Canada is too dangerous for Dick Cheney


petros
+3
#91
Quote: Originally Posted by Ocean BreezeView Post

Not that I can do anything about it...

Nope but you can be thankful that the Canadian Govt didn't fall the bull**** like some Canadians have.
 
Most helpful post: The members here have rated this post as best reply.
Ocean Breeze
+1
#92
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

Nope but you can be thankful that the Canadian Govt didn't fall the bull**** like some Canadians have.

oh believe me: I truly AM. I have to admit........when Cdn Gov said NO .........I felt a warm and fuzzy sense of pride .....as it was wonderful to see someone with guts to say NO to the southern war machine.

thank goodness Harper was not in charge then.
 
petros
+2
#93
It's funny how lack of evidence was the reason but some believe there was. I feel sorry for those people who believe there was.
 
taxslave
#94
Quote: Originally Posted by earth_as_oneView Post

Someone in the US started an unprovoked war of aggression, resulting in the deaths of hundredss of thousands of innocent civilians including women and children. The people responsible should be held responsible for their war crimes. Cheney is innocent until proven guilty, but I believe enough evidence exists to arrest Cheney. But until that happens, Cheney should be free to enter Canada. However, the Canadian government not only has a right to arrest war criminals, we have an obligation to do so.

In your warped mind perhaps.
 
earth_as_one
+2
#95
Quote: Originally Posted by ColpyView Post

I have NO problem with people protesting....please do! It is your right to make sure your voice is heard......which is why I contrasted the anti-Galloway protests with the anti-Cheney protests (or anti-Netanyahu, or anti-Coulter). The former included (as far as I can see) people shouting slogans and carrying signs........as is their right, and totally in accordance with custom and the ethics of peaceful protest.

If you find anything different, I'd love to hear about it!

Contrast that with the attacks and threats of violence from the left.

Then tell me again about the "conversation" we should be having.

I agree that Cheney should be allowed to enter Canada as our guest. I am against death threats or any violence against this likely (but unproven) war criminal. I also support the right of Canadians to peacefully protest Cheney's presence.

Quote: Originally Posted by BruSanView Post

What you believe is immaterial.

Evidence may exist but have the appropriate authorities designated him or Bush for that matter war criminals? For rule of law to prevail isn't it necessary to have warrant existant before you ASSUME he's a war criminal and arrest him?

Only asking because all of the bellicose protestations about a presumption of ASSUMED guilt by a morally outraged bunch of armchair critics amount to zip is it's just an opinion. Till the warrant is issued perhaps we'd be better served by maintaining our principles intact and actually follow the rule of law?

Someone is responsible for starting an unprovoked war which cost hundreds of billions, killed hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians and turned millions more into refugees. A thorough investigation has never been done as to how and why the Iraq war happened.
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

It's funny how lack of evidence was the reason but some believe there was. I feel sorry for those people who believe there was.

Apparently the standard of evidence is far lower when it comes to allegations regarding Hussein's WMD stockpiles and links to 9/11 allegations than it does for allegations regarding Cheney and Bush deliberately manipulating the US into an unprovoked war.
 
Colpy
#96
Quote: Originally Posted by gerryhView Post

Pot, meet kettle.




Oh, so the entire "left" have threatened violence against cheney eh? A few morons have threatened violence, and those that did should be prosecuted. The vast majority have only "called" for cheneys arrest. But then, you are very good at painting things with a very wide brush when it comes to opponents of the conservatives or Israel.

Cheney is a war criminal and should not be allowed into Canada, Galoway has given material support to terrorists and should not be allowed in Canada, Coulter is just a waste of skin and as such should not be allowed in Canada as it costs us money to process the douche.


Yep....and if the gov't had decided to keep ANY ONE of them out, that would be fine with me.

we don't need a reason.
 
BruSan
+2
#97
Quote: Originally Posted by Ocean BreezeView Post

By "we" I was referring to the west ......but I stand corrected in generalizing Canada with US policies. My bad.

and yes, I am outraged at US policies , Cheney's and Bush's behaviors that have brought us this past volatile decade. Not that I can do anything about it...

We have found some common ground with this post.

While the U.N. was founded with the best of intentions, it has now morphed into a dysfunctional organization that allows for the foxes to sit in the security council's hen-house and connot be relied upon to act diligently to adjudicate these many insurrections that percolate on what seem to be daily basis. Too many hidden agendas in that room.

I rely heavily on Canada's government of the day, in the absence of any common sense issuing from that august body of the U.N., to base any decision of joining any military action on it's testing the Canadian public's reaction and willingness to commit to whatever comes along.

In other words; we the citizens have to get darn vocal when someone starts beating the drums of war using what walks like a duck and quacks like a duck and smells like a lie as justification. WE need and owe it to ourselves to keep informed through means other than Faux News or CBC.
 
petros
+1
#98
Quote: Originally Posted by ColpyView Post

Yep....and if the gov't had decided to keep ANY ONE of them out, that would be fine with me.

we don't need a reason.

Why leave it up to the govt? They're well known for ****ty decisions.
Last edited by petros; Mar 17th, 2012 at 09:51 PM..
 
Colpy
#99
Quote: Originally Posted by gore0bsessedView Post

That's the problem. thinking as everything as a competition, it doesn't have to be. That type of thinking is why we have a billion people without any reliable access to food yet we have the ability to feed the entire world and then some.
Why aren't you in support of working together as a human species towards the betterment of all of our standards of living? You talk as "our civilization" is all perfect, and anything else are mongrel civilizations, non-human. Your type of thinking is backwards and retards our ability to improve as a species.


No....the problem is that those who are privileged enough to live in the culture that has made more people rich and free than any other civilization on earth are too stupid and lazy to understand that there is a REASON we are better off...in fact, several reasons.
 
petros
+1
#100
Quote: Originally Posted by ColpyView Post

there is a REASON we are better off...in fact, several reasons.

Blood AND guts.
 
earth_as_one
#101
Ethnic cleansing, colonization and exploitation of the planet's resources.
 
L Gilbert
+1
#102
Quote: Originally Posted by ColpyView Post

No....the problem is that those who are privileged enough to live in the culture that has made more people rich and free than any other civilization on earth are too stupid and lazy to understand that there is a REASON we are better off...in fact, several reasons.

Yeah, I agree. The rich are quite free. It's the rest of us that are slaves to gov'ts.
 
gopher
+6
#103
If he won't go to Canada, let him and Bush both go to Iraq so that they can get a first hand report of the gratitude shown by Iraqis for the good those two bestowed on them.

 
petros
+2
#104
Quote: Originally Posted by gopherView Post

If he won't go to Canada, let him and Bush both go to Iraq so that they can get a first hand report of the gratitude shown by Iraqis for the good those two bestowed on them.

They are free in a Iraq now. It was all well worth it.
 
earth_as_one
+1
#105
His last visit to Iraq became a popular web game:

httpwwwyoutubecomwatchvduLds-TZMGw



Sock and Awe: Your chance to whack George Bush
Well that's the rest of the day accounted for, then. Alex Tew, him of the MillionDollarHomepage (external - login to view) fame, has quickly knocked up SockAndAwe (external - login to view) - a web game where the object is to hit George Bush with as many shoes as possible. It's notched up half a million users so far and, at the time of writing, 7,396,241 shoes have hit Bush in the face.
What are you waiting for?

Yell "This is a farewell kiss, you dog" in Arabic with every throw to be authentic.

www.guardian.co.uk/media/pda/...orgebush-games (external - login to view)
Last edited by earth_as_one; Mar 17th, 2012 at 11:43 PM..
 
Nuggler
+6
#106
Quote: Originally Posted by ColpyView Post

Thank you for proving my point.

Harper is the ELECTED Prime Minister of Canada.


Harper is a psychotic, fukkbrain who apparently stole the election a la Bush, and is now working hard to strip Canadians of their rights, spending us further into the poorhouse, while babbling on about fiscal responsibility. Elected by what - 35% of voters. ?

They could run a chimp, and if it wore blue, you'd vote for it.

You looking for a job as a camp guard when the gulags go up.?
 
Cliffy
+1
#107
I just got 10 hits on Sock & Awe!
 
Niflmir
+1
#108
Quote: Originally Posted by BruSanView Post

What you believe is immaterial.

Evidence may exist but have the appropriate authorities designated him or Bush for that matter war criminals? For rule of law to prevail isn't it necessary to have warrant existant before you ASSUME he's a war criminal and arrest him?

Only asking because all of the bellicose protestations about a presumption of ASSUMED guilt by a morally outraged bunch of armchair critics amount to zip is it's just an opinion. Till the warrant is issued perhaps we'd be better served by maintaining our principles intact and actually follow the rule of law?

Indeed. These people went around avoiding the rule of law for basically eight years. My statement is also a matter of the public record. We are better people then them, however, and there is more than enough evidence to have a warrant issued:

1. Maher Arar was sent to Syria and tortured.
2. The CIA were running programs to send people to countries to be tortured.
3. Arar was questioned by US agents in Syria.
4. Cheney and Bush control the CIA.

All are matters of the public record. What isn't known is to what extent Bush/Cheney knew about the CIA rendition flights or to what extent they approved them. And whether or not the flight to Syria was ordered by the CIA.

Those are questions that extraditions are supposed to be used to answer so that justice can be served. On top of that, we are following the rule of law. Cheney is allowed to come, protestors are allowed to protest, and people that assault others publicly are charged with crimes.

Calling these people "armchair critics" when they are leaving the comfort of their armchair to actively try to raise awareness and try to get a case opened just shows bad faith. These people are doing a hell of a lot more than you or I to support their beliefs.
 
CDNBear
#109
Quote: Originally Posted by earth_as_oneView Post

Someone is responsible for starting an unprovoked war which cost hundreds of billions, killed hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians and turned millions more into refugees. A thorough investigation has never been done as to how and why the Iraq war happened.

I've only said this to you, at least a dozen times.

It was the Germans.

The US was following intel, from a credible source, and an ally.
 
petros
+1
#110
The Germans tricked the Americans? OFFS
 
earth_as_one
#111
The Germans didn't start an unprovoked war against Iraq, the Americans did. That would make the Americans responsible, not the Germans.

Besides the most credible intel which has been proven to be 100% accurate was Iraq's declaration. The next most accurate intel came from Hans Blix and the UN weapon inspectors, who claimed their were a few months away from resolving all key disarmament issues just two weeks before Bush declared war. Even US intel sources indicated that Iraq no longer had a WMD capability. The Bus administration ignored all these accurate sources including the UN inspectors and instead used unsupported allegations by Iraqi dissidents (most of whom were awarded positions of power by the US Iraqi occupation authority), Israel (who wanted the Americans to invade Iraq and impose regime change).

References:

UNMOVIC progress report two weeks before the invasion indicating all key disarmament issues would be resolved within a few months:
Security Council 7 March 2003 (external - login to view)

Deliberate manipulations of intelligence reports to support the case for war:
Annals of National Security: Selective Intelligence : The New Yorker (external - login to view)

Israel linked to Iraq intelligence failure, general says
By Molly Moore
Jerusalem
December 6, 2003

Israel was a "full partner" in American and British intelligence failures that exaggerated former president Saddam Hussein's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs before the US-led invasion of Iraq, a report by an Israeli military research centre has alleged. "The failures of this war indicate weaknesses and inherent flaws within Israeli intelligence and among Israeli decision-makers," Brigadier-General Shlomo Brom wrote in an analysis for Tel Aviv University's Jaffee Centre for Strategic Studies. Israeli intelligence services and political leaders provided "an exaggerated assessment of Iraqi capabilities", raising "the possibility that the intelligence picture was manipulated", wrote General Brom, former deputy commander of the Israeli military's planning division.
Study Faults Israel For Misinformation - Sun Sentinel (external - login to view)

Iraq:
The Trail of Disinformation
Let's start with a simple fact. The United States invaded and conquered Iraq on the basis of lies. Even the official report of the United States Senate admits as much. So, where did all this bad information come from?
Iraq - The Trail of Disinformation (external - login to view)
 
Liberalman
#112
Quote: Originally Posted by BruSanView Post

We have found some common ground with this post.

While the U.N. was founded with the best of intentions, it has now morphed into a dysfunctional organization that allows for the foxes to sit in the security council's hen-house and connot be relied upon to act diligently to adjudicate these many insurrections that percolate on what seem to be daily basis. Too many hidden agendas in that room.

I rely heavily on Canada's government of the day, in the absence of any common sense issuing from that august body of the U.N., to base any decision of joining any military action on it's testing the Canadian public's reaction and willingness to commit to whatever comes along.

In other words; we the citizens have to get darn vocal when someone starts beating the drums of war using what walks like a duck and quacks like a duck and smells like a lie as justification. WE need and owe it to ourselves to keep informed through means other than Faux News or CBC.

If you are referring to the fact that Canada did not join the invasion of Iraq led by our American friends south of the border you will have to remember how the Canadian Alliance leader the official opposition led by Stephan Harper our present Prime Minister ran down to the United States apologizing profusely to the American president George Bush Jr. for on the behalf of Canada for not supporting their invasion.

Since the Conservatives became the government they changed Afghanistan involvement to a combat mission, which effectively destroyed the peacekeeping mission that Canada was praised for.

The Liberal government originally committed the Canadian military to a rebuilding mission in Afghanistan.

At the time of the invasion, the Canadian Liberal government defined Canada's reasons for participating in the mission Afghanistan as follows: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada's_role_in_the_Afghanistan_War (external - login to view)
  1. Defend Canada's national interests;
  2. Ensure Canadian leadership in world affairs; and
  3. Help Afghanistan rebuild.
So BruSan one can say that this Conservative government lost their common sense side a long time ago and they were the ones that threw away Canada’s seat at the UN Security Council.
.
.
 
CDNBear
#113
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

The Germans tricked the Americans? OFFS

Quote: Originally Posted by earth_as_oneView Post

The Germans didn't start an unprovoked war against Iraq, the Americans did. That would make the Americans responsible, not the Germans.

I hate to burst your bubble guys, but the intel came from the Germans (external - login to view)...
 
petros
+1
#114
LMAO. Really? You're going to blame the Germans? That's funny. Way too funny.
 
CDNBear
#115
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

LMAO. Really? You're going to blame the Germans? That's funny. Way too funny.

Your reading and comprehension skills faltering this morning Pete?
 
BruSan
#116
Quote: Originally Posted by NiflmirView Post

Indeed. These people went around avoiding the rule of law for basically eight years. My statement is also a matter of the public record. We are better people then them, however, and there is more than enough evidence to have a warrant issued:

1. Maher Arar was sent to Syria and tortured.
2. The CIA were running programs to send people to countries to be tortured.
3. Arar was questioned by US agents in Syria.
4. Cheney and Bush control the CIA.

All are matters of the public record. What isn't known is to what extent Bush/Cheney knew about the CIA rendition flights or to what extent they approved them. And whether or not the flight to Syria was ordered by the CIA.

Those are questions that extraditions are supposed to be used to answer so that justice can be served. On top of that, we are following the rule of law. Cheney is allowed to come, protestors are allowed to protest, and people that assault others publicly are charged with crimes.

Calling these people "armchair critics" when they are leaving the comfort of their armchair to actively try to raise awareness and try to get a case opened just shows bad faith. These people are doing a hell of a lot more than you or I to support their beliefs.

Again; I'm in agreement with some content of your post but take umbrage with your "these people" being the ones I called armchair critics. My reference was to people posting their outrage on here from the comfort of their armchair and NOT the actual protestors who march in protest in an orderly and peaceful fashion.
 
petros
+3
#117
Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBearView Post

Your reading and comprehension skills faltering this morning Pete?

Gullibility falls on your shoulders not mine.



It's all true. It was in print.
 
earth_as_one
#118
The Americans started an unprovoked war with Iraq. Ultimately that makes them responsible.

Most of the evidence supported Iraq's declaration that they no longer possessed a WMD capability. Two weeks before Bush declared war, UNMOVIC declared that all remaining WMD issues were within a few months of being fully resolved:

UNMOVIC's March 2003 report to the UNSC
Blix: UNMOVIC within months of resolving all key remaining disarmament tasks. (external - login to view)


Blix Says Iraq's Weapons Declaration May Have Been True
Iraq's December 7, 2002 declaration: 12,000 pages that said there were no WMD programs (external - login to view)

Selective Intelligence
by Seymour M. Hersh May 12, 2003
Annals of National Security: Selective Intelligence : The New Yorker (external - login to view)

Iraq:
The Trail of Disinformation
Let's start with a simple fact. The United States invaded and conquered Iraq on the basis of lies. Even the official report of the United States Senate admits as much. So, where did all this bad information come from?
Iraq - The Trail of Disinformation (external - login to view)

Global Misinformation Campaign was Used to Build Case for War
former Iraqi exile group gave the Bush administration exaggerated and fabricated intelligence on Iraq (external - login to view)

Israel linked to Iraq intelligence failure, general says
By Molly Moore
Jerusalem
December 6, 2003

Israel was a "full partner" in American and British intelligence failures that exaggerated former president Saddam Hussein's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs before the US-led invasion of Iraq, a report by an Israeli military research centre has alleged. "The failures of this war indicate weaknesses and inherent flaws within Israeli intelligence and among Israeli decision-makers," Brigadier-General Shlomo Brom wrote in an analysis for Tel Aviv University's Jaffee Centre for Strategic Studies. Israeli intelligence services and political leaders provided "an exaggerated assessment of Iraqi capabilities", raising "the possibility that the intelligence picture was manipulated", wrote General Brom, former deputy commander of the Israeli military's planning division....

Israel linked to Iraq intelligence failure, general says - www.theage.com.au (external - login to view)
 
CDNBear
+2
#119
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

Gullibility falls on your shoulders not mine.

It's all true. It was in print.

Hmmm, I'll take that as a yes then.

Quote: Originally Posted by earth_as_oneView Post

The Americans started an unprovoked war with Iraq. Ultimately that makes them responsible.

I never said they weren't. I just pointed out that they were using evidence, from a reliable ally.

I know that doesn't bode well with the anti American crowd.
 
BruSan
+1
#120
Quote: Originally Posted by LiberalmanView Post

If you are referring to the fact that Canada did not join the invasion of Iraq led by our American friends south of the border you will have to remember how the Canadian Alliance leader the official opposition led by Stephan Harper our present Prime Minister ran down to the United States apologizing profusely to the American president George Bush Jr. for on the behalf of Canada for not supporting their invasion.
Since the Conservatives became the government they changed Afghanistan involvement to a combat mission, which effectively destroyed the peacekeeping mission that Canada was praised for.
The Liberal government originally committed the Canadian military to a rebuilding mission in Afghanistan.
At the time of the invasion, the Canadian Liberal government defined Canada's reasons for participating in the mission Afghanistan as follows: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada's_role_in_the_Afghanistan_WarDefend Canada's national interests;
Ensure Canadian leadership in world affairs; and
Help Afghanistan rebuild.

Quote has been trimmed, See full post: View Post


Not going to buy into your red agaisnt blue crap! I just don't differentiate them to the same extent as you apparently need to.

Please re-read my post and pay particular attention to the part where I refer to the "government of the day" with no specific party mentioned.

I'm sorry but I don't see one iota of difference between ANY of them and have complete faith that were it in the interests of a Liberal government to kiss *** at any particular time they'd grab their ankles just as quickly as a Conservative, NDP or Bloc for that matter!

Any one of them, from Bobby Rae to the useless maroon running the NDP at this moment would sell their soul and yours if it advanced their little ego-driven power trip. NONE of these parties maintains a party platform with any integrity in todays clusterflop that passes for Canadian politics.
 

Similar Threads

4
Dick Cheney - The Real Satan
by Mowich | Dec 11th, 2009
16
Watching Obama Morph Into Dick Cheney
by JBeee | May 22nd, 2009
45
Should Dick Cheney Be Hanged?
by Stretch | Dec 27th, 2008
3
Did Dick Cheney pass away?
by Kreskin | Sep 6th, 2008
2
Dick Cheney - What a man
by moghrabi | Nov 21st, 2004
no new posts