There are more countries in the world than just Canada &

Someone

Nominee Member
Dec 31, 2004
58
0
6
All this Canada vs USA talk gets really silly. It's funny when I think about the comparison: Canada has only one neighbour - the USA. USA has multiple neighbours - Canada, Mexico, Cuba, Bahamas, and probably a few other Caribbean nations.

While Canadians focus on so much on their attitudes towards the United States, it's amazing how this is not reciprocated. OK, Americans also do tend to think they're the only people in the world. But, there's also the fact that Mexico is worth A WHOLE LOT MORE attention than Canada. Why? Let's just say that we're on our way to having a USA whose Mexican (not Latin American, but just Mexican) population is larger than Canada's total. Imagine that! The Latin American and black American populations are already both larger than Canada's total.

Sorry to burst your bubble Canada, but the United States is the only other American country out there. You share the Americas with more than 30 other countries. Ever heard of that??!!
 

Someone

Nominee Member
Dec 31, 2004
58
0
6
All this Canada vs USA talk gets really silly. It's funny when I think about the comparison: Canada has only one neighbour - the USA. USA has multiple neighbours - Canada, Mexico, Cuba, Bahamas, and probably a few other Caribbean nations.

While Canadians focus on so much on their attitudes towards the United States, it's amazing how this is not reciprocated. OK, Americans also do tend to think they're the only people in the world. But, there's also the fact that Mexico is worth A WHOLE LOT MORE attention than Canada. Why? Let's just say that we're on our way to having a USA whose Mexican (not Latin American, but just Mexican) population is larger than Canada's total. Imagine that! The Latin American and black American populations are already both larger than Canada's total.

Sorry to burst your bubble Canada, but the United States is the only other American country out there. You share the Americas with more than 30 other countries. Ever heard of that??!!
 

Someone

Nominee Member
Dec 31, 2004
58
0
6
All this Canada vs USA talk gets really silly. It's funny when I think about the comparison: Canada has only one neighbour - the USA. USA has multiple neighbours - Canada, Mexico, Cuba, Bahamas, and probably a few other Caribbean nations.

While Canadians focus on so much on their attitudes towards the United States, it's amazing how this is not reciprocated. OK, Americans also do tend to think they're the only people in the world. But, there's also the fact that Mexico is worth A WHOLE LOT MORE attention than Canada. Why? Let's just say that we're on our way to having a USA whose Mexican (not Latin American, but just Mexican) population is larger than Canada's total. Imagine that! The Latin American and black American populations are already both larger than Canada's total.

Sorry to burst your bubble Canada, but the United States is the only other American country out there. You share the Americas with more than 30 other countries. Ever heard of that??!!
 

LadyC

Time Out
Sep 3, 2004
1,340
0
36
the left coast
RE: There are more countries in the world than just Canada &

Someone said:
Canada has only one neighbour - the USA.
Check a map. Canada also counts as neighbours Russia, Iceland, Greenland and France.
 

LadyC

Time Out
Sep 3, 2004
1,340
0
36
the left coast
RE: There are more countries in the world than just Canada &

Someone said:
Canada has only one neighbour - the USA.
Check a map. Canada also counts as neighbours Russia, Iceland, Greenland and France.
 

LadyC

Time Out
Sep 3, 2004
1,340
0
36
the left coast
RE: There are more countries in the world than just Canada &

Someone said:
Canada has only one neighbour - the USA.
Check a map. Canada also counts as neighbours Russia, Iceland, Greenland and France.
 

Someone

Nominee Member
Dec 31, 2004
58
0
6
RE: There are more countries in the world than just Canada &

OK fine, I guess I forgot about that. The point is, though, Canada practically pays attention to only the USA. The USA has more than just Canada to pay attention to, because of Mexico, if not also Cuba.
 

Someone

Nominee Member
Dec 31, 2004
58
0
6
RE: There are more countries in the world than just Canada &

OK fine, I guess I forgot about that. The point is, though, Canada practically pays attention to only the USA. The USA has more than just Canada to pay attention to, because of Mexico, if not also Cuba.
 

Someone

Nominee Member
Dec 31, 2004
58
0
6
RE: There are more countries in the world than just Canada &

OK fine, I guess I forgot about that. The point is, though, Canada practically pays attention to only the USA. The USA has more than just Canada to pay attention to, because of Mexico, if not also Cuba.
 

jensonj

New Member
Jan 29, 2005
38
0
6
CENTRAL CANADA
RE: There are more countries in the world than just Canada &

For your consideration Someone. I think you will find most Canadians agree to the following in the most part.

Speech on Canada - U.S. Relations -- Mel Hurtig (780) 488-3832 mhurtig@telusplanet.net

At The University of Victoria
April 4, 2003


I want to say a few words about the ill-mannered, obnoxious, arrogant U.S. Ambassador to Canada, Paul Cellucci.

Mr. Cellucci,
you ask why Canada doesn't support the United States. Why have we let you down?

Is not an equally justified question, Mr. Cellucci, why have you not supported Canada? Why have you turned your back on us? Why have you and your country proceeded in a reckless, arrogant manner which is 100% guaranteed to substantially increase terrorism and volatility around the world, is guaranteed to destabilize Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Iran, Pakistan (with its nuclear weapons), Turkey, Indonesia, the Philippines, Sudan, Yemen and many other countries?

Why have you launched into this foolhardy aggression that will cause hundreds of millions of Muslims to hate and despise Westerners for generations into the future, with potentially cataclysmic results, for ourselves, for our children and for our grandchildren?

Mr. Cellucci,
you ask why Canada doesn't support the United States in your aggressive, pre-emptive militarism.

Let me give you just a few of the reasons:

First, we are opposed to war when we believe there are viable alternatives to war.

Scores of countries, Canada included, made it clear that they believed that more weapons inspectors and more time would determine whether or not Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.

We also believed that unless they were invaded, there was no probability of Iraq launching attacks beyond its border.

We also believed that there was no evidence of cooperation between two natural opponents, Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden.

We also believed that your war would kill and injure thousands of innocents.

We also believed that we should not break with clear, long-established international lawŠ. international law which is the fundamental basis of the United Nations.

Unlike your country, Mr. Cellucci, Canada has always been a strong supporter of the United Nations.

Perhaps, Mr. Cellucci, you should look in a mirror and ask why it is that BOTH your NAFTA partners fought off heavy pressure from the White House and your State Department to join your ill-advised war. After all, didn't Mr. Bush once say that the U.S. has no greater friend than Mexico?

Where is it mandated that if your neighbour chooses to go off into a potentially catastrophic war, you must go too, even if we strongly disagree with your reasons and your logic, and if we regard your evidence for the necessity of war with the greatest skepticism?

Mr. Cellucci, the war your country has launched is the very type of war that was so harshly condemned by the Nuremberg War Crime Trials.

How is your attack on Baghdad different from the terrible day of infamy that Franklin Delano Roosevelt spoke of after Japans attack on Pearl Harbour, December 7th, 1941? Today, just as we were in the case of the Vietnam War, Canada is on the right side of history in relation to the war on Iraq.

Were also on the side of morality, justice and well-established, principled international law.

And were also on the side of innocent Iraqi men, women and children, not to mention the young British and American men and women who have been and will be killed both during the war, and for many years AFTER the war is over in the Balkans - like quagmire of ethnic war lords, bigotry and hatred and in the inevitable civil war that will result from the debris of Americas so-called and almost humorous, if it wasn't so deadly - coalition of the willing.

You know, bullied and bribed countries like Cameroon, the Marshall Island, Angola, Guinea, Ethiopia, El Salvador and Eritrea.

Several times in your inappropriate, offensive, threatening speech, Mr. Cellucci, you referred to Canadians as part of our family.

Mr. Cellucci, this might come as a surprise for you, but we are NOT part of your family and we have no desire to be part of your family. In a public opinion poll for Macleans magazine, Canadians were asked how they would describe our relations with the U.S. Only one in three said like family or best friends. 65% said cordial but distant or openly hostile. In another Macleans poll, 72% of Canadians said that they did not want to move closer to the U.S. And, more recently, only 8% said they thought Canada should become more like the U.SŠ Five times as many opted for less like the U.S.

Mr. Cellucci, some of these poll results were from polls taken soon after September 11th, when world-wide sympathy and support for your country was impressive and enthusiastic. Shouldnt you be asking yourself how you and Mr. Bush and Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney have managed to squander so much popular support from around the world in so short a time?

Mr. Cellucci, you say that the United States would be there for Canada and that Americans are disappointed and upset that Canada is not supporting the U.S. now.

Please tell me, exactly, where was the United Sates when from 1914 to 1917 tens of thousands of young Canadian men were left dead in the muddy trenches of Europe fighting off the Germans?

And, where was the United Sates from 1939 to late 1941, when Germany was overrunning Europe and the Luftwaffe and the rockets were bombing England and killing tens of thousands of men, women and children during the blitz and the Germans were beginning their roundup of millions of Jews who would be slaughtered in the Nazi concentration camps?

How is it that even though you knew exactly what was happening, your country sat back in the face of so much evil and agony, and waited until the Japanese attacked you before you finally, reluctantly, got involved in the war against the brutal Nazis?

Mr. Cellucci, Id like to hear your answer to that question.

And, by the way, thank you for being there for us when your country invaded us three times, the only country to ever invade Canada.

And, please dont ever lecture us again about going to war. We left 45,000 Canadians in European graves during our defence of liberty and democracy in the Second World War, while for much of the war your isolationists refused to get involved.

Mr. Cellucci, lets be clear. Canadians do not approve of your bad manners, your grossly undiplomatic behaviour, your lecturing us about defence spending, your warnings about the possible linkage of our opposition to war with your trade policies.

Best be careful. If you want to advocate linkage, Canadians may want to consider imposing a 27% tariff on our exports of oil, natural gas and electricity to the United States as a reasonable quid pro quo for your egregious softwood lumber duties. After all, you do believe in reciprocity, dont you?

And, dont for a moment consider it a meaningful warning for you to suggest that Mr. Bush might not want to come to Canada for his official state visit next month.

Canadians well remember the disastrous results for Canadian sovereignty when Ronald Reagan visited the obsequious Brian Mulroney in Quebec City in 1985.

Moreover, we all know why Mr. Bush was or is planning to come to Ottawa. There was only one reason. Not to patch up relations between the two countries, but rather to get your hands on even more of Canadas oil, natural gas and electricity. Best mind your manners, Mr. Cellucci, or the Canadian government might just possibly finally wake up to the fact that Mexico, your other NAFTA partner, firmly refused to sign the ridiculous NAFTA energy and resource-sharing agreement that some of our inept trade negotiators somehow managed to agree to.

Perhaps the Canadian government will realize that we haven't replaced our declining natural gas reserves since 1982. That our major Western sedimentary basin pools are depleting at the rate of 20% a year, that new replacement reserves are proving to be much more expensive to locate, are smaller in size and deplete more rapidly.

Mind your manners Mr. Cellucci, or perhaps Canada will have to walk away from the foolish NAFTA clauses that mean we must continue selling you 62% of our oil and natural gas, even if we Canadians begin to run short ourselves.

Mr. Cellucci, you were greatly upset that Cabinet Minister Herb Dhaliwal made totally inappropriate remarks by suggesting that George W. Bush was a failed statesman.

My, my, my. How terribly offensive can one be? How does failed statesman compare with Richard Nixon calling Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau an asshole, or John F. Kennedy calling Prime Minister John Diefenbaker a son of a bitch and a prick, or Lyndon Johnson grabbing Lester Pearson by the collar and shouting you pissed on my rug when Pearson suggested a pause in the U.S. bombing of North Vietnam and the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of civilians in the bombing.

It seems to me that being called a failed statesman is not only a mild criticism by comparison, but it is an accurate criticism.

George W. Bush is no moron. Few Canadians regard Americans as bastards. Most Canadians like most Americans.

But, not since the days of Richard Nixon and the Vietnam War has there been so much anti-Americanism in the world. The U.S. has antagonized not only the Muslim world, but long-time allies as well. It has walked away from, worked against or failed to support a long list of international agreements supported by Canada and the overwhelming majority of countries - the Land Mines Treaty, the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, the agreement to provide lower cost drugs to developing countries battling AIDS and other diseases, the International Criminal Court, the U.N. protocol on Developing, Producing or Stockpiling Biological or Toxic Weapons, the Small Arms Treaty, the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (supported by 191 countries, but not the U.S. or Somalia!).

While it is true that in recent months anti-Americanism in Canada has been increasing, and has increased since the invasion of Iraq and your ill-considered remarks, most of the antipathy is directed not at average Americans, but at George W. Bush and the arrogant, aggressive men and women who surround him as key advisors, the repugnant Donald Rumsfeld, the selfishly-motivated Dick Cheney, Karl Rowe and Paul Wolfowitz and other American hyper hawks who apparently place little value on human lives and have little appreciation for the value of patient international diplomacy.

Mr. Cellucci, Canadians are not impressed by your campaign of intimidation, by threats re the border, by proposed American boycotts of Canadian products.

Perhaps you would much better serve your country if you reminded your fellow citizens that millions of American jobs depend on your exports to Canada, that as every year goes by you will become increasingly dependent on imports of Canadian resources, that for 46 years in a row Canada has been the leading export market in the world for U.S. goods and services, that your exports to Canada every year are greater than your exports to all fifteen European Union countries combined, greater than your exports to Japan, the United Kingdom and Germany put together and more than to all of Latin America and the Caribbean countries combined.

Perhaps, instead of threatening us with economic retaliation for not taking part in your military aggression, you would be wise to remind Americans that by punishing Canadians you would be harming your best customer (not a very bright thing to do), you would be harming the profitable American companies that dominate so much of the Canadian economy, and you would be encouraging more anti-Americanism in Canada.

Mr. Cellucci, both you and your predecessor Gordon Giffin and Senator Hillary Clinton have expressed concerns about the Canada-U.S. border and, in Giffins words, skepticism about Canadas reliability on security.

Forget for a moment that Canada has already committed close to an extra $10 billion to security and defence spending since September 11th. Forget too, that Canada has had in place overseas document-screening for air travelers well before the United States even thought of such precautions. Forget that the September 11th terrorists were mostly from your Saudi Arabian friends, and were in the U.S. on visas. Forget that at the time of September 11th there were some six million illegals living in your country, but do consider the following.

There is not one single airport in Canada, not one single flight school that would have been dumb enough to agree to train people from the Middle East how to fly large passenger jet aircraft - people who had no interest in learning how to take off or how to land the aircraft - without quickly reporting the highly suspicious students to the RCMP and/or to CSIS.

Once again, Mr. Cellucci, look in the mirror instead of warning Canadians re security. Increasingly, your CIA, your FBI, your National Security Agency, all with huge multi-billion dollar budgets, make the term American intelligence seem like a laughable oxymoron.

And, by the way, have you thought about apologizing to Canadians for all the Canadians killed on September 11th and for your own irresponsible action in appointing your personal driver as head of security at Logan Airport in Boston, where two of the ill-fated aircraft and their hijackers took off from? Dont you think that you owe Canadians an apology?

Shouldnt it be Canadians who need to be concerned about the border, given your poor security record and all the violent nutcases your gun-ridden society breeds, your murderous snipers, your anthrax disseminators, your Timothy McVeighs, your Columbines, your paranoid militia, your aggressive history and behaviour?

Please dont threaten us about the border, because if you do, we might just decide to look more closely at your own records.

And, dont for a single moment believe that Tom dAquino, Allan Gotlieb and Brian Mulroney represent majority opinion in Canada. They never have, and they certainly dont now.

The best thing you and your fellow Americans can do in the best interests of future Canadian - American relations, is to listen carefully to every word Mr. dAquino, Mr. Gotlieb and Mr. Mulroney say, and then remember that Brian Mulroney left office as the least-popular prime minister in Canadian history, and that most Canadians do not subscribe to the craven policies of Gotlieb and dAquino.

Canada, you and Mr. Bush may find it hard to believe, is not yet an American colony, and we have no intention of becoming one. You would best serve your country by making that clear in Washington.
 

jensonj

New Member
Jan 29, 2005
38
0
6
CENTRAL CANADA
RE: There are more countries in the world than just Canada &

For your consideration Someone. I think you will find most Canadians agree to the following in the most part.

Speech on Canada - U.S. Relations -- Mel Hurtig (780) 488-3832 mhurtig@telusplanet.net

At The University of Victoria
April 4, 2003


I want to say a few words about the ill-mannered, obnoxious, arrogant U.S. Ambassador to Canada, Paul Cellucci.

Mr. Cellucci,
you ask why Canada doesn't support the United States. Why have we let you down?

Is not an equally justified question, Mr. Cellucci, why have you not supported Canada? Why have you turned your back on us? Why have you and your country proceeded in a reckless, arrogant manner which is 100% guaranteed to substantially increase terrorism and volatility around the world, is guaranteed to destabilize Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Iran, Pakistan (with its nuclear weapons), Turkey, Indonesia, the Philippines, Sudan, Yemen and many other countries?

Why have you launched into this foolhardy aggression that will cause hundreds of millions of Muslims to hate and despise Westerners for generations into the future, with potentially cataclysmic results, for ourselves, for our children and for our grandchildren?

Mr. Cellucci,
you ask why Canada doesn't support the United States in your aggressive, pre-emptive militarism.

Let me give you just a few of the reasons:

First, we are opposed to war when we believe there are viable alternatives to war.

Scores of countries, Canada included, made it clear that they believed that more weapons inspectors and more time would determine whether or not Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.

We also believed that unless they were invaded, there was no probability of Iraq launching attacks beyond its border.

We also believed that there was no evidence of cooperation between two natural opponents, Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden.

We also believed that your war would kill and injure thousands of innocents.

We also believed that we should not break with clear, long-established international lawŠ. international law which is the fundamental basis of the United Nations.

Unlike your country, Mr. Cellucci, Canada has always been a strong supporter of the United Nations.

Perhaps, Mr. Cellucci, you should look in a mirror and ask why it is that BOTH your NAFTA partners fought off heavy pressure from the White House and your State Department to join your ill-advised war. After all, didn't Mr. Bush once say that the U.S. has no greater friend than Mexico?

Where is it mandated that if your neighbour chooses to go off into a potentially catastrophic war, you must go too, even if we strongly disagree with your reasons and your logic, and if we regard your evidence for the necessity of war with the greatest skepticism?

Mr. Cellucci, the war your country has launched is the very type of war that was so harshly condemned by the Nuremberg War Crime Trials.

How is your attack on Baghdad different from the terrible day of infamy that Franklin Delano Roosevelt spoke of after Japans attack on Pearl Harbour, December 7th, 1941? Today, just as we were in the case of the Vietnam War, Canada is on the right side of history in relation to the war on Iraq.

Were also on the side of morality, justice and well-established, principled international law.

And were also on the side of innocent Iraqi men, women and children, not to mention the young British and American men and women who have been and will be killed both during the war, and for many years AFTER the war is over in the Balkans - like quagmire of ethnic war lords, bigotry and hatred and in the inevitable civil war that will result from the debris of Americas so-called and almost humorous, if it wasn't so deadly - coalition of the willing.

You know, bullied and bribed countries like Cameroon, the Marshall Island, Angola, Guinea, Ethiopia, El Salvador and Eritrea.

Several times in your inappropriate, offensive, threatening speech, Mr. Cellucci, you referred to Canadians as part of our family.

Mr. Cellucci, this might come as a surprise for you, but we are NOT part of your family and we have no desire to be part of your family. In a public opinion poll for Macleans magazine, Canadians were asked how they would describe our relations with the U.S. Only one in three said like family or best friends. 65% said cordial but distant or openly hostile. In another Macleans poll, 72% of Canadians said that they did not want to move closer to the U.S. And, more recently, only 8% said they thought Canada should become more like the U.SŠ Five times as many opted for less like the U.S.

Mr. Cellucci, some of these poll results were from polls taken soon after September 11th, when world-wide sympathy and support for your country was impressive and enthusiastic. Shouldnt you be asking yourself how you and Mr. Bush and Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney have managed to squander so much popular support from around the world in so short a time?

Mr. Cellucci, you say that the United States would be there for Canada and that Americans are disappointed and upset that Canada is not supporting the U.S. now.

Please tell me, exactly, where was the United Sates when from 1914 to 1917 tens of thousands of young Canadian men were left dead in the muddy trenches of Europe fighting off the Germans?

And, where was the United Sates from 1939 to late 1941, when Germany was overrunning Europe and the Luftwaffe and the rockets were bombing England and killing tens of thousands of men, women and children during the blitz and the Germans were beginning their roundup of millions of Jews who would be slaughtered in the Nazi concentration camps?

How is it that even though you knew exactly what was happening, your country sat back in the face of so much evil and agony, and waited until the Japanese attacked you before you finally, reluctantly, got involved in the war against the brutal Nazis?

Mr. Cellucci, Id like to hear your answer to that question.

And, by the way, thank you for being there for us when your country invaded us three times, the only country to ever invade Canada.

And, please dont ever lecture us again about going to war. We left 45,000 Canadians in European graves during our defence of liberty and democracy in the Second World War, while for much of the war your isolationists refused to get involved.

Mr. Cellucci, lets be clear. Canadians do not approve of your bad manners, your grossly undiplomatic behaviour, your lecturing us about defence spending, your warnings about the possible linkage of our opposition to war with your trade policies.

Best be careful. If you want to advocate linkage, Canadians may want to consider imposing a 27% tariff on our exports of oil, natural gas and electricity to the United States as a reasonable quid pro quo for your egregious softwood lumber duties. After all, you do believe in reciprocity, dont you?

And, dont for a moment consider it a meaningful warning for you to suggest that Mr. Bush might not want to come to Canada for his official state visit next month.

Canadians well remember the disastrous results for Canadian sovereignty when Ronald Reagan visited the obsequious Brian Mulroney in Quebec City in 1985.

Moreover, we all know why Mr. Bush was or is planning to come to Ottawa. There was only one reason. Not to patch up relations between the two countries, but rather to get your hands on even more of Canadas oil, natural gas and electricity. Best mind your manners, Mr. Cellucci, or the Canadian government might just possibly finally wake up to the fact that Mexico, your other NAFTA partner, firmly refused to sign the ridiculous NAFTA energy and resource-sharing agreement that some of our inept trade negotiators somehow managed to agree to.

Perhaps the Canadian government will realize that we haven't replaced our declining natural gas reserves since 1982. That our major Western sedimentary basin pools are depleting at the rate of 20% a year, that new replacement reserves are proving to be much more expensive to locate, are smaller in size and deplete more rapidly.

Mind your manners Mr. Cellucci, or perhaps Canada will have to walk away from the foolish NAFTA clauses that mean we must continue selling you 62% of our oil and natural gas, even if we Canadians begin to run short ourselves.

Mr. Cellucci, you were greatly upset that Cabinet Minister Herb Dhaliwal made totally inappropriate remarks by suggesting that George W. Bush was a failed statesman.

My, my, my. How terribly offensive can one be? How does failed statesman compare with Richard Nixon calling Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau an asshole, or John F. Kennedy calling Prime Minister John Diefenbaker a son of a bitch and a prick, or Lyndon Johnson grabbing Lester Pearson by the collar and shouting you pissed on my rug when Pearson suggested a pause in the U.S. bombing of North Vietnam and the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of civilians in the bombing.

It seems to me that being called a failed statesman is not only a mild criticism by comparison, but it is an accurate criticism.

George W. Bush is no moron. Few Canadians regard Americans as bastards. Most Canadians like most Americans.

But, not since the days of Richard Nixon and the Vietnam War has there been so much anti-Americanism in the world. The U.S. has antagonized not only the Muslim world, but long-time allies as well. It has walked away from, worked against or failed to support a long list of international agreements supported by Canada and the overwhelming majority of countries - the Land Mines Treaty, the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, the agreement to provide lower cost drugs to developing countries battling AIDS and other diseases, the International Criminal Court, the U.N. protocol on Developing, Producing or Stockpiling Biological or Toxic Weapons, the Small Arms Treaty, the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (supported by 191 countries, but not the U.S. or Somalia!).

While it is true that in recent months anti-Americanism in Canada has been increasing, and has increased since the invasion of Iraq and your ill-considered remarks, most of the antipathy is directed not at average Americans, but at George W. Bush and the arrogant, aggressive men and women who surround him as key advisors, the repugnant Donald Rumsfeld, the selfishly-motivated Dick Cheney, Karl Rowe and Paul Wolfowitz and other American hyper hawks who apparently place little value on human lives and have little appreciation for the value of patient international diplomacy.

Mr. Cellucci, Canadians are not impressed by your campaign of intimidation, by threats re the border, by proposed American boycotts of Canadian products.

Perhaps you would much better serve your country if you reminded your fellow citizens that millions of American jobs depend on your exports to Canada, that as every year goes by you will become increasingly dependent on imports of Canadian resources, that for 46 years in a row Canada has been the leading export market in the world for U.S. goods and services, that your exports to Canada every year are greater than your exports to all fifteen European Union countries combined, greater than your exports to Japan, the United Kingdom and Germany put together and more than to all of Latin America and the Caribbean countries combined.

Perhaps, instead of threatening us with economic retaliation for not taking part in your military aggression, you would be wise to remind Americans that by punishing Canadians you would be harming your best customer (not a very bright thing to do), you would be harming the profitable American companies that dominate so much of the Canadian economy, and you would be encouraging more anti-Americanism in Canada.

Mr. Cellucci, both you and your predecessor Gordon Giffin and Senator Hillary Clinton have expressed concerns about the Canada-U.S. border and, in Giffins words, skepticism about Canadas reliability on security.

Forget for a moment that Canada has already committed close to an extra $10 billion to security and defence spending since September 11th. Forget too, that Canada has had in place overseas document-screening for air travelers well before the United States even thought of such precautions. Forget that the September 11th terrorists were mostly from your Saudi Arabian friends, and were in the U.S. on visas. Forget that at the time of September 11th there were some six million illegals living in your country, but do consider the following.

There is not one single airport in Canada, not one single flight school that would have been dumb enough to agree to train people from the Middle East how to fly large passenger jet aircraft - people who had no interest in learning how to take off or how to land the aircraft - without quickly reporting the highly suspicious students to the RCMP and/or to CSIS.

Once again, Mr. Cellucci, look in the mirror instead of warning Canadians re security. Increasingly, your CIA, your FBI, your National Security Agency, all with huge multi-billion dollar budgets, make the term American intelligence seem like a laughable oxymoron.

And, by the way, have you thought about apologizing to Canadians for all the Canadians killed on September 11th and for your own irresponsible action in appointing your personal driver as head of security at Logan Airport in Boston, where two of the ill-fated aircraft and their hijackers took off from? Dont you think that you owe Canadians an apology?

Shouldnt it be Canadians who need to be concerned about the border, given your poor security record and all the violent nutcases your gun-ridden society breeds, your murderous snipers, your anthrax disseminators, your Timothy McVeighs, your Columbines, your paranoid militia, your aggressive history and behaviour?

Please dont threaten us about the border, because if you do, we might just decide to look more closely at your own records.

And, dont for a single moment believe that Tom dAquino, Allan Gotlieb and Brian Mulroney represent majority opinion in Canada. They never have, and they certainly dont now.

The best thing you and your fellow Americans can do in the best interests of future Canadian - American relations, is to listen carefully to every word Mr. dAquino, Mr. Gotlieb and Mr. Mulroney say, and then remember that Brian Mulroney left office as the least-popular prime minister in Canadian history, and that most Canadians do not subscribe to the craven policies of Gotlieb and dAquino.

Canada, you and Mr. Bush may find it hard to believe, is not yet an American colony, and we have no intention of becoming one. You would best serve your country by making that clear in Washington.
 

jensonj

New Member
Jan 29, 2005
38
0
6
CENTRAL CANADA
RE: There are more countries in the world than just Canada &

For your consideration Someone. I think you will find most Canadians agree to the following in the most part.

Speech on Canada - U.S. Relations -- Mel Hurtig (780) 488-3832 mhurtig@telusplanet.net

At The University of Victoria
April 4, 2003


I want to say a few words about the ill-mannered, obnoxious, arrogant U.S. Ambassador to Canada, Paul Cellucci.

Mr. Cellucci,
you ask why Canada doesn't support the United States. Why have we let you down?

Is not an equally justified question, Mr. Cellucci, why have you not supported Canada? Why have you turned your back on us? Why have you and your country proceeded in a reckless, arrogant manner which is 100% guaranteed to substantially increase terrorism and volatility around the world, is guaranteed to destabilize Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Iran, Pakistan (with its nuclear weapons), Turkey, Indonesia, the Philippines, Sudan, Yemen and many other countries?

Why have you launched into this foolhardy aggression that will cause hundreds of millions of Muslims to hate and despise Westerners for generations into the future, with potentially cataclysmic results, for ourselves, for our children and for our grandchildren?

Mr. Cellucci,
you ask why Canada doesn't support the United States in your aggressive, pre-emptive militarism.

Let me give you just a few of the reasons:

First, we are opposed to war when we believe there are viable alternatives to war.

Scores of countries, Canada included, made it clear that they believed that more weapons inspectors and more time would determine whether or not Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.

We also believed that unless they were invaded, there was no probability of Iraq launching attacks beyond its border.

We also believed that there was no evidence of cooperation between two natural opponents, Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden.

We also believed that your war would kill and injure thousands of innocents.

We also believed that we should not break with clear, long-established international lawŠ. international law which is the fundamental basis of the United Nations.

Unlike your country, Mr. Cellucci, Canada has always been a strong supporter of the United Nations.

Perhaps, Mr. Cellucci, you should look in a mirror and ask why it is that BOTH your NAFTA partners fought off heavy pressure from the White House and your State Department to join your ill-advised war. After all, didn't Mr. Bush once say that the U.S. has no greater friend than Mexico?

Where is it mandated that if your neighbour chooses to go off into a potentially catastrophic war, you must go too, even if we strongly disagree with your reasons and your logic, and if we regard your evidence for the necessity of war with the greatest skepticism?

Mr. Cellucci, the war your country has launched is the very type of war that was so harshly condemned by the Nuremberg War Crime Trials.

How is your attack on Baghdad different from the terrible day of infamy that Franklin Delano Roosevelt spoke of after Japans attack on Pearl Harbour, December 7th, 1941? Today, just as we were in the case of the Vietnam War, Canada is on the right side of history in relation to the war on Iraq.

Were also on the side of morality, justice and well-established, principled international law.

And were also on the side of innocent Iraqi men, women and children, not to mention the young British and American men and women who have been and will be killed both during the war, and for many years AFTER the war is over in the Balkans - like quagmire of ethnic war lords, bigotry and hatred and in the inevitable civil war that will result from the debris of Americas so-called and almost humorous, if it wasn't so deadly - coalition of the willing.

You know, bullied and bribed countries like Cameroon, the Marshall Island, Angola, Guinea, Ethiopia, El Salvador and Eritrea.

Several times in your inappropriate, offensive, threatening speech, Mr. Cellucci, you referred to Canadians as part of our family.

Mr. Cellucci, this might come as a surprise for you, but we are NOT part of your family and we have no desire to be part of your family. In a public opinion poll for Macleans magazine, Canadians were asked how they would describe our relations with the U.S. Only one in three said like family or best friends. 65% said cordial but distant or openly hostile. In another Macleans poll, 72% of Canadians said that they did not want to move closer to the U.S. And, more recently, only 8% said they thought Canada should become more like the U.SŠ Five times as many opted for less like the U.S.

Mr. Cellucci, some of these poll results were from polls taken soon after September 11th, when world-wide sympathy and support for your country was impressive and enthusiastic. Shouldnt you be asking yourself how you and Mr. Bush and Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney have managed to squander so much popular support from around the world in so short a time?

Mr. Cellucci, you say that the United States would be there for Canada and that Americans are disappointed and upset that Canada is not supporting the U.S. now.

Please tell me, exactly, where was the United Sates when from 1914 to 1917 tens of thousands of young Canadian men were left dead in the muddy trenches of Europe fighting off the Germans?

And, where was the United Sates from 1939 to late 1941, when Germany was overrunning Europe and the Luftwaffe and the rockets were bombing England and killing tens of thousands of men, women and children during the blitz and the Germans were beginning their roundup of millions of Jews who would be slaughtered in the Nazi concentration camps?

How is it that even though you knew exactly what was happening, your country sat back in the face of so much evil and agony, and waited until the Japanese attacked you before you finally, reluctantly, got involved in the war against the brutal Nazis?

Mr. Cellucci, Id like to hear your answer to that question.

And, by the way, thank you for being there for us when your country invaded us three times, the only country to ever invade Canada.

And, please dont ever lecture us again about going to war. We left 45,000 Canadians in European graves during our defence of liberty and democracy in the Second World War, while for much of the war your isolationists refused to get involved.

Mr. Cellucci, lets be clear. Canadians do not approve of your bad manners, your grossly undiplomatic behaviour, your lecturing us about defence spending, your warnings about the possible linkage of our opposition to war with your trade policies.

Best be careful. If you want to advocate linkage, Canadians may want to consider imposing a 27% tariff on our exports of oil, natural gas and electricity to the United States as a reasonable quid pro quo for your egregious softwood lumber duties. After all, you do believe in reciprocity, dont you?

And, dont for a moment consider it a meaningful warning for you to suggest that Mr. Bush might not want to come to Canada for his official state visit next month.

Canadians well remember the disastrous results for Canadian sovereignty when Ronald Reagan visited the obsequious Brian Mulroney in Quebec City in 1985.

Moreover, we all know why Mr. Bush was or is planning to come to Ottawa. There was only one reason. Not to patch up relations between the two countries, but rather to get your hands on even more of Canadas oil, natural gas and electricity. Best mind your manners, Mr. Cellucci, or the Canadian government might just possibly finally wake up to the fact that Mexico, your other NAFTA partner, firmly refused to sign the ridiculous NAFTA energy and resource-sharing agreement that some of our inept trade negotiators somehow managed to agree to.

Perhaps the Canadian government will realize that we haven't replaced our declining natural gas reserves since 1982. That our major Western sedimentary basin pools are depleting at the rate of 20% a year, that new replacement reserves are proving to be much more expensive to locate, are smaller in size and deplete more rapidly.

Mind your manners Mr. Cellucci, or perhaps Canada will have to walk away from the foolish NAFTA clauses that mean we must continue selling you 62% of our oil and natural gas, even if we Canadians begin to run short ourselves.

Mr. Cellucci, you were greatly upset that Cabinet Minister Herb Dhaliwal made totally inappropriate remarks by suggesting that George W. Bush was a failed statesman.

My, my, my. How terribly offensive can one be? How does failed statesman compare with Richard Nixon calling Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau an asshole, or John F. Kennedy calling Prime Minister John Diefenbaker a son of a bitch and a prick, or Lyndon Johnson grabbing Lester Pearson by the collar and shouting you pissed on my rug when Pearson suggested a pause in the U.S. bombing of North Vietnam and the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of civilians in the bombing.

It seems to me that being called a failed statesman is not only a mild criticism by comparison, but it is an accurate criticism.

George W. Bush is no moron. Few Canadians regard Americans as bastards. Most Canadians like most Americans.

But, not since the days of Richard Nixon and the Vietnam War has there been so much anti-Americanism in the world. The U.S. has antagonized not only the Muslim world, but long-time allies as well. It has walked away from, worked against or failed to support a long list of international agreements supported by Canada and the overwhelming majority of countries - the Land Mines Treaty, the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, the agreement to provide lower cost drugs to developing countries battling AIDS and other diseases, the International Criminal Court, the U.N. protocol on Developing, Producing or Stockpiling Biological or Toxic Weapons, the Small Arms Treaty, the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (supported by 191 countries, but not the U.S. or Somalia!).

While it is true that in recent months anti-Americanism in Canada has been increasing, and has increased since the invasion of Iraq and your ill-considered remarks, most of the antipathy is directed not at average Americans, but at George W. Bush and the arrogant, aggressive men and women who surround him as key advisors, the repugnant Donald Rumsfeld, the selfishly-motivated Dick Cheney, Karl Rowe and Paul Wolfowitz and other American hyper hawks who apparently place little value on human lives and have little appreciation for the value of patient international diplomacy.

Mr. Cellucci, Canadians are not impressed by your campaign of intimidation, by threats re the border, by proposed American boycotts of Canadian products.

Perhaps you would much better serve your country if you reminded your fellow citizens that millions of American jobs depend on your exports to Canada, that as every year goes by you will become increasingly dependent on imports of Canadian resources, that for 46 years in a row Canada has been the leading export market in the world for U.S. goods and services, that your exports to Canada every year are greater than your exports to all fifteen European Union countries combined, greater than your exports to Japan, the United Kingdom and Germany put together and more than to all of Latin America and the Caribbean countries combined.

Perhaps, instead of threatening us with economic retaliation for not taking part in your military aggression, you would be wise to remind Americans that by punishing Canadians you would be harming your best customer (not a very bright thing to do), you would be harming the profitable American companies that dominate so much of the Canadian economy, and you would be encouraging more anti-Americanism in Canada.

Mr. Cellucci, both you and your predecessor Gordon Giffin and Senator Hillary Clinton have expressed concerns about the Canada-U.S. border and, in Giffins words, skepticism about Canadas reliability on security.

Forget for a moment that Canada has already committed close to an extra $10 billion to security and defence spending since September 11th. Forget too, that Canada has had in place overseas document-screening for air travelers well before the United States even thought of such precautions. Forget that the September 11th terrorists were mostly from your Saudi Arabian friends, and were in the U.S. on visas. Forget that at the time of September 11th there were some six million illegals living in your country, but do consider the following.

There is not one single airport in Canada, not one single flight school that would have been dumb enough to agree to train people from the Middle East how to fly large passenger jet aircraft - people who had no interest in learning how to take off or how to land the aircraft - without quickly reporting the highly suspicious students to the RCMP and/or to CSIS.

Once again, Mr. Cellucci, look in the mirror instead of warning Canadians re security. Increasingly, your CIA, your FBI, your National Security Agency, all with huge multi-billion dollar budgets, make the term American intelligence seem like a laughable oxymoron.

And, by the way, have you thought about apologizing to Canadians for all the Canadians killed on September 11th and for your own irresponsible action in appointing your personal driver as head of security at Logan Airport in Boston, where two of the ill-fated aircraft and their hijackers took off from? Dont you think that you owe Canadians an apology?

Shouldnt it be Canadians who need to be concerned about the border, given your poor security record and all the violent nutcases your gun-ridden society breeds, your murderous snipers, your anthrax disseminators, your Timothy McVeighs, your Columbines, your paranoid militia, your aggressive history and behaviour?

Please dont threaten us about the border, because if you do, we might just decide to look more closely at your own records.

And, dont for a single moment believe that Tom dAquino, Allan Gotlieb and Brian Mulroney represent majority opinion in Canada. They never have, and they certainly dont now.

The best thing you and your fellow Americans can do in the best interests of future Canadian - American relations, is to listen carefully to every word Mr. dAquino, Mr. Gotlieb and Mr. Mulroney say, and then remember that Brian Mulroney left office as the least-popular prime minister in Canadian history, and that most Canadians do not subscribe to the craven policies of Gotlieb and dAquino.

Canada, you and Mr. Bush may find it hard to believe, is not yet an American colony, and we have no intention of becoming one. You would best serve your country by making that clear in Washington.
 

jensonj

New Member
Jan 29, 2005
38
0
6
CENTRAL CANADA
RE: There are more countries in the world than just Canada &

This report is based on results from Communication Canada's Listening to Canadians survey of winter 2003 and a mirror study conducted in the United States at the same time. The key findings are as follows:

Canadians are divided on the state of current relations between the governments of Canada and the United States. Roughly one-third of Canadians feel the relationship is good, another third say neither good nor bad, while a final third say it is poor. However, a majority of Canadians feel the relationship has been worsening over the past two years. American opinion stands in stark contrast. A majority of Americans feel the relationship is good and that it has remained essentially unchanged over the past two years.
Canadians are more able to point out important issues facing the North American relationship. Not surprisingly, with the war pending at the time of the survey, most Canadians believed that the Iraq issue was the most important. Conversely, nearly one in two Americans were unaware of any major issues challenging the relationship between the two governments.
A strong majority of Canadians say they are aware of trade disputes pending between Canada and the United States, with 88% of these pointing to the current lumber dispute. Moreover, when it comes to trade, a majority of Canadians also feel that the United States has been unfair in its dealings with Canada. Nevertheless, they are confident in the Government of Canada's ability to resolve any present or future problems in the relationship, including those related to trade. A strong majority of Americans are unaware of any trade disputes. Of those who are aware, a majority are unable to specify any particular dispute.
Regarding support for greater co-operation on a series of bilateral issues, a majority of Canadians are in favour of closer ties on border security, increased trade, and common environmental policies and defence. They are less supportive of greater co-operation on issues such as immigration, economic and foreign policies as well as the possibility of a common currency, as these may be perceived as limiting Canadian sovereignty.
Americans are significantly more supportive of greater ties with Canada on all issues measured, the exception being a common currency. They are most interested in co-operation on border security, which they believe will make North America safer and protect their economy. Furthermore, Americans are confident that Canada can be relied upon to help protect the homeland security of the United States. This sentiment is especially true for Americans living along the Canadian border.
Just one-third of Canadians believe current relations between the Government of Canada and the U.S. government are good, while a majority of Americans think so.
In Canada, the Atlantic provinces have the most positive view of the relationship, nearly half (47%) saying the relationship is good.
Canadians earning $60,000 or more and university-educated Canadians are more likely to rate the state of relations as bad, at 35% and 33% respectively.
In the United States, northern tier residents are most likely to report that relations between our governments are good, with nearly six in ten (59%) feeling this way.
In the southern tier, slightly less than half of Americans (48%) hold the same opinion.
Sixty-one per cent (61%) of Americans in the highest earning bracket (US$50,000+) rate the state of relations as good compared to 49% of those who make less than US$50,000.
One in two Canadians believe that the Government of Canada's relationship with the U.S. government has worsened over the past two years.
Americans hold a different view. A majority of them feel the relationship has remained essentially unchanged. This is particularly true of Americans with college education (60%), those aged 18 to 34 (57%) and those earning more than US$50,000 annually (57%).
Perceptions that the relationship has worsened are strongest in Alberta, where 66% feel the relationship has deteriorated (59% in Western Canada as a whole).
Canadians earning $60,000 or more (60%), university-educated Canadians (58%) and
Canadians aged 55 and older (56%) are most likely to feel that the relationship has worsened over the past two years.
When asked to name the most important issue facing the Canadian-American relationship, almost three in ten Canadians mentioned Iraq.
On the other hand, only 6% of Americans mentioned Iraq, while 14% reported border issues and security as the most important issue facing our relationship, followed by trade disputes.
Nearly half the American population (44%) could not identify any specific issue. This suggests that the Canadian-American relationship is not a concern for most Americans.
Nevertheless, 63% of northern tier residents, that is, those with greater exposure to Canada and the bilateral relationship, were able to identify an important issue. Conversely, only 51% of Americans living in the southern tier states could do the same.
Canadians are very aware of trade disputes between Canada and the United States. Nearly seven in ten say they have heard about disputes.
Of those who have heard about trade disputes, almost 90% mention softwood lumber.
Awareness of this issue is particularly high in British Columbia (94%) and Alberta (90%).
Prairie Canadians are more likely to mention the grain subsidies issue. This issue was mentioned by almost half the respondents (49%) in Saskatchewan, by 29% in Manitoba and 22% in Alberta.
In sharp contrast to Canadians, more than three-quarters of Americans are not aware of any trade disputes between Canada and the United States.
Furthermore, close to one third of those respondents who are aware of disputes are unable to identify any specific issue.
Awareness among Americans is higher in the northern tier, where almost 30% report hearing about trade disputes.
Trade disputes mentioned by these Americans include those involving softwood lumber, fishing, grain subsidies, beef, water, garbage, and potatoes.
Despite the fact that softwood lumber is the issue most often mentioned in both countries, only one in four (26%) of the 22% of Americans aware of trade disputes mention this particular dispute. This contrasts with 88% of the 69% of Canadians aware of trade disputes.
American men (28%) are more likely to be aware of trade disputes than are women (17%).
A majority of Canadians believe that, when it comes to trade disputes, the United States has not been fair in its dealings with Canada.
In British Columbia, where softwood lumber disputes are a concern, more than three-quarters (76%) believe this to be true.
Nearly three-quarters (74%) of university-educated Canadians agree with the statement, compared with less than half of those who have not completed high school (47%).
A strong majority of Canadian men (67%) agree that the U.S. has not been fair in its dealings with Canada, while just over half (56%) of Canadian women believe the same.
A majority of Canadians believe that, when it comes to trade disputes, the United States has not been fair in its dealings with Canada.
In British Columbia, where softwood lumber disputes are a concern, more than three-quarters (76%) believe this to be true.
Nearly three-quarters (74%) of university-educated Canadians agree with the statement, compared with less than half of those who have not completed high school (47%).
A strong majority of Canadian men (67%) agree that the U.S. has not been fair in its dealings with Canada, while just over half (56%) of Canadian women believe the same.
A majority of Canadians believe that, when it comes to trade disputes, the United States has not been fair in its dealings with Canada.
In British Columbia, where softwood lumber disputes are a concern, more than three-quarters (76%) believe this to be true.
Nearly three-quarters (74%) of university-educated Canadians agree with the statement, compared with less than half of those who have not completed high school (47%).
A strong majority of Canadian men (67%) agree that the U.S. has not been fair in its dealings with Canada, while just over half (56%) of Canadian women believe the same.
Despite perceptions that, when it comes to trade disputes, the U.S. has been unfair in its dealings with Canada, 70% of Canadians are moderately or very confident in the Government's ability to resolve present or future problems with the United States.
Of those Canadians with less than high school education, 45% report moderate confidence in the Government of Canada to resolve these problems.
Furthermore, 46% of young people (aged 18-34) are confident in the Government's abilities in this area while 35% of those aged 35-54 are not.
Americans are more likely to support greater co-operation between Canada and the United States than are Canadians.
The biggest gaps between Canadians and Americans are in the areas of foreign policy (19-point gap); national defence, immigration policies and economic policies (12-point gaps); and environmental policies (10-point gap).
In our focus group discussions held in Canada, participants tended to base their rationale for closer relations on tangible benefits to Canada or a sense of necessity. For example, border security and trade benefit Canada and are also seen as necessary given geography and the current mood in the United States. On the other hand, participants opposed greater co-operation on issues such as foreign policy and common currency, where they see no obvious benefit and fear loss of Canadian sovereignty.
University-educated Canadians are more likely to oppose co-operation on all issues than Canadians with less formal education.
A strong majority of Americans in the northern tier support greater co-operation on border security, national defence and economic policies
A majority of both Canadians and Americans agree that creating common border policies will make all of North America safer.
Canadians, however, are less convinced that doing so will protect Canada's economy.
Americans, on the other hand, are four times more likely to agree than to disagree that common border policies will protect their economy.
Sixty-five per cent (65%) of Americans older than 55 believe that creating common border policies will make North America safer, compared with 56% of those in the youngest age bracket (18-34).
Nearly three in ten (29%) university-educated Canadians disagree that common border policies will make all of North America safer.
The great majority of Americans are either very confident (56%) or moderately confident (25%) in the reliability of Canada as a defence partner.
Confidence in Canada is strongest in the northern tier states, where 64% feel very confident, and the central/western states, where 57% feel very confident.
This is not the case when it comes to Mexico. Only 42% are very or moderately confident in Mexico's ability to contribute to American security.
Finally, at the time of these surveys, despite the looming war in Iraq and the different positions of the governments of Canada and the United States on the war, overall, both Canadians and Americans felt their governments were doing a good job of managing the Canadian-American relationship.
However, Americans are more likely to feel their government is doing a good job.
Furthermore, fewer Americans rate their government's performance as bad. Canadians are more critical of their government's performance, with more than one-quarter rating its ability to manage the relationship as bad.
Western Canadians are more likely to rate the Government's performance on this issue as bad (36%), while Atlantic Canadians are more likely to believe the Government is doing a good job (49%). Residents of Quebec are more likely to be ambivalent, with 37% answering neither good nor bad.
More than half (52%) of American men believe the U.S. government is doing a good job managing its relationship with Canada, compared with 46% of American women.

http://www.communication.gc.ca/survey_sondage/14-15/can-am/can-am2003q4_toc.html
 

jensonj

New Member
Jan 29, 2005
38
0
6
CENTRAL CANADA
RE: There are more countries in the world than just Canada &

This report is based on results from Communication Canada's Listening to Canadians survey of winter 2003 and a mirror study conducted in the United States at the same time. The key findings are as follows:

Canadians are divided on the state of current relations between the governments of Canada and the United States. Roughly one-third of Canadians feel the relationship is good, another third say neither good nor bad, while a final third say it is poor. However, a majority of Canadians feel the relationship has been worsening over the past two years. American opinion stands in stark contrast. A majority of Americans feel the relationship is good and that it has remained essentially unchanged over the past two years.
Canadians are more able to point out important issues facing the North American relationship. Not surprisingly, with the war pending at the time of the survey, most Canadians believed that the Iraq issue was the most important. Conversely, nearly one in two Americans were unaware of any major issues challenging the relationship between the two governments.
A strong majority of Canadians say they are aware of trade disputes pending between Canada and the United States, with 88% of these pointing to the current lumber dispute. Moreover, when it comes to trade, a majority of Canadians also feel that the United States has been unfair in its dealings with Canada. Nevertheless, they are confident in the Government of Canada's ability to resolve any present or future problems in the relationship, including those related to trade. A strong majority of Americans are unaware of any trade disputes. Of those who are aware, a majority are unable to specify any particular dispute.
Regarding support for greater co-operation on a series of bilateral issues, a majority of Canadians are in favour of closer ties on border security, increased trade, and common environmental policies and defence. They are less supportive of greater co-operation on issues such as immigration, economic and foreign policies as well as the possibility of a common currency, as these may be perceived as limiting Canadian sovereignty.
Americans are significantly more supportive of greater ties with Canada on all issues measured, the exception being a common currency. They are most interested in co-operation on border security, which they believe will make North America safer and protect their economy. Furthermore, Americans are confident that Canada can be relied upon to help protect the homeland security of the United States. This sentiment is especially true for Americans living along the Canadian border.
Just one-third of Canadians believe current relations between the Government of Canada and the U.S. government are good, while a majority of Americans think so.
In Canada, the Atlantic provinces have the most positive view of the relationship, nearly half (47%) saying the relationship is good.
Canadians earning $60,000 or more and university-educated Canadians are more likely to rate the state of relations as bad, at 35% and 33% respectively.
In the United States, northern tier residents are most likely to report that relations between our governments are good, with nearly six in ten (59%) feeling this way.
In the southern tier, slightly less than half of Americans (48%) hold the same opinion.
Sixty-one per cent (61%) of Americans in the highest earning bracket (US$50,000+) rate the state of relations as good compared to 49% of those who make less than US$50,000.
One in two Canadians believe that the Government of Canada's relationship with the U.S. government has worsened over the past two years.
Americans hold a different view. A majority of them feel the relationship has remained essentially unchanged. This is particularly true of Americans with college education (60%), those aged 18 to 34 (57%) and those earning more than US$50,000 annually (57%).
Perceptions that the relationship has worsened are strongest in Alberta, where 66% feel the relationship has deteriorated (59% in Western Canada as a whole).
Canadians earning $60,000 or more (60%), university-educated Canadians (58%) and
Canadians aged 55 and older (56%) are most likely to feel that the relationship has worsened over the past two years.
When asked to name the most important issue facing the Canadian-American relationship, almost three in ten Canadians mentioned Iraq.
On the other hand, only 6% of Americans mentioned Iraq, while 14% reported border issues and security as the most important issue facing our relationship, followed by trade disputes.
Nearly half the American population (44%) could not identify any specific issue. This suggests that the Canadian-American relationship is not a concern for most Americans.
Nevertheless, 63% of northern tier residents, that is, those with greater exposure to Canada and the bilateral relationship, were able to identify an important issue. Conversely, only 51% of Americans living in the southern tier states could do the same.
Canadians are very aware of trade disputes between Canada and the United States. Nearly seven in ten say they have heard about disputes.
Of those who have heard about trade disputes, almost 90% mention softwood lumber.
Awareness of this issue is particularly high in British Columbia (94%) and Alberta (90%).
Prairie Canadians are more likely to mention the grain subsidies issue. This issue was mentioned by almost half the respondents (49%) in Saskatchewan, by 29% in Manitoba and 22% in Alberta.
In sharp contrast to Canadians, more than three-quarters of Americans are not aware of any trade disputes between Canada and the United States.
Furthermore, close to one third of those respondents who are aware of disputes are unable to identify any specific issue.
Awareness among Americans is higher in the northern tier, where almost 30% report hearing about trade disputes.
Trade disputes mentioned by these Americans include those involving softwood lumber, fishing, grain subsidies, beef, water, garbage, and potatoes.
Despite the fact that softwood lumber is the issue most often mentioned in both countries, only one in four (26%) of the 22% of Americans aware of trade disputes mention this particular dispute. This contrasts with 88% of the 69% of Canadians aware of trade disputes.
American men (28%) are more likely to be aware of trade disputes than are women (17%).
A majority of Canadians believe that, when it comes to trade disputes, the United States has not been fair in its dealings with Canada.
In British Columbia, where softwood lumber disputes are a concern, more than three-quarters (76%) believe this to be true.
Nearly three-quarters (74%) of university-educated Canadians agree with the statement, compared with less than half of those who have not completed high school (47%).
A strong majority of Canadian men (67%) agree that the U.S. has not been fair in its dealings with Canada, while just over half (56%) of Canadian women believe the same.
A majority of Canadians believe that, when it comes to trade disputes, the United States has not been fair in its dealings with Canada.
In British Columbia, where softwood lumber disputes are a concern, more than three-quarters (76%) believe this to be true.
Nearly three-quarters (74%) of university-educated Canadians agree with the statement, compared with less than half of those who have not completed high school (47%).
A strong majority of Canadian men (67%) agree that the U.S. has not been fair in its dealings with Canada, while just over half (56%) of Canadian women believe the same.
A majority of Canadians believe that, when it comes to trade disputes, the United States has not been fair in its dealings with Canada.
In British Columbia, where softwood lumber disputes are a concern, more than three-quarters (76%) believe this to be true.
Nearly three-quarters (74%) of university-educated Canadians agree with the statement, compared with less than half of those who have not completed high school (47%).
A strong majority of Canadian men (67%) agree that the U.S. has not been fair in its dealings with Canada, while just over half (56%) of Canadian women believe the same.
Despite perceptions that, when it comes to trade disputes, the U.S. has been unfair in its dealings with Canada, 70% of Canadians are moderately or very confident in the Government's ability to resolve present or future problems with the United States.
Of those Canadians with less than high school education, 45% report moderate confidence in the Government of Canada to resolve these problems.
Furthermore, 46% of young people (aged 18-34) are confident in the Government's abilities in this area while 35% of those aged 35-54 are not.
Americans are more likely to support greater co-operation between Canada and the United States than are Canadians.
The biggest gaps between Canadians and Americans are in the areas of foreign policy (19-point gap); national defence, immigration policies and economic policies (12-point gaps); and environmental policies (10-point gap).
In our focus group discussions held in Canada, participants tended to base their rationale for closer relations on tangible benefits to Canada or a sense of necessity. For example, border security and trade benefit Canada and are also seen as necessary given geography and the current mood in the United States. On the other hand, participants opposed greater co-operation on issues such as foreign policy and common currency, where they see no obvious benefit and fear loss of Canadian sovereignty.
University-educated Canadians are more likely to oppose co-operation on all issues than Canadians with less formal education.
A strong majority of Americans in the northern tier support greater co-operation on border security, national defence and economic policies
A majority of both Canadians and Americans agree that creating common border policies will make all of North America safer.
Canadians, however, are less convinced that doing so will protect Canada's economy.
Americans, on the other hand, are four times more likely to agree than to disagree that common border policies will protect their economy.
Sixty-five per cent (65%) of Americans older than 55 believe that creating common border policies will make North America safer, compared with 56% of those in the youngest age bracket (18-34).
Nearly three in ten (29%) university-educated Canadians disagree that common border policies will make all of North America safer.
The great majority of Americans are either very confident (56%) or moderately confident (25%) in the reliability of Canada as a defence partner.
Confidence in Canada is strongest in the northern tier states, where 64% feel very confident, and the central/western states, where 57% feel very confident.
This is not the case when it comes to Mexico. Only 42% are very or moderately confident in Mexico's ability to contribute to American security.
Finally, at the time of these surveys, despite the looming war in Iraq and the different positions of the governments of Canada and the United States on the war, overall, both Canadians and Americans felt their governments were doing a good job of managing the Canadian-American relationship.
However, Americans are more likely to feel their government is doing a good job.
Furthermore, fewer Americans rate their government's performance as bad. Canadians are more critical of their government's performance, with more than one-quarter rating its ability to manage the relationship as bad.
Western Canadians are more likely to rate the Government's performance on this issue as bad (36%), while Atlantic Canadians are more likely to believe the Government is doing a good job (49%). Residents of Quebec are more likely to be ambivalent, with 37% answering neither good nor bad.
More than half (52%) of American men believe the U.S. government is doing a good job managing its relationship with Canada, compared with 46% of American women.

http://www.communication.gc.ca/survey_sondage/14-15/can-am/can-am2003q4_toc.html
 

jensonj

New Member
Jan 29, 2005
38
0
6
CENTRAL CANADA
RE: There are more countries in the world than just Canada &

This report is based on results from Communication Canada's Listening to Canadians survey of winter 2003 and a mirror study conducted in the United States at the same time. The key findings are as follows:

Canadians are divided on the state of current relations between the governments of Canada and the United States. Roughly one-third of Canadians feel the relationship is good, another third say neither good nor bad, while a final third say it is poor. However, a majority of Canadians feel the relationship has been worsening over the past two years. American opinion stands in stark contrast. A majority of Americans feel the relationship is good and that it has remained essentially unchanged over the past two years.
Canadians are more able to point out important issues facing the North American relationship. Not surprisingly, with the war pending at the time of the survey, most Canadians believed that the Iraq issue was the most important. Conversely, nearly one in two Americans were unaware of any major issues challenging the relationship between the two governments.
A strong majority of Canadians say they are aware of trade disputes pending between Canada and the United States, with 88% of these pointing to the current lumber dispute. Moreover, when it comes to trade, a majority of Canadians also feel that the United States has been unfair in its dealings with Canada. Nevertheless, they are confident in the Government of Canada's ability to resolve any present or future problems in the relationship, including those related to trade. A strong majority of Americans are unaware of any trade disputes. Of those who are aware, a majority are unable to specify any particular dispute.
Regarding support for greater co-operation on a series of bilateral issues, a majority of Canadians are in favour of closer ties on border security, increased trade, and common environmental policies and defence. They are less supportive of greater co-operation on issues such as immigration, economic and foreign policies as well as the possibility of a common currency, as these may be perceived as limiting Canadian sovereignty.
Americans are significantly more supportive of greater ties with Canada on all issues measured, the exception being a common currency. They are most interested in co-operation on border security, which they believe will make North America safer and protect their economy. Furthermore, Americans are confident that Canada can be relied upon to help protect the homeland security of the United States. This sentiment is especially true for Americans living along the Canadian border.
Just one-third of Canadians believe current relations between the Government of Canada and the U.S. government are good, while a majority of Americans think so.
In Canada, the Atlantic provinces have the most positive view of the relationship, nearly half (47%) saying the relationship is good.
Canadians earning $60,000 or more and university-educated Canadians are more likely to rate the state of relations as bad, at 35% and 33% respectively.
In the United States, northern tier residents are most likely to report that relations between our governments are good, with nearly six in ten (59%) feeling this way.
In the southern tier, slightly less than half of Americans (48%) hold the same opinion.
Sixty-one per cent (61%) of Americans in the highest earning bracket (US$50,000+) rate the state of relations as good compared to 49% of those who make less than US$50,000.
One in two Canadians believe that the Government of Canada's relationship with the U.S. government has worsened over the past two years.
Americans hold a different view. A majority of them feel the relationship has remained essentially unchanged. This is particularly true of Americans with college education (60%), those aged 18 to 34 (57%) and those earning more than US$50,000 annually (57%).
Perceptions that the relationship has worsened are strongest in Alberta, where 66% feel the relationship has deteriorated (59% in Western Canada as a whole).
Canadians earning $60,000 or more (60%), university-educated Canadians (58%) and
Canadians aged 55 and older (56%) are most likely to feel that the relationship has worsened over the past two years.
When asked to name the most important issue facing the Canadian-American relationship, almost three in ten Canadians mentioned Iraq.
On the other hand, only 6% of Americans mentioned Iraq, while 14% reported border issues and security as the most important issue facing our relationship, followed by trade disputes.
Nearly half the American population (44%) could not identify any specific issue. This suggests that the Canadian-American relationship is not a concern for most Americans.
Nevertheless, 63% of northern tier residents, that is, those with greater exposure to Canada and the bilateral relationship, were able to identify an important issue. Conversely, only 51% of Americans living in the southern tier states could do the same.
Canadians are very aware of trade disputes between Canada and the United States. Nearly seven in ten say they have heard about disputes.
Of those who have heard about trade disputes, almost 90% mention softwood lumber.
Awareness of this issue is particularly high in British Columbia (94%) and Alberta (90%).
Prairie Canadians are more likely to mention the grain subsidies issue. This issue was mentioned by almost half the respondents (49%) in Saskatchewan, by 29% in Manitoba and 22% in Alberta.
In sharp contrast to Canadians, more than three-quarters of Americans are not aware of any trade disputes between Canada and the United States.
Furthermore, close to one third of those respondents who are aware of disputes are unable to identify any specific issue.
Awareness among Americans is higher in the northern tier, where almost 30% report hearing about trade disputes.
Trade disputes mentioned by these Americans include those involving softwood lumber, fishing, grain subsidies, beef, water, garbage, and potatoes.
Despite the fact that softwood lumber is the issue most often mentioned in both countries, only one in four (26%) of the 22% of Americans aware of trade disputes mention this particular dispute. This contrasts with 88% of the 69% of Canadians aware of trade disputes.
American men (28%) are more likely to be aware of trade disputes than are women (17%).
A majority of Canadians believe that, when it comes to trade disputes, the United States has not been fair in its dealings with Canada.
In British Columbia, where softwood lumber disputes are a concern, more than three-quarters (76%) believe this to be true.
Nearly three-quarters (74%) of university-educated Canadians agree with the statement, compared with less than half of those who have not completed high school (47%).
A strong majority of Canadian men (67%) agree that the U.S. has not been fair in its dealings with Canada, while just over half (56%) of Canadian women believe the same.
A majority of Canadians believe that, when it comes to trade disputes, the United States has not been fair in its dealings with Canada.
In British Columbia, where softwood lumber disputes are a concern, more than three-quarters (76%) believe this to be true.
Nearly three-quarters (74%) of university-educated Canadians agree with the statement, compared with less than half of those who have not completed high school (47%).
A strong majority of Canadian men (67%) agree that the U.S. has not been fair in its dealings with Canada, while just over half (56%) of Canadian women believe the same.
A majority of Canadians believe that, when it comes to trade disputes, the United States has not been fair in its dealings with Canada.
In British Columbia, where softwood lumber disputes are a concern, more than three-quarters (76%) believe this to be true.
Nearly three-quarters (74%) of university-educated Canadians agree with the statement, compared with less than half of those who have not completed high school (47%).
A strong majority of Canadian men (67%) agree that the U.S. has not been fair in its dealings with Canada, while just over half (56%) of Canadian women believe the same.
Despite perceptions that, when it comes to trade disputes, the U.S. has been unfair in its dealings with Canada, 70% of Canadians are moderately or very confident in the Government's ability to resolve present or future problems with the United States.
Of those Canadians with less than high school education, 45% report moderate confidence in the Government of Canada to resolve these problems.
Furthermore, 46% of young people (aged 18-34) are confident in the Government's abilities in this area while 35% of those aged 35-54 are not.
Americans are more likely to support greater co-operation between Canada and the United States than are Canadians.
The biggest gaps between Canadians and Americans are in the areas of foreign policy (19-point gap); national defence, immigration policies and economic policies (12-point gaps); and environmental policies (10-point gap).
In our focus group discussions held in Canada, participants tended to base their rationale for closer relations on tangible benefits to Canada or a sense of necessity. For example, border security and trade benefit Canada and are also seen as necessary given geography and the current mood in the United States. On the other hand, participants opposed greater co-operation on issues such as foreign policy and common currency, where they see no obvious benefit and fear loss of Canadian sovereignty.
University-educated Canadians are more likely to oppose co-operation on all issues than Canadians with less formal education.
A strong majority of Americans in the northern tier support greater co-operation on border security, national defence and economic policies
A majority of both Canadians and Americans agree that creating common border policies will make all of North America safer.
Canadians, however, are less convinced that doing so will protect Canada's economy.
Americans, on the other hand, are four times more likely to agree than to disagree that common border policies will protect their economy.
Sixty-five per cent (65%) of Americans older than 55 believe that creating common border policies will make North America safer, compared with 56% of those in the youngest age bracket (18-34).
Nearly three in ten (29%) university-educated Canadians disagree that common border policies will make all of North America safer.
The great majority of Americans are either very confident (56%) or moderately confident (25%) in the reliability of Canada as a defence partner.
Confidence in Canada is strongest in the northern tier states, where 64% feel very confident, and the central/western states, where 57% feel very confident.
This is not the case when it comes to Mexico. Only 42% are very or moderately confident in Mexico's ability to contribute to American security.
Finally, at the time of these surveys, despite the looming war in Iraq and the different positions of the governments of Canada and the United States on the war, overall, both Canadians and Americans felt their governments were doing a good job of managing the Canadian-American relationship.
However, Americans are more likely to feel their government is doing a good job.
Furthermore, fewer Americans rate their government's performance as bad. Canadians are more critical of their government's performance, with more than one-quarter rating its ability to manage the relationship as bad.
Western Canadians are more likely to rate the Government's performance on this issue as bad (36%), while Atlantic Canadians are more likely to believe the Government is doing a good job (49%). Residents of Quebec are more likely to be ambivalent, with 37% answering neither good nor bad.
More than half (52%) of American men believe the U.S. government is doing a good job managing its relationship with Canada, compared with 46% of American women.

http://www.communication.gc.ca/survey_sondage/14-15/can-am/can-am2003q4_toc.html
 

jackd

Nominee Member
Nov 23, 2004
91
0
6
Montreal
Re: There are more countries in the world than just Canada &

Obviously, Someone's geography is not his strongest topic, closely followed by his knowledge of political and economical subjects.
He probably does not know Canada is the U.S. largest trading partner. If Canada would stop sending crude oil, natural gas and electrical power to the U.S tomorrow morning, the U.S. would face its biggest disaster ever. 20% of all the U.S. exports are to Canada. 60% of your newspapers are printed on Canadian made paper. 40% of your houses are built with Canadian wood.
The U.S. great lake region would be come a disaster area if we close the St. Laurence seaway to U.S. ship traffic. You'd also be loosing your second most important foreign investor if you were to stop dealing with Canada.
Go ahead, ask Mexico or the Bahamas to replace Canada as your no.1 trade partner. You can also ask Mexico to give you a road to Alaska, or to allow your NORAD bases in northern Canada to defend you against the big bad Russia and other invaders.
 

jackd

Nominee Member
Nov 23, 2004
91
0
6
Montreal
Re: There are more countries in the world than just Canada &

Obviously, Someone's geography is not his strongest topic, closely followed by his knowledge of political and economical subjects.
He probably does not know Canada is the U.S. largest trading partner. If Canada would stop sending crude oil, natural gas and electrical power to the U.S tomorrow morning, the U.S. would face its biggest disaster ever. 20% of all the U.S. exports are to Canada. 60% of your newspapers are printed on Canadian made paper. 40% of your houses are built with Canadian wood.
The U.S. great lake region would be come a disaster area if we close the St. Laurence seaway to U.S. ship traffic. You'd also be loosing your second most important foreign investor if you were to stop dealing with Canada.
Go ahead, ask Mexico or the Bahamas to replace Canada as your no.1 trade partner. You can also ask Mexico to give you a road to Alaska, or to allow your NORAD bases in northern Canada to defend you against the big bad Russia and other invaders.
 

jackd

Nominee Member
Nov 23, 2004
91
0
6
Montreal
Re: There are more countries in the world than just Canada &

Obviously, Someone's geography is not his strongest topic, closely followed by his knowledge of political and economical subjects.
He probably does not know Canada is the U.S. largest trading partner. If Canada would stop sending crude oil, natural gas and electrical power to the U.S tomorrow morning, the U.S. would face its biggest disaster ever. 20% of all the U.S. exports are to Canada. 60% of your newspapers are printed on Canadian made paper. 40% of your houses are built with Canadian wood.
The U.S. great lake region would be come a disaster area if we close the St. Laurence seaway to U.S. ship traffic. You'd also be loosing your second most important foreign investor if you were to stop dealing with Canada.
Go ahead, ask Mexico or the Bahamas to replace Canada as your no.1 trade partner. You can also ask Mexico to give you a road to Alaska, or to allow your NORAD bases in northern Canada to defend you against the big bad Russia and other invaders.
 

Someone

Nominee Member
Dec 31, 2004
58
0
6
RE: There are more countries in the world than just Canada &

As a matter of fact, jackd, I impress many people with my geography!!!

Canada may be the US largest trading partner, but here's one thing I bet you didn't know:

The border between San Diego, California and Tijuana, Mexico is the world's most crossed border.

A lot of this consists of tourists, true. A lot of Californians and Americans love to go to Mexico to kick it. And you have Mexicans who visit California. But a lot of that flow is also migrants, both legal and illegal. Did you know that the number of migrants (who are almost all, but not all Mexican) who cross the border everyday numbers well into the thousands? Apparently, that fence we built at the border between San Diego and Tijuana hasn't held as many people back as hoped for. Never mind the desert region in Arizona or the Rio Grande in southern Texas. Yep, we get Mexicans entering by the millions every year!!! Lo and behold, Spanish will be our second language for a while (far more important than French is in Canada).

And what impact do you think this has on the US economy and resources? Over the past decade, we suddenly have to step up border patrols.

It has, in many ways, helped the US economy, though, by providing great sources of labour and business, despite some of the drains!!!

I'll tell you one thing, if you think the Surrey, BC/Blaine, WA crossing is busy, wait until you see the San Diego/Tijuana crossing. Oh my goodness!!!

And it's not just Mexicans that use this border. People from all over the world arrive in Mexico to enter the USA. Most of these are Central Americans.

Oh, and did I mention the Cuban and Haitian boat people who arrive in Florida like crazy?

And this is not all just people either, this leads to business as well.

So this massive migration into the US from Mexico doesn't affect Canadians. Or so they think.

With all that in mind, don't be offended or surprised if the USA doesn't pay as much attention to Canada as Canada does to the USA. You're not the ones with a Mexico or Cuba in your immediate path, in addition to a northern neighbour. You're not the ones who need to build a fence on your southern border. Because as much as you think that Americans are providing you with a "foreign invasion" well, Americans have the same feeling about their own southern neighbour.
 

Someone

Nominee Member
Dec 31, 2004
58
0
6
RE: There are more countries in the world than just Canada &

As a matter of fact, jackd, I impress many people with my geography!!!

Canada may be the US largest trading partner, but here's one thing I bet you didn't know:

The border between San Diego, California and Tijuana, Mexico is the world's most crossed border.

A lot of this consists of tourists, true. A lot of Californians and Americans love to go to Mexico to kick it. And you have Mexicans who visit California. But a lot of that flow is also migrants, both legal and illegal. Did you know that the number of migrants (who are almost all, but not all Mexican) who cross the border everyday numbers well into the thousands? Apparently, that fence we built at the border between San Diego and Tijuana hasn't held as many people back as hoped for. Never mind the desert region in Arizona or the Rio Grande in southern Texas. Yep, we get Mexicans entering by the millions every year!!! Lo and behold, Spanish will be our second language for a while (far more important than French is in Canada).

And what impact do you think this has on the US economy and resources? Over the past decade, we suddenly have to step up border patrols.

It has, in many ways, helped the US economy, though, by providing great sources of labour and business, despite some of the drains!!!

I'll tell you one thing, if you think the Surrey, BC/Blaine, WA crossing is busy, wait until you see the San Diego/Tijuana crossing. Oh my goodness!!!

And it's not just Mexicans that use this border. People from all over the world arrive in Mexico to enter the USA. Most of these are Central Americans.

Oh, and did I mention the Cuban and Haitian boat people who arrive in Florida like crazy?

And this is not all just people either, this leads to business as well.

So this massive migration into the US from Mexico doesn't affect Canadians. Or so they think.

With all that in mind, don't be offended or surprised if the USA doesn't pay as much attention to Canada as Canada does to the USA. You're not the ones with a Mexico or Cuba in your immediate path, in addition to a northern neighbour. You're not the ones who need to build a fence on your southern border. Because as much as you think that Americans are providing you with a "foreign invasion" well, Americans have the same feeling about their own southern neighbour.