I Am Not Un-American, Just Tired

[Curiosity]

Friends should do alot more than say yes, they should say no when they think it is appropriate to do so.

Ithinknot - excellent and wise - and yes friends should be the advisor when they see a friend going astray.

But the anger accompanying this wave of sentiment towards the U.S., isn't doing Canadians any good. That is what I am trying to impart. It makes us seem as if we are standing behind the door pointing fingers instead of offering sage advice tempered with care and concern. It has become a bully-ism which I find strange
among Canadians who are for the most part accepting of all peoples in our world, unless they are physically attacking us.

Ideologically, the U.S. has not attacked Canada, but has partnered in many trade endeavours, has been a good neighbor for the most part, and has remained a peaceful neighbor and supporter in many
of our global efforts. We have also worked in uncountable ways as common causes and missions suit both the nations together in matters of defence, energy exploration and sharing of advances in medicine and industry.

So, if the man Bush - is not up to Canadian politic standards whatever that fleeting image is - we can't just damn him for his jug-ears and snotty ways can we? How internationally diplomatic is that? It reduces us to childish, non-productive thought.

Nobody has to like the guy - only ensure Canada remains is good, comfortable stead regarding its trade and economic arrangements.
In a protective mode if you will, certainly not the aggressive stuff we write here.

If it stays here good and well, but the press love it and the U.S. people are retaliating in kind. Our enemies like it even better.
We have existed for over 200 years in relative peace and trade and I think we owe our forefathers who saw to it peace reigned after our initial split into two countries, to try and maintain that peace.

Think of the border wars in Europe for instance - a history we are more aware of than others in our studies. We have far surpassed all their little kingdom takeovers, their revolutions, their massacres, and infighting.... and have emerged two great, strong nations because of it.

If the U.S. is making a mistake, it will do no good to continuously remind them of it. The people already know it. They might need
some reassurance that Canadians are behind their country, even when the make huge mistakes. We may not like it but we stand as friends through it.

In the long term of events to come, I think it would be a more advantageous choice for Canada to make.

 

[I think not]

Americans have recently become much more aware of the Northern neighbor, and I'll just leave it at that.

 

[gopher]

proof of pre-war Amerian subversive terrorism in Iraq:


Before the War, CIA Reportedly Trained a Team of Iraqis to Aid U.S.

By Dana Priest and Josh White
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, August 3, 2005; Page A12

Before the war in Iraq began, the CIA recruited and trained an Iraqi paramilitary group, code-named the Scorpions, to foment rebellion, conduct sabotage, and help CIA paramilitaries who entered Baghdad and other cities target buildings and individuals, according to three current and former intelligence officials with knowledge of the unit.

The CIA spent millions of dollars on the Scorpions, whose existence has not been previously disclosed, even giving them former Soviet Hind helicopters. But most of the unit's prewar missions -- spray-painting graffiti on walls; cutting electricity; "sowing confusion," as one said -- were delayed or canceled because of poor training or planning, said officials briefed on the unit. The speed of the invasion negated the need for most of their missions, others said.

After Baghdad fell, the CIA used the Scorpions to try to infiltrate the insurgency, to help out in interrogations, and, from time to time, to do "the dirty work," as one intelligence official put it.

In one case, members of the unit, wearing masks and carrying clubs and pipes, beat up an Iraqi general in the presence of CIA and military personnel, according to investigative documents reviewed by The Washington Post and according to several defense and intelligence officials.

Post inquiries about the case prompted the CIA to brief the House and Senate intelligence committees on the unit, said several members of Congress and two defense officials.

Rep. Peter Hoekstra (R-Mich.), chairman of the House intelligence committee, asked if he was satisfied with the information he received on the unit, said, "Yes -- if it existed." But he added: "We're not spending a lot of time going back and dissecting tactical programs."

CIA spokeswoman Jennifer Millerwise declined to comment on the unit. Defense Department spokesmen referred comments on the unit to the CIA. All former and current government officials interviewed spoke on the condition of anonymity, citing the classified nature of the Scorpions.

Authorized by a presidential finding signed by President Bush in February or March 2002, the Scorpions were part of a policy of "regime change" in Iraq. The covert members, many of whom were exiles recruited by the Kurds, were trained in target identification, explosives and small arms at two secret bases in Jordan, according to one U.S. government official.

They were sent surreptitiously into Iraq before the war and were in cities such as Baghdad, Fallujah and Qaim to give the impression that a rebellion was underway and to conduct light sabotage, according to the two defense sources and the three former and current intelligence officials.

"They painted X's [for targeting] on buildings and things like that," said one former intelligence officer.

After the initial combat phase of the war, the CIA used the paramilitary units as translators and to fetch supplies and retrieve informants in an increasingly dangerous Iraq where CIA officers largely stayed within the protected Green Zone, according to the officials.

CIA control over the unit became weaker as chaos grew in Iraq. "Even though they were set up by us, they weren't well supervised," said an intelligence official.

"At some point, and it's not really clear how this happened, they started being used in interrogations . . . because they spoke the local dialect" and were caught roughing up detainees, Curtis E. Ryan, an Army investigator, told a military court in Colorado where four soldiers are charged in connection with the death of Maj. Gen. Abed Mowhoush in 2003.

Many of the paramilitaries did not speak English. When they entered Iraq after the invasion, because they wore civilian clothes and traveled in civilian vehicles, the Scorpion teams were often mistaken for insurgents. On a couple of occasions, U.S. soldiers unknowingly tracked the teams as insurgents and focused on their official safe houses as possible targets until they were discovered to be working with U.S. officials.

 

[mrmom2]

 

[moghrabi]

RE: I Am Not Un-American,

Mrmom. Your avatar is awesome.

 

[mrmom2]

Thanks Mog I've got a bunch of new pics i'm going to send you

 

[moghrabi]

RE: I Am Not Un-American,

Great thanks my friend.

 

[bulldog]

Bulldog, I love your avatar but I think you look better in the one down here when you click it.

http://img77.imageshack.us/img77/3982/av820ux.gif

So you prefer trashy white girls? If you can pretend to be a soap opera star, I can pretend to be a skeptical black man. In fact, I am neither.

Bull Dog

 

[moghrabi]

Bulldog, I love your avatar but I think you look better in the one down here when you click it.

http://img77.imageshack.us/img77/3982/av820ux.gif

So you prefer trashy white girls? If you can pretend to be a soap opera star, I can pretend to be a skeptical black man. In fact, I am neither.

Bull Dog

You may not be a man or a skeptical opera star, but I still think you are a piece of trash.

 

[bulldog]

Bulldog, I love your avatar but I think you look better in the one down here when you click it.

http://img77.imageshack.us/img77/3982/av820ux.gif

So you prefer trashy white girls? If you can pretend to be a soap opera star, I can pretend to be a skeptical black man. In fact, I am neither.

Bull Dog

You may not be a man or a skeptical opera star, but I still think you are a piece of trash.

What a rude thing to say. In fact, cruel. You should be banned.

Bull Dog

 

[moghrabi]

RE: I Am Not Un-American,

You insulted me enough on this board. Taste some of your own poison.

 

[mrmom2]

:lol: :lol: :lol:
Hey look I found a younger pic of the Bulldog

 

[moghrabi]

RE: I Am Not Un-American,

Are you talking about the picture or the pig on your avatar???

 

[mrmom2]

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[peapod]

Now come on boys thats not nice.... just coz you two look good at closing time, I will be cutting the beer off if this continues :? :? :? got any radical riz's rollin papers??

 

[moghrabi]

RE: I Am Not Un-American,

Hi Pea. Long time no talk. I am just having fun with mrmom. No harm intended. I just hate that BULLOG

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: I Am Not Un-American,

Anyway...back to the topic at hand. The supposition that Canadians shouldn't be angry at the Bush administration is silly. The entire world is angry at Bush for what he's done.

This isn't the first time that there have been rough spots between the US and Canada. There always have been, including when another idiot Texan was in the White House. The difference this time is that Bush and his oily little buddies have no idea how to be diplomatic and lack the ability to comprehend that Canada is a sovereign nation. To suggest that

As people of logic, fair play, reliability and honesty - this unfocused anger doesn't seem to fit in with the Canadian psyche,

is to suggest that we should just quietly accept what the US does...to be a quiet little satellite state that had better shut up or else. Canada has little history of doing that.

We also have the negative influence of the Official Opposition in Canada being comprised of a gang of anti-Canadian buffoons and a government full of senior members with a serious tendency towards toadyism. That causes the Canadian people to be more vocal because our alleged leaders do not seem to be representing us very well.

The trade argument is a strawman. The US holds most of the cards in our trade relationship because of the size of its economy. We hold all the high cards though. Oil, natural gas, electricity, and the raw materials that industry relies on. Without us, there is no US economy. Without us, it is doubtful they can even feed themselves.

So suggesting that we shut up and be good little robots while our leaders kneel in front of George Bush is a ridiculous proposition. We are threatened by US policy and have a not only a right, but a duty to speak out against those policies.

 

[mrmom2]

 

[I think not]

Re: RE: I Am Not Un-American,

We hold all the high cards though. Oil, natural gas, electricity, and the raw materials that industry relies on. Without us, there is no US economy. Without us, it is doubtful they can even feed themselves.

How about a link that provides economic data to backup your claim that you actually "feed" us. And try and find a link that claims more than 3% of oil etc....comes from Canada.

 

[Curiosity]

Reverend Blair

I wrote:
As people of logic, fair play, reliability and honesty - this unfocused anger doesn't seem to fit in with the Canadian psyche...

You responded:
......is to suggest that we should just quietly accept what the US does...to be a quiet little satellite state that had better shut up or else. Canada has little history of doing that.

Reverend: You are putting meaning into my words which does not exist. Canada and its people are well known for their considered opinions, their lack of knee-jerk reactions, and fair play.

To equate that in our world of "shoot now worry later", I would offer that reputation I have described as a worthy one to uphold, rather than the passive little toy you describe.

You cannot believe Canada is a pawn of the U.S. - because it isn't true. I think you are way off base with that comment.

My criticism is the 'unfocused anger' some Canadians are displaying towards inaccuracies being placed on the backs of the U.S. and (1) I suggest you take a long hard look at wherever you find this unfortunate information you publish; and, (2) you stop playing victim - which in turn will make anyone - even a responsible person such as yourself angry.

I have read your opinions (or others' you have replicated) on two issues now and you are flying off in several directions predicting dire and improbable outcomes for things which simply are not accurate. Why you choose to play Hysterical Auntie a la Parrish is beyond me when you are so obviously well thought out.

Canada has her own issues on an equal footing with the U.S. and should exert her energies towards productive cohabitation regardless of what the U.S. is doing internationally.

We can speak up our objections through diplomatic channels, but to keep nitpicking demeans the Canadian people and their reputation of advisors to nations in trouble. Which according to all of your posts - is where the U.S. has landed - in trouble.