerland doesn't join a war? NO! Personally i want to remain liked by the rest of the world and not to be thought of as the US' Bitch. Come Canada, sit Canada, roll over Canada....FUck that shit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arcane Posted August 1, 2003 Report Share Posted August 1, 2003 We don't upset when Aruba doesn't participate in a war. I like Aruba. Nice, peaceful Aruba. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Constable Posted August 1, 2003 Report Share Posted August 1, 2003 quote:Originally posted by Schwa.: Right wing weinies! Personally i want to remain liked by the rest of the world and not to be thought of as the US' Bitch. Come Canada, sit Canada, roll over Canada....FUck that shit. [/QB]Spoken like a true liberal English!!! Pretty soon you're gonna be eatin' granola & twigs, livin' in some hollowed out tree in the middle of the forest, and drivin' a corn powered moped back and forth from your job helping misguided delinquents rise up against the 'man'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bouche Posted August 1, 2003 Report Share Posted August 1, 2003 "Roman Catholic Bishop Fred Henry of Calgary warned that Mr. Chrétien could be doomed to burn in hell if he allows same-sex legislation to become legal in Canada." from the Globe and Mail Geezuz. Cretien sure is taking risks these days for everyone. I think 'burning in hell' has to be the greatest of them all. You go Jean! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
secondtube Posted August 1, 2003 Report Share Posted August 1, 2003 they may not be perfect...but there is no way i'm voting for anyone but the liberals in the next election... staying out of the war the pot stuff same sex marriages Canada surely Kicks Ass Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarcO Posted August 1, 2003 Report Share Posted August 1, 2003 quote: Originally posted by The Constable: Pretty soon you're gonna be eatin' granola & twigs, livin' in some hollowed out tree in the middle of the forest, and drivin' a corn powered moped back and forth from your job helping misguided delinquents rise up against the 'man'. I fail to see the problem here...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schwa. Posted August 1, 2003 Report Share Posted August 1, 2003 I already live in a tree, bring on the granola. Hey Swifts, BP's stag and doe is tonight if you're interested. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.