For anyone who doubted

For anyone who doubted the fundamentalist nature of Stephen Harper's character and what his true intentions are this should be fair warning.

The man is a bigot, an elitist and he is dangerous.

Be warned.

Not just Harper

Let's remember that ALL political parties expressed indignation over this issue, not just Harper.
I can see Harper going along with this.
It panders to racist Quebec, as well as having support from the average Joe across the country.
I would have preferred that this matter was handled better.
Maybe the mail in vote is a better way for those that want to hide their face to exercise their franchise.

Bigotry should always be fought, wherever it arises.

Inserted by delusional commenter.

I am dangerous

Am I dangerous, just because [OFFENSIVE COMMENT REMOVED HERE...] West thinks so.
Pardon me, but I don't ever remember the liberal left offering anything but fear tactics, and disrespect ( Pee Wee ???? )
Harper is hardly a pee wee.
Maybe a giant killer, but not a pee wee.
Just because something is said over and over again, doesn't make me change my opinion.
And isn't it great that my opinion can be posted at this site.
An opinion that recognizes the difference between The Holocaust and Abu Grabe.
That can see that the Gulags, are not quite the same as Guantanamo Bay.
That can see it's impossible for a copy of a book like the Koran to be flushed down a toilet. It's physically impossible.
I am glowing with confidence, that sees the very weak rhetoric, coming from the left against my PM.
My PM will eat you for lunch.
Liberals are defective in their thinking.
[...AND HERE...] West is a perfect example of those that find it impossible to determine the differences between actions that actually resulted in killing millions of Jews compared to a few terrorists having to place a pair of woman's underwear over their heads.
The difference between the Gulags of the Soviet Union compared to Guantanamo Bay.
Go to your toilet now [...AND HERE...] West, and try to flush the Bible down the toilet.
Go to scientists and ask them if the ice of the Antarctic is increasing.
Tell me some truth [...AND HERE...] West.
[...AND HERE.]
You are such a stationary target.

Opinion

Dear IAMC: The things you continually express are not opinions.

Opinions are reasoned things, based on argument and reason. Your views are more properly called beliefs. They are somebody else's party line, pre-manufactured and fed to you in blocks. So you'll know what to think in any given discussion.

I have to object when you defend the humiliation of prisoners, calling them terrorists as if that justified misbehaviour, when court cases are springing up suggesting that as many inmates of Guantanamo are innocent of any crime as any other American prison.

Please note that these cases are beginning despite draconian efforts to keep the goings on there, and in other secret dungeons completely out of the public knowledge.

Your PM will eat her for lunch? The sentence doesn't surprize me. Your PM's so-called conservative agenda seems to me as well to be quite cannibalistic.

Perhaps, Ron, you should learn to read French

So you might understand the idea of calling Stephen Harper Pee Wee Rambo didn't start with me. The inspiration came from a column in Le Devoir written by Jean-Robert Sansfaçon published mercredi 15 mars 2006:

I'll post the first paragraph, just for you.

It's quite good:

Quel courage! Quelle leçon de leadership! Enfin un premier ministre qui dit haut et fort que le Canada doit s'impliquer davantage militairement pour défendre le monde libre menacé par l'ennemi terroriste! Stephen Harper est revenu du front afghan gonflé de cette fierté qui caractérise les vrais combattants de la démocratie. «Avant d'être affranchi du régime des talibans, l'Afghanistan a souvent servi d'incubateur pour al-Qaïda et d'autres organisations terroristes. Cette réalité nous a touchés de façon tragique le 11 septembre 2001 lorsque deux douzaines de Canadiens ont perdu la vie soudainement et gratuitement dans la destruction du World Trade Center», a rappelé M. Harper. Enfin, nous avons notre petit Rambo tout rosé, un brin rondouillard, pour nous seuls...

Please, let me know if you'd like to read the rest of it.

G WEST, HOW ABOUT THE REST OF THAT STORY

Which courage! Which lesson of leadership! At last a Prime Minister that says high and strong that Canada must imply itself more militarily to defend the free world threatened by the terrorist enemy! Stephen Harper returned from the Afghani forehead inflated of this pride that characterizes the true fighters of the democracy. "Before being freed system of the Talibans, the Afghanistan often used incubator for Al-qaeda and of other terrorist organizations. This reality touched us in a manner tragic September 11 2001 when two dozens of Canadians died suddenly and free in the destruction of the World Trade Center", recalled Mr. Harper. At last, we have our small Rambo all pinkish, a pudgy wisp, for us only...

Love too, woody:

Here's the whole column - your translation is a little rough and doesn't quite capture the satirical impact of the French.

Pee-wee Rambo
Jean-Robert Sansfaçon
Le Devoir mercredi 15 mars 2006

Quel courage! Quelle leçon de leadership! Enfin un premier ministre qui dit haut et fort que le Canada doit s'impliquer davantage militairement pour défendre le monde libre menacé par l'ennemi terroriste! Stephen Harper est revenu du front afghan gonflé de cette fierté qui caractérise les vrais combattants de la démocratie. «Avant d'être affranchi du régime des talibans, l'Afghanistan a souvent servi d'incubateur pour al-Qaïda et d'autres organisations terroristes. Cette réalité nous a touchés de façon tragique le 11 septembre 2001 lorsque deux douzaines de Canadiens ont perdu la vie soudainement et gratuitement dans la destruction du World Trade Center», a rappelé M. Harper. Enfin, nous avons notre petit Rambo tout rosé, un brin rondouillard, pour nous seuls...

Fallait les voir, nos valeureux journalistes de guerre radiocanadiens, bomber le torse fièrement au côté de notre chef suprême des armées. Une belle grosse équipe déléguée par la société d'État pour accompagner le premier ministre au front et rendre compte à la Nation des dangers qu'il y a à se balader la nuit, dans le bruit infernal des hélicoptères fournis par l'armée américaine et le plus grand secret militaire, entre Kandahar et Kaboul. Quelle leçon d'information formidable en terrain miné par la propagande. CNN n'aurait pas fait mieux !

(balance to follow)

conclusion

Et cette répétition infinie d'éditoriaux dithyrambiques dans la presse canadienne depuis deux jours pour tenter de nous convaincre que le temps était vraiment venu pour le Canada de cesser de faire les choses à moitié pour enfin assumer ce rôle de «leader», selon le terme du premier ministre, que le monde libre attend de nous. Il y a tout juste trois semaines, les mêmes commentateurs nous expliquaient qu'il ne fallait surtout pas publier des dessins du prophète Mahomet pour ne pas jeter d'huile sur le feu islamiste et mettre ainsi en danger la vie de nos soldats en Afghanistan. Mais aujourd'hui, rien n'est trop risqué pour défendre la liberté !

Qu'on nous comprenne bien : le Canada se devait et se doit toujours de participer à la force multinationale qui essaie, tant bien que mal, de contenir les talibans et de reconstruire l'Afghanistan. En ce sens, Stephen Harper fait bien d'encourager ses soldats et de leur fournir l'équipement nécessaire pour accomplir leur mission. Ce qui agace, c'est cette mise en scène de propagande militaire à laquelle les grands médias du pays, dont la télévision d'État, se prêtent si gentiment, tout sens critique éteint, pour mousser la version conservatrice du rôle du Canada dans le monde de George W. Bush. Le Canada doit contribuer au maintien de la paix dans le monde, parfois même au prix d'actions offensives stratégiques, mais faut-il pour autant adhérer au virage militariste que les conservateurs et leur chef ont décidé de nous imposer sans autre débat ?

M. Harper a promis d'enrôler 13 000 soldats permanents et 10 000 réservistes de plus, puis d'accroître les dépenses d'équipement militaire de 5,3 milliards de dollars en cinq ans. Voilà des promesses qui plaisent aux défenseurs d'une présence militaire canadienne plus musclée aux côtés des États-Unis, mais qu'en pense la majorité des Canadiens et des Québécois ?

THERE IS ONLY WAY TO DISCRIBE THIS STORY.

G WEST, there is only one way to describe this story. It replicates the Seinfeld show, in that, it says, and is, about nothing, at the very least, nothing worth repeating. I guess they required some copy that particular day, so they filled that column with this fluff.

As I said, woody, your translation skills

Are somewhat lacking.

What did you use, babelfish?

Try taking something written in English - use a program translation to render it into French and then transpose the same transliterated text back into English using a different translation program. You’ll get the picture.

Unless you actually understand the language, you simply can't hope to appreciate subtleties and nuance - especially in an opinion piece like that which has absolutely nothing in common with Seinfeld.

The image of a nicely scrubbed, pink-fleshed and a little overweight ‘pee wee’ Rambo hob-knobbing with our soldiers in Afghanistan as he claims that ‘Canada’ was attacked by terrorists on 9/11 is really quite priceless…but I guess you need to speak French to really appreciate it. Too bad really.

He can speak Spanish too.

I can't speak or read french, sorry.
But our PM is fluent in three languages.
In fact he made an important speech in Spanish.
I here he is able to speak in French, so understandable in Quebec, he is able to be a great communicator to the racist Quebecois Nation.
He knows how to say " vote for me " in three different languages.
What's next? Cantonese?
I guess the liberal Canadian left has an answer for this juggernaut ?
Let's here about it.

Racist Quebecois nation?

If that's the case, pee wee should feel right at home with his new rules about women voting while veiled.

I understand there are maybe 22 women in all of Canada who actually 'wear' the burqa - pretty major concern isn't it? Personally, I think every sensible woman in the country should wear one the next time they go to the polling stations - just to make concrete how ridiculous this is.

It seems pretty obvious this is a pander to pee wee's fundie roots doesn't it?

BTW what is the 'liberal Canadian left' anyway Ron?

Harper is not alone

Just for clarity, as I I posted above, this is a non partisan issue, apparently.
Did not all political parties condemn the actions of the head of Elections Canada?
Who determined that those who want to hide their faces, do not need to expose themselves?
I do know that the Liberal, NdDP and Bloc were also against this poor official, who pointed out that we still have a mail ballot.
Are we to discontinue the mail ballot?
This attempt to blame only the CPC for this racist policy, will become painfully exposed once they all vote in Parliament.

interesting times

Just a thought G West, won't it be interesting, when someone walks into the police or Canadian forces recruiting office, wanting to sign up, while wearing a veil, mean while, standing right behind him or her, is a person with a turban on, also waiting to sign up.

No Ron it is not a non-partisan issue

It's a human rights issue - and anyone who says it isn't has NO credibility.

Oh I think pee wee would let them both sign up - no problem woody - but it certainly would underline what this whole thing is REALLY all about.

Better off Pink than Yellow.

G West, regarding this reference that was made about Harper. I know only to well, about that French (Quebec) language flavor, your alluding to. True I used a translation search engine, not to achieve the flavor or aroma, but to get the nuts and bolts of the article. Which I did, in short, its simply, a Harper put down. Fine ,good enough, but repeat the same thing in English, and the average person would simply say ,huh. The following is the gist of that story.(The image of a nicely scrubbed, pink-fleshed and a little overweight ‘pee wee’ Rambo hob-nobbling with our soldiers in Afghanistan)
You will have to agree with me when I say, better off to be remembered as being Pink, Rather than remembered being Yellow, as is the situation with, the three leaders of the opposition.

Well now woody

Would you care to clarify what exactly you mean by that remark?

As to your appreciation of the Gallic wit and charm in that piece about pee wee - hey, each to his or her own - I thought it was a wonderful bit of descriptive and slightly subversive prose in 'either' of Canada's 'official' languages. It was also aptly funny.

I'd like to know what, if anything, Harper's few hours at a base in Kandahar actually meant about his 'character'- other than that he was trying - much like Don Cherry does on Hockey Night in Canada with his constant references to the Canadian Forces - to gain some status by facile association.

The proposition that he was in any danger there is so absurd as to be laughable; consequently, the fact that other political leaders have not succumbed to the temptation to engage in the same kind of phony posturing probably inures to their credit. Why, otherwise, would the piece about Harper as 'pee wee Rambo' have been written? The writer was saying, and I totally agree with him, that our Prime Minister is a phony.

And no more phony than when he pretends that there is any need for the changes to the Election Act discussed in this piece of Tyee journalism.

This, just like his approach to 'law 'n order' is a base appeal to irrationality, prejudice and fear.

If anyone ought to be ashamed of a performance, it is the current Prime Minister.

All, as always, in my view.

G West your question, Would

G West your question,
Would you care to clarify what exactly you mean by that remark?
My answer, what is there to clarify? what do you not under stand?
PS, I even made this simple for you.

You were calling people cowards - correct?

Normally when someone says something like that I give them a chance to clarify.

You apparently don't want it so let's let it stand for the ridiculous sentiment it actually expressed.

I understand you perfectly.

Bigot

": a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance"

How does a legitimate security issue become bigotry?

When:

a) it isn't a legitimate security issue, and,
b) when it is directed exclusively at an identifiable group, and
c) when it discriminates against members of that group on the basis of their religious and/or cultural attributes, none of which,
d) impinge in any significant or reasonable way upon the rights of others.

LIKE IT IS IN THIS CASE.

G West no requirement

G West, there's no requirement for me to elaborate on my comment, you know perfectly well what I'm saying.

Huh?

How does veil get turned into scarf?

You don't like being wrong, do you?

When I'm not wrong

No I don't.

Veil schmail - you know exactly what I mean.

DO you enjoy being obtuse.

Dead horse.

Well if you're not wrong this time you'll be flogging a dead horse pretty quick with regards to this issue.

Oh, seems you're the one that's obtuse. Once again you have to clarify your remark. There is a big difference between a veil and a scarf, then again maybe not in your mind.

Nope

Frank is obviously right - there's no point talking to a snert.
Bye.