Hugo Chavez, the Richard and Judy tyrant who has brought Marxism back from its grave

MHz

Time Out
Mar 16, 2007
41,030
43
48
Red Deer AB
MHz, is it the anti Americanism you get off on? Or do you really believe that Chavez and Castro are great people, deserving our support?

Not really, but when talking to an American, a very patriotic one, I want to see if he has read the same things have. I don't see anything wrong with Americans, but they are either in the dark about some things their government does in dealing with them and with other Nations (naive patriotism) or they are fully aware of all the dealings and are still patriotic.

Those two seem to put the least of the people's welfare above the welfare of foreign (for profit) companies. Rather than the US still have open commerce with them they make their development as difficult as possible. There are 4 examples of this since 1950.
 

MikeyDB

House Member
Jun 9, 2006
4,612
63
48
Bear

Anti-Americanism is just a point of view. I'm very Anti-Spanish for instance, based on my perceptions of the Spanish people and their forms of government and history of conquest. Their embrace of "religion" (not a 'religion' I particularly admire), they're propensity for hanging onto barbaric practices (bullfighting, cock fighting, dog fighting etc.) they're patriarchal "normal" disdain for women and the myth of machismo... They're reluctant to accept their incapacity to deal with "the slings and arrows of outrageous misfortune" and propensity to regard arrogant cocky self-assurance as defense against what the rest of the world's people accept as life simply being what it is....

I've found almost nothing admirable about this nation or its people and consider them to be the single most barbaric and primitive "nation" on the planet. While wearing the acoutrements of a "modern society" their approach to life is mired in ancient mythic codes and empty hollow symbolisms that have despite having failed them for centuries are desperately grasped to their collective bosoms.

America and Americans are something else, but in the end it's simply a view, an opinion, a perception. Under the majority of circumstances I'd help either if I could because even though burdened with raging arrogance and constantly over-compensating for their lack of genuine identity (in the case of Americans) and enthusiastically backward (in the case of the Spanish) they're still people. It's the wearing of the "emperors clothes" as justification and legitimization for their arrogance and backwardness, in the case of the Spanish and their lawlessness and greed in the case of Americans I find most disturbing when it comes to dealing with them in their "national personna".
 

I think not

Hall of Fame Member
Apr 12, 2005
10,506
33
48
The Evil Empire
Canada is the only oil producing country in the world that doesn't give its citizens a break at the pump - thank you USA and NAFTA.

I know you're set in your thoughts and ideologies and I am not about to even begin to pursuade you otherwise, but I have to point this out, because if it is something I really loathe above everything else, it's WHINING.

Perhaps you need to ask yourself why nearly 50% of the gas you pay at the pump are taxes.

While you're asking that question and have fully answered it to your satisfaction, ponder the issue of being a major word player of exporting oil and have literally zilch refining capacity.

When you're done with those two issues, consider how your gas is transported throughout the empty vastness that is Canada. Because your gas (not natural) distribution network is worse than most countries.

When you have answered all three questions you can start yelling at your politicians.

When you're finished with all the above and you're able to give an intelligent answer to all questions, then you can whine about NAFTA and the Evil Empire.

Until then, you're just WHINING.
 

Zzarchov

House Member
Aug 28, 2006
4,600
100
63
so what if it is?

I'd rather be childish about gambling halls than dead serious about banning multiparty elections.
 

Toro

Senate Member
May 24, 2005
5,468
109
63
Florida, Hurricane Central
I know you're set in your thoughts and ideologies and I am not about to even begin to pursuade you otherwise, but I have to point this out, because if it is something I really loathe above everything else, it's WHINING.

That, and this

Canada is the only oil producing country in the world that doesn't give its citizens a break at the pump - thank you USA and NAFTA.

is just about as wrong as you possibly could be.

Let's forget the semantics that the US is one of the largest oil producing countries in the world, and that many, many countries produce oil, even if they are importers. Its over $6 a gallon for gas in Norway, one of Europe's largest producing and exporting countries.
 

Scott Free

House Member
May 9, 2007
3,893
46
48
BC
I know you're set in your thoughts and ideologies and I am not about to even begin to pursuade you otherwise, but I have to point this out, because if it is something I really loathe above everything else, it's WHINING.

Perhaps you need to ask yourself why nearly 50% of the gas you pay at the pump are taxes.

While you're asking that question and have fully answered it to your satisfaction, ponder the issue of being a major word player of exporting oil and have literally zilch refining capacity.

When you're done with those two issues, consider how your gas is transported throughout the empty vastness that is Canada. Because your gas (not natural) distribution network is worse than most countries.

When you have answered all three questions you can start yelling at your politicians.

When you're finished with all the above and you're able to give an intelligent answer to all questions, then you can whine about NAFTA and the Evil Empire.

Until then, you're just WHINING.

I don't see how what your asking has anything to do with what I said!?!

High taxes... um yeah that would be the government not giving us a break on prices.

NAFTA has caused our energy prices to sky rocket. Before NAFTA it was cheaper to heat your house with N/G than electricity. Today the opposite is true.

As for our gas, if we weren't shipping it all to the US as unrefined crude our prices would be a lot lower and our countries economy a lot wealthier.

Funny that you hate whining so much because you sure do snivel, "everybody hates the US."
 

Albertabound

Electoral Member
Sep 2, 2006
555
2
18
I
wonder if Peter has any shares in Exxon,

Sure sounds like it to me.

The only reason the US creates propaganda like this is because Chavez told Big Oil to take a hike......good for him. I just wish our politicians had the balls to do it as well. If we were to nationalize our oil it wouldn't take 1 month for the US to be down our throat and more than likely knocking down our door.

The article is the biggest piece of crap I've seen in a long time.

Eaglesmack, how about just glancing at Mhz article ....the reason you had to scroll so long is for no other reason other than that is just how much the US has interfere with the worlds business.......these are facts, unlike the crap in the article you provided.
 

Albertabound

Electoral Member
Sep 2, 2006
555
2
18
If Canada chose to block all trade with Liberia tommorow because we think their country has a stupid flag, thats our right. If they don't like it they are well within their rights to put their own sanctions on us.

true...but now ask if Canada stopped trade to the US....ie. oil. Do you really think we have the right to do that or would the US do what ever they feel necessary to gain that oil supply back .....using the excuse ..."it is of national interest to the US and so we will take it if we need it". That is how they work you know, in case you have not being paying attention to the past 100 years.
 

Albertabound

Electoral Member
Sep 2, 2006
555
2
18
Perhaps you need to ask yourself why nearly 50% of the gas you pay at the pump are taxes.

Because our politicians unlike Chavez do not stand up to big oil and so we (Canada) end up
receiving some of the lowest, if not the lowest royalties from oil companies for "our" oil. Not the governments oil.....our oil. Oil companies that are American based. If we collected more of the royalties for "our" oil, maybe we wouldn't have to tax 50% of our gas at the pumps. And yes NAFTA does not help the cause.
 

Albertabound

Electoral Member
Sep 2, 2006
555
2
18
Please buy our dirty oil

Mar 13th 2008 | OTTAWA
From The Economist print edition
A new American law could limit oil-sands production in Alberta



CANADIANS like to think that although they are the junior partner in their trade relations with the United States, the 174 billion barrels of proven reserves in the oil sands of Alberta provide a powerful ace up their sleeve in any dealings with their energy-hungry neighbour. That belief has now been shaken by an American law that appears to prohibit American government agencies from buying crude produced in the oil sands of the western province.
The Energy Independence and Security Act 2007 did not set out to discriminate against Canada, America's biggest supplier of oil. But that is the effect of banning federal agencies from buying alternative or synthetic fuel, including that from non-conventional sources, if their production and use result in more greenhouse gases than conventional oil. Transforming Alberta's tarry muck into a barrel of oil is an energy-intensive process that produces about three times the emissions of a barrel of conventional light sweet crude.

Having woken belatedly to the danger, the Canadian government is now scrambling to secure an exception. Michael Wilson, Canada's ambassador in Washington, has written to America's secretary of defence, Robert Gates (whose department is a big purchaser of Canadian oil), stressing American dependence on Canadian oil, electricity, natural gas and uranium imports, and noting that some of the biggest players in the Alberta oil patch are American companies. Mr Wilson added plaintively that both George Bush and his energy secretary, Samuel Bodman, have publicly welcomed expanded oil-sands production, given the increased contribution to American energy security.
John Baird, the Canadian environment minister, referred this week to the American move when he unveiled new proposals to reduce industrial emissions in Canada, including the oil sands, by 20% by 2020. Big states like California were making similar pronouncements, he told reporters. The oil sands were an important national resource, but had to be expanded in an environmentally friendly way.
The fear in Canada is that the American purchasing restrictions, which at present apply only to federal agencies, is the start of a wholesale shift to greener as well as more protectionist policies under a Congress and potentially a White House controlled by the Democrats. With energy exports, mainly from Alberta, driving the Canadian economy, this is not a happy thought for Canadians.
Yet environmentalists point out that Canada is now paying for its own foot-dragging at the federal level on green initiatives. Having signed the Kyoto agreement under a previous Liberal government, Canada did little to stop its emissions rising. They are now almost 35% above the Kyoto target. And although Mr Baird likes to describe his plan as tough, it will not bring Canada into line with Kyoto. The rules for the oil sands, now the fastest growing source of greenhouse gases, have yet to be finalised and will not come into force until 2010. Furthermore, they rely on carbon capture, a promising but unproven technology.
The vagueness of the proposed federal rules did not stop the premier of Alberta, Ed Stelmach, from giving a defiant warning that he will stand up for the interests of Albertans (read oil industry) and will be examining the constitution to ensure that the federal government's proposed plan does not intrude on provincial jurisdiction. His province has one of the weakest environmental regimes in Canada.
Although the Canadian embassy says that there has been no official response to Mr Wilson's letter, there are reports of talks going on in Washington aimed at addressing Canada's concerns. But even if a deal is reached with the outgoing Bush administration, any exception for Canada may be short-lived if green-tinged Democrats take the White House in November.


So what do we do? We bend over and beg them to take our oil. When all we have to do is sell it to China for much more a profit. I imagine the US would drop their little enviro act pretty quick.
 

I think not

Hall of Fame Member
Apr 12, 2005
10,506
33
48
The Evil Empire
I don't see how what your asking has anything to do with what I said!?!

Reading comprehension issues?

High taxes... um yeah that would be the government not giving us a break on prices.

OK, so you got one. What does the US have to do with Ottawa increasing taxes?

NAFTA has caused our energy prices to sky rocket. Before NAFTA it was cheaper to heat your house with N/G than electricity. Today the opposite is true.

Please elaborate, I'm not denying your claim, but you must have some sort of logic behind that statement.

As for our gas, if we weren't shipping it all to the US as unrefined crude our prices would be a lot lower and our countries economy a lot wealthier.

So if you're not selling a product you become wealthier? :-?

Funny that you hate whining so much because you sure do snivel, "everybody hates the US."

No not everybody, but its quite evident who does, IMO.

Because our politicians unlike Chavez do not stand up to big oil and so we (Canada) end up
receiving some of the lowest, if not the lowest royalties from oil companies for "our" oil. Not the governments oil.....our oil. Oil companies that are American based. If we collected more of the royalties for "our" oil, maybe we wouldn't have to tax 50% of our gas at the pumps. And yes NAFTA does not help the cause.

OK, so your successive governments didn't make a good deal on behalf of Canadians. We'll take that as a given. How did NAFTA add to this problem?

So what do we do? We bend over and beg them to take our oil. When all we have to do is sell it to China for much more a profit. I imagine the US would drop their little enviro act pretty quick.

That sounds like a grandiose idea, so what's the problem? Canadian voting habits? China is too far away to be competitive? Oil extraction is "controlled" by American corporations?
 

Zzarchov

House Member
Aug 28, 2006
4,600
100
63
Actually NAFTA does have provisions about selling oil and cutting ourselves a break (we aren't allowed to). Its not some Conspiracy, it was part of the agreement.

I mean it was a trade-off, after all, you'd have to get something for our ability to destroy your softwood lumber industry..I mean, back when the US government planned to honour its agreements.
 

Albertabound

Electoral Member
Sep 2, 2006
555
2
18
Oil extraction is "controlled" by American corporations?

It is in Alberta....Saskatchewan however has not signed anything over to syncrude yet. Oilsands Quest inc. I believe is the only contract so far, which I'm sure is Amercan anyways. If we the people ran the country, we would nationalize our oil companies just like Venezuela and tell the US oil companies to go F#ck yourself.

That sounds like a grandiose idea, so what's the problem? Canadian voting habits? China is too far away to be competitive? Oil extraction is "controlled" by American corporations?

No....America is the problem. What do YOU think would happen if we quit selling oil to the US and started selling it to China. For one, we can't because of NAFTA, we are bound to the US. Second the US would come up with ever tarrif and trade sanction available in order to "persuade" us to perhaps change our way of thinking. Then if none of that worked......bombs away, they would not think twice of taking us over in order for them to fulfill their quest for oil and world dominance, because the two come hand in hand.

Don't worry....China wants our oil....distance is not a concern. They already have a pipeline route picked out to the pacific.
 

unclepercy

Electoral Member
Jun 4, 2005
821
15
18
Baja Canada
Have any of you Canadians heard of the recently discovered - and soon to be developed
Barnett Shale? Perhaps we won't be so dependent on others after all.

The Barnett Shale is a geological formation of economic significance. It consists of sedimentary rocks of Mississippian age (354-323 million years ago) in the U.S. State of Texas. The formation is estimated to stretch from the city of Dallas to west of the city of Fort Worth and south, covering 5,000 square miles (13,000 km²) and at least 17 counties.
Some experts have suggested the Barnett Shale may be the largest onshore natural gas field in the United States. [1] The field is proven to have 2.5 trillion cubic feet (59 km³) of natural gas, and is widely estimated to contain as much as 30,000,000,000,000 cubic feet (850,000,000,000 m³) of natural gas resources.[2] Oil also has been found in lesser quantities, but sufficient enough (with recent high oil prices) to be commercially viable.

URL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barnett_Shale

Looks like we are sitting on top of the Mother Lode in my home town. :lol:

Uncle
 

Albertabound

Electoral Member
Sep 2, 2006
555
2
18
Well I sure hope it's true, because other wise you're going to suck us dry.

By the way somebody was curious to why gas is no longer cheaper than electricity to heat....supply and demand. The US demands it and we supply it.......
....no, but really .demand is up due to the US and because of it we in Canada pay a higher price for the supply. So like I said, I sure hope your right about that.
 

Albertabound

Electoral Member
Sep 2, 2006
555
2
18
Do you realize that there are 4 major pipelines leading into the US, however there is not "one" going to the east in our own country....WTF.
 

EagleSmack

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 16, 2005
44,168
96
48
USA
Have any of you Canadians heard of the recently discovered - and soon to be developed
Barnett Shale? Perhaps we won't be so dependent on others after all.

The Barnett Shale is a geological formation of economic significance. It consists of sedimentary rocks of Mississippian age (354-323 million years ago) in the U.S. State of Texas. The formation is estimated to stretch from the city of Dallas to west of the city of Fort Worth and south, covering 5,000 square miles (13,000 km²) and at least 17 counties.
Some experts have suggested the Barnett Shale may be the largest onshore natural gas field in the United States. [1] The field is proven to have 2.5 trillion cubic feet (59 km³) of natural gas, and is widely estimated to contain as much as 30,000,000,000,000 cubic feet (850,000,000,000 m³) of natural gas resources.[2] Oil also has been found in lesser quantities, but sufficient enough (with recent high oil prices) to be commercially viable.

URL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barnett_Shale

Looks like we are sitting on top of the Mother Lode in my home town. :lol:

Uncle

Unplercy...There is also another Motherlode that was found up in the Dakotas that is purported to be the biggest find since they found oil in Saudi Arabia. But I do not hold much faith in the oil companies to flip off OPEC and be independent. What they will do is drill and cap the wells. The oil companies under the current formula are making BILLIONS in profit by buying oil from the Mid East. Why would they change. It is cheaper for them to buy MidEast oil than it is to drill, process, and distribute oil here in the US. Their sole function is to make profit for themselves and investors. What the Mid East does with their cash or how much you and I pay at the pump is irrelevant and not the concern of the big oil companies.
 

EagleSmack

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 16, 2005
44,168
96
48
USA
Eaglesmack, how about just glancing at Mhz article ....the reason you had to scroll so long is for no other reason other than that is just how much the US has interfere with the worlds business.......these are facts, unlike the crap in the article you provided.

The crap in my article? How can you call my article crap! How dare you! I didn't even post an article. :lol:

Well when it says the US killed 300K in Yugoslavia during the NATO thing...when it says the US killed 1 Million in Rwanda during the genocide when we weren't even there (but we both know who was don't we? ;-)) you now know why it was so long. Because it is FULL of lies and made up stuff to make a LOOOOOOOONG list and blame us for EVERYTHING that has gone wrong in the world.
 

MikeyDB

House Member
Jun 9, 2006
4,612
63
48
Eaglesmack

As much as I think it would be a wonderful turn of events to end North American depencency on imported oil, I'm concerned that if these deposits are fiscally "profitable" that although our dependency has changed our attitude toward energy use and consumption doesn't.

"All that is gold does not glitter"....