If terrs get caught, they are hapless; if they succeed, they are bloodthirsty.

Terrorism has existed since the world began, usually for religious and ideological reasons. Over the past century, or so, we had the anarchists, the communists, the nazis, the Jews, the PLO, the IRA, the Sikhs, etc. etc. committing terror acts, sky and ship jackings, bombings, shootings.

When we were living in England the IRA were blowing things up, but there was no mass hysteria against the Irish, pumped up by the governments, or against Sikhs for the Air India bombing.

Some years ago we had fundamentalist Christian militias, with Chinese automatic rifles, forming around here, waiting for the call by the Leader, to "kill all Indians, socialists and fags". "Give us a platoon with machineguns and we'll settle the native landclaims pretty damn fast!" They even wrote threatening letters to the papers. The Oklahoma City bombing, by the same mindset, has pushed them underground and we've never heard of them again.

Right now, here in Central BC, we have daily overflights by the worst terrorists, wearing officers' uniforms, practicing to kill possibly millions with H bombs.

Terrorists, like the military, are not acting by their own free will, they are always the brainwashed faithful, out of their minds, controlled by religious and economic priesthoods.

Both religious and economic brainwashing is now going on in our world at an unprecedented scale, to justify energy control through violence, on behalf of would be, or existing ruling sectors. Some are thumping Bibles, others Korans and others economic textbooks, selling globalization, enforced with violence. This is well documented.

Hitler, Stalin, Mao, the Jonestown mass suicides and the graduates of our university economics departments, were and excellent examples of the power of brainwash. Now we have religions on one side and globalized market economy on the other, trying to persuade people, with good success, that they're holding the key to the secret of prosperity and everlasting life after.

What is remarkable in this present case are the details leaked and passed on to the media for mass distribution, obviously, to create exactly the same brainmwash that may have persuaded these unfortunate fools into their actions.

It is quite common in Europe for the police to give out details of confessions, or of alleged crimes to the media, but here in Canada, and generally in countries under British commoin law, the police and authorities are usually very secretive about the charges, to ensure fair trial.

So, why are then the authorities now so open about the charges against these arrested, if not for ideological propaganda reasons, to justify sending more soldiers to Afghanistan , or wherever the Lords of the Universe decide to attack nextt "To protect our freedoms and to spread democracy". Some may even believe this crap.

Attacking and occupying on the orders of the Lord, of course, as in the case of Iraq.

Ed Deak.

nightbloom

I'd suggest, if you actually think about it, that the distinction is extremely important. You may not be aware of some other changes that have been made to the legal framework within which police forces are now permitted to work in this country. Whether or not this will turn out to be a case in which entrapment is a factor remains to be seen.

Sadly, no time for more.

Nightbloom wrote: "We haven't experienced a successful large-scale terror plot yet."

What the fuk would you call the Air India bombing then? Did Canada react with fear, anger and revenge? Did we start demonizing all Sikhs, or start bombing India?

A balanced and good piece. I also applaud Herr Harper on his restraint. I do, however, believe that his response would have been much different if he had a majority.

The "plot" seems to have been ameturish in the extreme, more like a bunch of naughty kids telling dirty jokes. The arrests will have the effect that such shenagians will not be tolerated in any way.

Similar warnings went down in my home town of Duncan BC after the Air India bombings and the attack of a Indian cabinet ministers. One ring leader was a school teacher. A tax audit found him embezzling temple funds. He was convicted and lost his teacher's licence. All very subtle and very effective.

So now we Canadians are being sent on "search and destroy" missions.
This was NEVER our role before.
SHAME.
SHAME on the neo-con, bush lackey harper and his goose-stepping cronies.
I said before and I'll say it again.
F U harper.

The article makes several claims about the differences between Canada and the United States. I question those claims because I suspect they are riddled with generous helpings of wishful thinking. I certainly wish it were true -- the part about Canadians having better-integrated communities.

At the very least, some evidence would be nice.

Amen to that!

Canadians should bear in mind that this recent wave of arrests is not the first. Two years ago, as many as 26 Muslim men were arrested in Toronto in a sweep called “Project Thread” that received widespread international attention and that, according to at least one government official, had uncovered “an Al-Qaeda sleeper cell” in Canada. This statement was proved to be false, not one of the men was ever formally charged (or convicted) of committing a crime, and most were deported from Canada. No effort was made to clear their names or restore their reputations.

http://www.rabble.ca/news_full_story.shtml?sh_itm=efc9b361d4f0158dab14b7c1f3576c05&rXn=1&

I remember how all those "communist cells" in the US during the Cold War were shown to be mostly made up of FBI personel.

Stephen Vikash Chand, aka Abdul Chakur,
has been shown to have been a member of the Canadian military.

http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2006/06/07/wednesday-suspects.html

Rocco Galati complained yesterday about the publication ban imposed after the media have ramped up the allegations leaving the defense with no opportunity to refute the charges.

From the evidence it is starting to appear that Chand was the kingpin for a government entrapment program that sought to manufacture a terrorist alert by creating a de facto terrorist cell.

prisonplanet.com/articles/june2006/080606militaryconnections.htm

Somehow the quotes got mixed with my own comments, but you get the idea...it's another intelligence agency scam!

Well said, Fiat Lux.

Now: how to get more of that sort of message into more of our neighborhoods?

Nana's quote revives the 1950s when there were supposed to be communists in every pumpkin patch. It should remind us of another plot which should've invoked howls of outrage except that I doubt if many people knew.

W.A.C. Bennett had just won his first, shakey election with his rag-tag bunch of bulldozer operators and used car salesmen. (No offence to honest workers.) He had a very faint hold on the public imagination.

That's when a splendid plan for "Civil Defense" was hatched. Upright citizens either built air-raid shelters in their back yards, or stepped forward to undergo training in ... ahem ... Civil Defense. All fake ... except the Socred part.

These training sessions took place once a week, in ordinary homes, all over B.C. Only the patriotic citizens didn't learn about Civil Defence. Oh, no ...

Years later, from a relative (who I knew, had trained for Civil Defense) let it slip that she had voted Socred in a B.C. election. Astonished, I asked: "It's not that you don't have every right to vote as you please ... but how did you take up with the Socreds?"

The reply: "It was during the Civil Defense sessions ... we studied Social Credit." Very effective those Social Credit lessons must have been, too, as this rel is still a dedicated rightwinger. For me, it solved the mystery of how B.C. Social Credit governments kept gedtting re-elected yet rarely did anybody admit to voting Socred. An official secret, no doubt.

The appalling audacity astonishes me even today ... a government cover story ... and a government-sponsored program ... based on false information (U.S.S.R. never threatened us) ... operating safely in a convenient environment of U.S.-inspired fear ... and a population (which knew nothing of Social Credit) needing to be captured. Talk about the perfect plot.

It could be the template for the one unfolding around us again today. But I often wonder what would have happened if the N.D.P. had hatched such a plot ... !!

Once again, I reply to Mr. Dobbin’s musings. Murray has written at length about the sturdiness of Canadian society. Yes, the plot failed and no one was hurt. The media was careful and reserved. The Canadian public has seen the consequences of hysteria after 9/11 and the London bombings.

Let me add one perspective. Canadians are culturally more diverse and tolerant. In the States, the melting pot has limited respect for ethnicity. These days, it’s dangerous to challenge the American mainstream (Sieg Heil!).

Moreover, few Canadians believe in the Big Lie. This is the current version of the White Man’s burden, which had been the moral foundation for colonialism. However, the megalomania of Americans have been stroked by the media and their politicians. Americans believe that there is a clash of civilization between western freedom (i.e. American virtue) and oriental oppression.

The problem is that the Canadian establishment believes in the Big Lie. It is not a coincidence that the establishment is essentially, white, male and business-minded. For example, Bill Graham believes that Canada should stay in Afghanistan until the mission is achieved. Scott Brison, a gay trying to gain acceptance from the establishment, shares this view.

The NDP’s Jack Layton opposes the establishment and the Afghan War. It is not a coincidence that the NDP is resurgent while the Liberal Party is in decline. I hope that my short note adds something to the discussion.

Indeed, outstanding Fait.

There certainly is something happening here, but what it is just isn't exactly clear. Though our suspicions should be rightfully aroused

Actually, I think, an overall good article Murray.

But there goes nightbloom again, plugging himself immediately into the hysteria of the neoconservative crazies.

And which is not to say, that we may not yet really experience the dropping of the other shoe to our foolish "puppet" intervention into Afghanistan. Indeed, we may bloody well.

These kids though... manipulated as they were by CSIS and the RCMP?

I'll wait until all the evidence is out. I trust neither of these two "security" institutions enough, or their being free of CIA influence and control, to leap on board with their claims at this early stage. (I still have the raid of British Security Forces on that "bomb factory" home in a Muslim neighbourhood recently, killing one, only to discover zip, zero, nada after the fact. Now they say, oops, "Mistake." As well, that hapless Brazilian immigrant to Britain electrician, who was mistaken for an "Arab terrorist" and immediately thrown to the ground trying to catch the underground, and had his head immediately blown off. Ooops! Amother mistake. And on and on it goes.)

I'll await the actual evidence, thank you very much.

US power and its puppets are clearly working to create an atmosphere of hysteria to justify their fascist violations of democractic principles.

Jimtan,

Indeed your observations do add something to the conversation, brother.

Does this distinction really matter to anyone but the lawyers and anti-establishment ideologues?

And why the laboured & self-conscious attempt to portray the plotters as "hapless"...?

There's something just a little too self-satisfied about the notion of Canadianism that is peddled in this article. We haven't experienced a successful large-scale terror plot yet - that is the defining difference between the Canadian & U.S. domestic temper right now.

Don't kid yourself.

Don't kid yourself... obviously it matters. We've arrested people who have yet to commit a crime, they've only really thought about it. If people could be arrested for bad thoughts the majority of us would be in jail.

Thus its important to show how much intent there was to follow through on their thoughts. So its important to know if these suspects were being led through hoops by CSIS or on their own. It's not a black and white matter, obviously, and the degree of dedication and sophistication of this group will go a long way toward shaping future policy and actions. If they were serious and sophisticated terrorists who almost got away with their plans is one thing - Canada would have to rethink our policies and vulnerabilities. If they were amateurs and disgruntled liked to talk big but not act then the threat is significantly lower.

In sum, I found this article well written and interesting.

Dobbin as usual weaves his narrative with some truths, some half truths, and some outright questionable prose.

I think the American mosaic is much more nationalistic than Canada. Kids are continuously bombarded with the 'American Way' as part of their education. Rote teaching of the wonder of the Tri cameral governmental system, commercialism, the Stars and Strips, and numerous other side bars, including the glorification of their armed forces. I think too, that Americans are far more endeared to religion both Jewish and Christian, with a good number of religious clubs, focussing on profit rather than the staid following of the Anglican or Catholic methods. I think also that the American community, for the most part, is more dedicated and participatory, than equvalent Canadian ciommunities. American sports is much more a focal point in schools, colleges and universities, community involvement and indeed corporate involvement is I think much stronger.

Canada is clearly much much more socialistic than the United States and this may or may not be a good thing. Helping out others in Canada seems to be reserved to governments, or NGOs supported by governments. The sense of individualism in Canada is dying out because of the general feeling of the 'government will always' take care of you. Unionism, too, has made its mark in Canada that retards individual incentives.

Canada does have without question a more laid back society. But this is changing, rapidly. Multicultural is creating pockets of 'little' India's, China's, Africa's etc., instead of activiely promoting integration into Canada and absorbing the so called 'Canadian Way'.

The issue of terrorism is ever present, has been for decades. The 17 who were recently accused of terrorism face a serious interrogation, and they should. But it does not just stop at terrorism. We see advancing gang warfare; the bikers, the competition between asian gangs, first nation unrest.

The matter in the middle east, in Afghanistan, and that of Bosian, and other far off nations in general are justified. The difficulty is that 'peace keeping' is really no longer a valid process. Peace making is the new reality. These issues have been sanctioned by the United Nations and thus Canada should be involved. Conflict is never nice, but unfortunately is the nature of the human specie.

Coyote,

Thank you.

The arrest of 17 suspected terrorists has absolutely NOTHING to do with the state of Canadian democracy.

This story is not about us. This is a story about them.

This is not a matter of self-loathing and navel gazing. This is a matter of people propogating violence - the most henious of crimes - because of HATE.

This is not a question of what's wrong with us...at all. Mr Dobbin completely misses the point. The fact that he suggests that individualism might fuel this behaviour is exactly WHY they hate us.

In short, whether you believe it or not, the arguments of Mr. Dobbin is part of the problem, not the solution.

Hey Fiat:

Likening economists to Hitler and Stalin insults your own obvious intelligence - you're smarter than that.

I understand if you don't understand economics. If you want to suggest something better than capitalism, please do.

doesn't sound totally inappropriate to many neoconman.

Is there really much difference between the unmediated discipline of the market and the discipline of fascist dictators?

Well I have had the opportunity to sit in local mosques and I can tell you the Imans were not preaching tolerance and love thy neighbour. While the majority of Muslims I know and meet just want to be able to live a peaceful life, there is a element amongst them that intend to carry out a Jihad against the decadent West. Ignoring them will backfire on us, go after every Muslim will do also.
One of the saving graces for us so far is the lack of a single strong community in the Canadian Islamic circles, it is actually a very diverse group, ranging from all over the world and having very different views on how things are taught, practiced and traditions. We need to pay attention to subtle details and not allow ourselves to listen to only a select few voices from that group.
To understand the threat of fundamentalist Islam you need to know how it spreads. In general groups like the Whabbi’s which are well funded set up or take over mosques and schools providing much needed funding for the community, but there is a catch, the mosques and schools must teach the Whabbi’s radical viewpoint. The fundamentalists have adopted a similar strategy that the Communists did, in this case using both the mosque and school system as means of promotion, fundraising, recruiting and intimidating moderate Muslim opponents.

Canada needs to keep a close eye on what is being preached and taught. Also we need to resist attempts to ‘ghettoize” the Muslims by allowing the implementation of Sharia law and the promotion of fundamentalist practices. France should be an object lesson in how not to deal with Muslim communities.

People like to say that the US is anti-Muslim, yet it is the fastest growing religion there, with a present population of 6 million.

What I find disturbing about this article is the author’s irrational fear of the individual. He claims that individuals are easily frightened and only a “collective mass can resist such fears” What a crock, look at post WWI Germany, you had a fairly strong mono-community that took the Nazi’s propaganda hook, line and sinker. Also look how the Liberals have managed to alter social thinking during.

Individualism and community are not mutually exclusive terms, in fact a strong community requires strong individual responsibility.

What I find ironic about this article is that you, Murry Dobbin are fear-mongering to the masses about individualism and making it sound like some sort of disease that needs to be stomped out.

Sorry
Meant to add: during the Liberal time in power, collective groups are generally easier to manipulate than individuals, as you only need to promote one message time and again and not have to convince each person with a separate argument tailored to that person.

Alcibiades:

I would argue that market forces have provide you with one of the highest living standards in the world - maybe that's not much of a difference to you.

Are you on retainer with CSIS, Colin or just the CPC?

What is the Big Lie?

Essentially, it is a belief that western society is superior and will be the norm of the future. That liberal democracy will be the political organization of countries that are currently underdeveloped. Did someone coin the phrase, “The end of history”?

This is false. Japan recovered rapidly after World War 2 by re-organizing around their traditional society. Today, Japan is a first world economy practicing a form of democracy that bears only a superficial resemblance to American democracy. Women are not equal, and one political party has ruled Japan almost continuously since 1955.

And, China is surging economically as an authoritarian society. Non-western societies have many options.

One corollary of the Big Lie is that western democracy has widespread support in the Middle East. This is false. Iraqi Shiites didn’t ask to be given the vote. They wanted ethnic freedom and security. Given a democracy, they have organized themselves into armed factions.

What about Afghanistan? Are the western countries fighting alongside brave Afghanis, who are battling militants and drug lords? False once again!

The Americans are trying to restructure the country into a centralized state, contrary to traditional practices. The country is descending into a civil war. It’s Kabul backed by some western countries against much of the rest of the country. Even the CBC doesn’t have the courage to say the “c” word.

The rebels are possibly at a similar stage of the Vietnam War in 1959. In that year, those opposed to the Catholic tyrant ruling in Saigon formed the National Liberation Front. That is why the Vietcong rapidly gained control of the majority of villages in Vietnam.

Something similar is happening in Afghanistan. Our troops are coming under fire whenever they stop for the night. Can all these attackers be Taliban? No, these are locals who oppose the presence of foreign troops who menace local communities. In a civil war, it’s the Taliban who benefit.

Will Afghan soldiers and police fight for Kabul? Should male Afghanis give their lives for female equality? Will Afghanis help subdue their ethnic brothers?

How will a few thousand foreign troops defeat all the millions of Afghanis, Pakistanis and Iranians? The west is not willing to pay the farmers to stop growing opium? Will the money be spent more productively on an expeditionary force?

Finally, the worst corollary of the Big Lie is that the militants are eager to attack the west. This is false for the Taliban and Hamas. Their concerns are local.

It is the Al-Qaeda who seek to militarize Muslims through a clash of civilization. Sending crusaders to Muslim countries is a boon to Al Queda. Have they grown strong in Iraq where there was no history of terrorism? Did Hamas or Al-Qaeda inspire the London bombers?

Do you believe in the Big Lie?

neocon
From someone who calls him/herself neocon that was a pretty predictable response.

Since jimtan has responded very admirably I'll leave it at that.

Bush, and increasingly Harper, assert that the terrorists hate us for "who we are". They're correct, although not for the reasons they publicly assert. The less developed countries of the world are becoming increasingly irritated with the developed countries' tendency to embark on a global, economically imperialist mission. Steal a countries resources, give them nothing in return, and funnel the money back home. They don't hate us because we "love freedom and democracy" - we obviously don't, given the state of affairs in both Canada and the U.S.. Yes, the west's roles in both Afghanistan and Iraq have fanned the flames of global terrorism, but we must remember the real reasons for western involvement in the first place - primarily economic ones. The military involvement in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the subsequent terrorism created as a result, is a symptom of a much larger problem and not a contributing factor to terrorism in and of itself. If we truly envision a peaceful world free of international terrorism, we must look closely at how our society currently functions and its dependency on the rest of the world's resources. IMHO.

Good discussion.

Dobbin right on.

Seems clear the security services are manipulating opinion -- and perhaps the 'hapless" terrorists. Government now conniving: why else impose the news blackout on court proceedings after RCMP/CSIS have leaked so much?

Alcibiades

No my power points skills are not strong enough to join CSIS.

Actually I come from a strong NDP family and used to vote NDP, back when it meant something other than the party that represents the GTA.

Jimtan
I doubt very much that the Afghans presently have the nationalistic desires that the Vietnamese had, nor the desire or will to accept the level of causalities that the North Vietnamese were willing to inflict on their own people (400,000 not including people that died after the downfall of the south or the decade of war with the Chinese)

Your grasp of the military situation is not that great, the reason the troops are involved in heavy fighting is that they are being aggressive and taking on the Taliban in areas where they were rarely challenged. Their losses are quite significant and they will have a hard time replacing experienced commanders. It is foolish to think that the western militaries have forgotten the lessons of Vietnam, but they are also aware that this is a very different enemy, in different terrain and with less outside support. The Taliban are scrambling to readjust their tactics as they have tried to employ the same tactics they used against the soviets, which are failing against the western armies who have far more motivated troops, who can out react the Taliban. Plus they have not been receiving the same level or types of equipment from their supporters that they received from the west to use against the Soviets.
Keep in mind also that after the Tet offensive the North was spent and had the US maintained it’s pressure they could have nothing to stop them from taking the North. I give them credit for being good poker players.

How is Afghanistan descending into civil war? More accurate to state that the country is trying drag itself up from a state of civil war that has been ongoing for roughly 25 years.
The only real true analogies are
1. The only hope that the Taliban have of winning is to alter public opinion in the west
2. That Afghanistan will be won or lost in the schools and hospitals and in the establishment or failure of government infrastructure and security. This sense of security was the only thing the Taliban had to offer, other than fear.

greenalbertan:

It is not the west who has stolen from LDC's. It is their own governments who have stolen from their people. The more aid a country gets, the bigger the corporate jet they will fly around in.

I should clarify. The Taliban never actually fought the Soviets, most of the groups that did make up the Northern Alliance. The term Taliban means something similar to student in Pastun if I remember correctly and most were refuges living in Pakistan and are likely supported by the Military Intelligence Service or factions within.

Jimtan: Japan recovered because the US rebuilt it.

You've succumbed to a conspiracy theory...sorry.

Alcibiades - It's the intent that matters. Yes, police methods must always be scrutinized, but the bottom line is this: did they intent to terrorize the Canadian public.

Soft-touch liberal casuistry can't dodge around that simple litmus.

Having said that, if police methods were so incompetent as to cast reasonable doubt on the intent of the accused, then we can rest assured that our system is sufficiently weighted in favour of the accused that they'll walk free and then slap the Canadian taxpayers with a multi-million dollar lawsuit.

Japan recovered, because the US sent a brilliant statistician/economist by the name of W.Edwardes Deming to help them rebuild their economy. And he did it in spades.

Deming was a brilliant man who discovered long ago that it is not competition, but cooperation that builds sustainable, prosperous societies.

Read up on his work and see why the globally competitive, neeoclassical market capitalism is killing millions and must collapse.

I didn't compare Hitler and Stalin to economists, they did enough harm without being guilty of that too.

In any case, Hitler was invented and created by the Treaty of Versailles.

Ed Deak.

nightbloom
There's an equally valid question about intent which springs into my suspicious mind when I see the kind of excessive folderol that the Toronto Police, CSIS, the RCMP, several prominent foot-in-mouth politicians and a good deal of the same knee-jerk media who splashed Holocaust references across front pages over an invented story from Iran a few weeks ago. Time will tell, in the meantime, skepticism seems entirely in order.

Like most people trained in the military tradition, police have as big an aversion to the truth as do some politicians

PS to my previous:

Also, Japan didn't permit any foreign, carpetbagger investors to go in and strip them bare. Unlike Canada, with an economy controlled from, and most of the benefits of resource extraction and conversion going abroad, while our economists are advising our idiot politicians to beg for more such colonizing exploitation.

Like our troops in Afghanistan requesting US corporate owned Tim Horton's for a touch of home.

Ed Deak.

neocon:
You are partially correct about the flow of money to the LDCs, but there is a significant component that you overlook.

For the past 60-odd years, beginning with the Bretton Woods agreement, here's how international aid through the World Bank, IMF, and USAID has occurred:

1. Infrastructure loans are made to the LDCs based on the condition that the recipient country must use U.S. contractors (e.g. Bechtel, Halliburton) to complete the infrastructure projects. Thus, the money is partially funnelled back to the U.S. through these corporations.

2. Especially in the case of Latin America, governments who agree to the aid package are promised substantial kickbacks in return for their cooperation, which pays for the corporate jets of which you speak.

3. The loans are made with the full understanding that they will never be repaid; when the recipient country encounters financial difficulty, the "pound of flesh" required by the lendors takes the form of resources (usually oil), purchased for pennies on the dollar.

For a much more detailed explanation, please read John Perkins' book Confessions of an Economic Hitman. It's a very interesting read, and an excellent description of why the global political situation is as it is.

Fiat:

Japan also prospered due to an educated workforce, free food from the US (for a time) and a well-managed sytem of free enterprise - as opposed to, say, the Soviet Union.

Japan also ran a closed economy which restricted imports and Japan discouraged immigration. Their banking system more-or-less failed in the 90s as they've suffered a decade of economic decline.

How can you say that most of the benefits of resource extraction goes abroad, when people are employed here, buy equipment here, pay tax here, build facilities here...seems to me that for every dollar paid to Inco, more than 95 cents stays here - unless, of course, you can PROVE otherwise.

When an economy is controlled from abroad, you're an employee and a slave in your own home country.

When you have resources, you have capital, especially with the present imaginary capital being created by banks to take over the economies of others.

I believe in self employment, decision making and democracy. These fraudulent free trade agreements, the WTO and "borderless" globalization are designed to strip peoples of their democratic decision making powers, which is the only and ultimate purpose of the destruction of the national state.

Wendy's has been saved by the takeover of Tim Horton's and their profits, now taken out of the country.

Foreign investment is a fraud and a racket.

Ed Deak. Economic nationalist and protectionist.

Jack Layton is spanking his monkey and playing politics with the Afghanistan war. He proped up the government that made the decision to go there, and now, claiming that there is no exit strategy, says we should get out and go to Darfur.

I haven't heard him yet explain what his exit strategy is for Darfur.

If his popularity is rising and frankly, I'm sceptical, it's because he can play political games with no repercussions becasue he has no legitimate shot at forming government.

k, somthing about the words "our traditional international goals of peace and justice" makes me feel ...weird. Ya Canadians aren't nearly as bad as Americans with our foreign policy, but this is just relative.

Fiat – did you get a bad cup of coffee at Timmy’s ? I don’t mind your rants, they’re amusing in a childish sort of way. The shareholders of Tim Hortons made a decision to sell their holdings to a different company. Have you even analysed the outflow of capital from Canada, or is there an inflow as they build more stores?

Do any of the commonly accepted economic standards apply to anything you say, or is everything other than what you do, just a fraud or a criminal activity?

You say that resources are capital but capital is also a resource and individuals have choices about how they prefer to use their resources, whether it conforms to your view of what’s appropriate or not.

Going along with Bush has destroyed our 'nice guy' image - a reputation accumulated from our peace-keeping assignments.
Now it's open season on us too.

At least the apprehended terrorists took aim at our politicians which shows they can't be all bad.

We go to Timmy's every time we go to town, as it is the only place that doesn't reek of burned grease, but we don't drink the coffee.

Since Wendy's took them over, their service, quality and variety have gone down. Now we can't even buy a 7 Up or Sprite any more, as they only have it in aluminum cans and my wife is allergic to the metal, so we drink milk. Also, we hardly ever see the same faces again, within the 2 weeks between our visits, so it must be a lousy workplace.

Of course, the shareholders sold out, as they did with the Bay, as most of them would sell their own grandmothers' ashes if they had the chance to satisfy their greed.

Foreign capital moving into a country has the only purpose of inflating the money supply of the recipient country. That's all.

There's no inflow of capital into Canada, because there's no such thing as monetary capital any more, with deregulated money creation. Plus, much of the foreign takeovers are done with Canadian capital created by Canadian banks to sell off Canadian resources.

I happen to have 49 years of independent business experience in BC and know that corporations don't use their own capital to take over businesses, because it is
better for them to borrow and write off the service charges as tax deductible expenses.

So, now we have Canadian and foreign banks creating imaginary money against the collateral of Canadian businesses and resources, and then account them as their own assets so they can create more.

According to StatsCan, up to 97% of the yearly "foreign investment" goes into the takeover of established businesses, followed immediately by layoffs, the shutting down of facilities and resource exports. As we see them here in the Cariboo, with dozens of trucks, loaded with ore, each worth about $500,000. going to the ports, every time we're on the highways. They don't build, they extract and take.

In any case, even with the former, gold based, real capital, foreign investors brought nothing into the country, and take nothing into any other country, because that capital is being paid back many times over the years, in short it is not a gain, but a loss.

That capital serves only as the jug of priming water to start the flow of the waters and profits.

As any business person knows, one doesn't have to sell parts of businesses, or properties to get working capital, because those reasources can be temporarily turned into capital through borrowing. We all do it and this is exactly what the foreign investors are doing against the resources of others.

If this is not a racket, what the hell is it ?

Don't you brainwashed capitalists know anything about the workings of capital, apart from repeating long time worn and discarded cliches?

Monetary capital doesn't "create" wealth, it is the resources that do it.

Ed Deak, Private enterpriser, property owner and protector.

Ed,
Thank you for your explanation of how "foreign investment" works to the detriment of the host country. It's amazing that most people who grew up playing monopoly don't make the connection with how unrestrained capitalism works and unfortunately don't have a clue about the scam fractional reserve banking is.

Nana, even fractional reserve banking died when Mulroney deregulated the banks and gave them unlimited money creation potential back in 1991.

To the best of my knowledege, it isn't practiced anywhere on Earth any more.

Now it is all imaginary money created from the air and charged interest on.

On account of this, less than 400 individuals and families now own and control about half of the Earth's resources.

According to World Bank figures from 5-6 years ago, as I don't have the latest, back in the mid '80s, 13% of Canada's exports were raw materials. After the FTA and NAFTA took hold, it was 67%, thanks to the free movement of imaginary, foreign capital taking control.

Ed Deak.

neocon:

Market forces? You mean, like the one driving Bombardier?
http://www.taxpayer.com/main/news.php?news_id=1863

A bunch of wing nuts think they are terrorists, and are watched by the authorities so are rendered harmless.

Reminds me of the FLQ who actually did kill someone, although they were tracked most of the time as well. But scare the begeezus out of the citizens and suddenly there is no shortage of cash for coppers and the governments can and will pass legislation that is heavy handed. Bush did it, Blair did it, and so did Canada. Piere said it all when asked what he would do. he said "just watch me" His political friends got a boost, we spent tax dollars hauling the airborne battalion down to Montreal and then got the job of hauling the terrorists down to Cuba.

Good old taxpayers, they can be duped on a regular basis by someone saying terrorists.

One writer mentioned the Air India debacle. The mounties shredded a bunch of evidence ,millions were spent and they walked, but then again years ago the mounties became famous for burning down barns.

Now it's easy to pick up somebody that looks different than what we want people to look like and they get dumped in the can on security warrants. Bush sends folks to Cuba for years and we are no better. The CIA stops periodically in canada hauling who knows what to where, our response is, "we don't look in the aircraft". Not good enough folks. THis country has a bunch of laws and sure don't ned security warrants to keep us safe from crooks

Good man , Fait. Busy, busy, but enjoyed reading your intelligent and entirely accurate analyses-, and the manner in which you clarify the neocon bullshit around foreign ownership and so-called globalization. You help make clear the importance of Canadians waking up and acting in defence of their nation from foreign capital takeover-, arising from the conspiracy of at least two ruling classes, ours and theirs.

Guess whose?

It is already near entirely gone of course. We have already dithered long while Rome burns. If the populace doesn't act soon, it will soon all be moot and but a historical footnote anyway. We will have been totally conquered and not lifted a finger in the defence of ourselves or nation.

No wonder so many Quebecers want out.

Pathetic. And the problem is largely Anglo-Canadians of the Oilbertan/Noleftnut and Co. type.

And of course, the Joe and Jane Average such as were around in Germany to witness the rise of Hitler, and who did nothing, because at first, it was only the Jews. And he did get the trains running on time.

Great discussion, but what struck me was the two articles in McLean's online today about how we cannot trust the Muslims. I am paraphrasing, of course, but my point is that I am not so sure that our sense of community is such a great protection from fear politics. We may be more vunerable then we like to think.

Ed
Do actually think that they would get the environmental green light to build a smelter here? Having been on many reviews, I doubt it would fly. Even if they could get the go ahead the compensation plans would be huge cost. Don’t get me wrong, I would love to see more small industry here, but talking to anyone trying to set it up it’s like pissing into the wind, everyone just see you as a moneytree to pluck from.

Boy am I glad we have people like Mr. Dobbin.

You have to also remember that the Bilderberg Group meeting in Ottawa started just a few days after the "arrests".

A good corporate media distraction was needed. And perhaps even a cheap attempt to make Harper look good to his superiors.

To their credit, The Ottawa Citizen and The Globe and Mail did give use a few tidbits about the Bilderbergers and their history.

That's utter nonsense, and your reference to Iran & the Holocaust is tangential.

Police and military are actually worlds apart, despite broad-brush attempts at generalization. The only time when this difference becomes blurred & problematic is when the political leadership (i.e. civilians) employ their military for non-traditional purposes other than what it was designed and intended for.

Most Canadians in uniform have a far, far more intimate grasp of Canadian values that your average slack-assed civilian in Vancouver or Toronto. Sure, there have been some exceptions, scandals, and screw-ups over the years, but the Canadian military is exactly what the civilian electorate has asked for it to be: a highly representative institution that mirrors closely the composition and values of Canadian society. The officer corps is drawn from civilian university campuses across the country, and the NCO ranks are filled by high school and college graduates from every province. To speak of them as a separate species is ridiculous and undermines your (usually fairly sober) argumentation.

The faults of militaries, like the faults of other large-scale representative institutions, are really the flaws of the people & society from which it is derived.

If Canadians have a problem with the nature of their military, then addressing them requires a return to the root of things, starting with a hard look in the mirror.

Oh come on nightbloom. Do I have to go back into the archives and drag out our debate about the lack of truthiness of the officer class in the US military over the prosecution of the 'war' in Iraq? After a long drawn-out attempt by your good self to defend the honour of the military you did finally acknowledge that the hierarchy was more concerned with careerism than telling truth to power and you also acknowledged that most of the few who have spoken out about the adventures in the M.East have done so from the relative safety of retirement.

I’ve been watching you backslide here for the last several days with interest. Surely we don’t have to go back to that old debate again. My case is even stronger now than it was a couple of months ago, what with the Haditha incident having since come to light.

The Canadian military my see themselves as governed by a code of honour – but as long as we have leaders like Gen Hillier, who are as anxious to see themselves expostulating on world politics at the elbow of some politician, I have real doubts that were getting the straight goods from our military as well,

nightbloom:

And what exact values are those, nightbloom?

My experience of the military, and ex-military, alas, is that most of these people are incurious careerists more concerned with their next promotion than they are with any independently arrived at concept of value, Canadian or otherwise. These guys and girls - and I've met quite a few of them in my day - certainly can parrot the party line (it has been well drilled into them) but they are not, in the main, the sort of people - with certain exceptions - to discuss complex issues and ideas with. As to being slack-assed or not, I've met a good many career officers who could also compete admirably in that department as well.

Next time you see those little promos on hockey night in Canada for the military you might want to consider who the biggest promoter of the forces is these days….you like being associated with those values too, I guess!

Busy again today. So that’s it for the moment!

So you are out for a walk with your little daughter and some stranger comes up and punches your daughter in the face. Do you think to yourself " gee what did I do to DESERVE that? "
It's not what you did, it's what you didn't do. You didn't carry a big stick to protect yourself from these evil-doers.
We are not our enemy. Where did this idiotic idea come from ? The Toronto Star ?

Alcibiades, Gwest - Neither of your tandem responses address the salient issue here, which is the nature of the modern volunteer military in a democratic society. Alcibiades seems content with his facile mischaracterizations, and Gwest wants to re-hash civil-military relations at the Command and Leadership level.

As someone who served in uniform and later conducted graduate studies as a civilian in a uniformed milieu, I find both of you to be consistently naive and jingoistic when it comes to discussion of the nature of modern militaries.

And if you two really want to re-hash the debate, don't apply your customary selectivity when interacting with nightbloom. Dig up the comprehensive and scholarly military criticism of U.S. civilian-mandated policy in Iraq that I linked.

If I recall, that conversation concluded with Alcibiades' utopian wishful thinking about how civil-military relations should be restructured so that national militaries can whimsically "opt-out" of any endeavour the elected civilian leadership puts them up to.

Reality check please, boys.

Suffice it to say, nightbloom is talking through the starched shorts of his own narrow conventionality again. Poppycock.

Double poppycock. I was in the military as merely a delinquent youth means to try and start my life, pick myself up out of the poverty of my circumstances, and secure a job with little to no education-, and get my sorry ass away from the cops and all the religious nuttery that surrounded me.

The officer corp and truthfulness?

Hell, you were more right awhile back when you said that they were more interested in careerism than truth. My own observation was that the Canadian officer corps, when I was in, were just coming out of the old British Empire colonial military school, with that particular affected Sandhurst War College nobility mentality, and being rapidly absorbed into the rising US Empire colonial military school, with all its Westpoint careerist think-, where they are stuck even more today.

My most prominent memory of being in the Canadian military was the way we were subservient to, and followed the US military around the world, doing their bidding. The Canadian military, like much of the "values in practice" of the rest of the Canadian population is much stuck still in "colonial think". And I came to that conclusion rather quickly, around the events of the British and French invasion of Suez in 1956 and the later observation of our "compromised" role as enablers for the rising US Empire in Vietnam.

That reality of "colonial think", that is much a part of these overblown Canadian values of which you speak so loosely, though more positive values there are as well, and you both need to change That or we should just give it up and run the US Empire stars and stripes up on all our flagpoles and call it fitting wimp-ass end to our attempting to be an independant nation state, capable of self-sufficiently standing up on our own two feet. (The latter which I would desparately love to see before I go to that great Happy Hunting Ground in the sky. :-)

Somehow, at some pathetic level though nightbloom, you actually do typify the sorry state of this country-, I regret to say.

Methinks you very well may be right, Kelley. We are in a more sorry state as a population I suspect, than we would generally like to acknowledge.

I think that could and needs to change, but it will take a huge and highly organized effort at this point.

I don't know if this makes any sense but there are three facts contributing to Canadian/U.S. government/terrorist intrigue.

The American government is clever at projecting images of what it wants its populace and the rest of the world to know.

The U.S. is the biggest exporter of arms in the world. The Taliban has no trouble buying its share of American weapons.

The Canadian Intelligence Agency and the RCMP has had an Insp. Clouseau image in recent years and they certainly need something to make them look less bumbling.

Alcibiades post...

As ex-military, I sadly tend to agree.
I will say this, however, when military people leave 'the service' they tend to be very successful in a second careers - for whatever reason.

And there is more than a grain of truth to this observation as well, Jack's, and may well play no small part in what and how this has gone down. And both these "Clouseau-like" agencies have to know that the Conservative government, ever on its knees with boot brush and polish in hand before The Empire, is most anxious to be looked upon fondly and praised by the Amerikkkans, and hence these agencies will want to please both their masters. (Though there is only one real Chief, and we and they know it ain't Harper.)

My experience in the military, war and decades of the study of military history shows that all, and I mean the international, professional military, is based and survives on bs., lies and coverups.

The promition in all large organizations is based on performance, which, in many, if not most, cases demands lies to cover up mistakes and justify actions. Then comes the Peter Principle, where everybody is promoted one step above his potential.

The troops lie to the NCOs, the NCOs lie to the officers, the officers lie to the generals, the generals lie to the governments to get more funds, and the governments lie to the people to justify the expenses, acts and crimes committed by the military. Like the saturation bombing of cities in WW2, still sold as heroic actions, or the H bomb laden B52
over central BC every day.

This is the same all over the world in every profession, especially in professions based on faith, like the killing and destruction powers of the military.

My favourite soldier was a lieutenant, who gathered up about 100 us of the rearguard and ordered a counterattack, with rifles and machineguns, against a tank army. We were encircled and by the time we broke out a day later, there were only 30 of us left. Nobody ever asked him what happened to the rest? It was war and they died. If we'd ever gone into action again with that jerk, he would have ended up with a hole in his head. From me.

But then, that's what armies are about anywhere on Earth. The justification of crimes and corruption. And now, at the highest levels, the absorption of Canada into the USA.

Ed Deak.

Aw well, nightbloom, as I've noticed before, your memory is a trifle selective...and I have provided plenty of links to support my contention about the responsible role of the military in a democracy. You seem to prefer a more command-oriented discipline structure where you can "tell" people how to behave and they'll tug their forelock and scream "Yessir, right away sir', rather than actually thinking.

Which is strange, in a way, because you do try to think and provide a reasonable defence for an often untenable position - so be it. I see some other posters here have observed the same tendency.

Too bad you so often find yourself playing apologist for either the military (like that mindless puppet Hillier) or the Church. You could do so much better.

Fiat:

I'm sorry, but you have some very bizarre beliefs about banking and the monetary system - unsubstantiated as well.

What do you say to someone who believs all economic textbooks are wrong? Why do you believe you're smarter than someone like David Dodge, Paul Volker, Alan Greenspan et al? Who's filling your head with such rubbish?

You once said in a posting that "economics is a set of constructs to serve those who utilize them".

What I interpret that to mean from you is that you don't understand economics - so then you choose not to just criticize the subject, you villify it. Do you believ that chemistry is also "a set of constructs"?

You seem to be like "Marx and Engels in the middle of the 19th century believing that capitalism is an evil system based on exploitation and impoverishment, and that the solution is revolution and collectivism. They died before their revolutions came to pass. Students of history can see the results."

No doubt, based upon the degree to which they have learned to unquestioningly do as they are told. "The Heirarchical System", of which capitalism is but one variant modification of slavery and feudalism (and the old Soviet and current Sino "State Capitalism" is but another variation on the same theme as well), loves people who will just blindly obey orders. (And there are always exceptions-, which but serve to prove "The Rule".)

Back to starched tighty-whities and puppycocks again, eh Coyote-daddy?

Gwest, sorry to be the one to always point out the grey areas surrounding these issues, rather than obediently swallowing your party line. The irony of all this is that - on a fundamental level - you, Alcibiades and I tend to share the same basic worldview. Most of my critique surrounds the means of properly mobilizing and implementing that world view. You'll notice that I have not defended American policy one iota here.

Attacking military command structure or culture won't get you anywhere - that's simply preaching to the choir (i.e. liberal-Left constituency consolidation through propaganda rather than true rational argumentation to reach out universally). The real problem here, Gwest, is the political leadership and the way people are mobilized to vote and maintain them in power. I should point out that Alcibiades identified this same fundamental problem/frustration in one of his more generous & personalized posts on one of those threads a month or two ago. There is a unifying arch linking my comments here to my oft-quoted remarks elsewhere on the failure of the Left to tap progressive elements that don't conform to their pseudo-religious salvation and oppression dogmas and their calcified marriage to orthodox labour structures - a good example of this deliberate failure to reach out is found in, but certainly not limited to, progressive religious constituencies (which describes virtually all R.C., Anglican, Lutheran and soft-core evangelical lay people in Canada & the U.S.). The Left is not being as effective as it can be in mobilizing support for its programme, and the reason it isn't is because it favours ideological and doctrinal purity over universal appeal (much like the R.C. clergy which has been bashed routinely on this website, but which is also so committed to its established structures and the doctrines which justify them that change will only come after their institutional attrition has become catastrophic). Purist Left ideolgues are just another form of priesthood, and their aspirations fit the model of Bertrand Russell's elucidation on the nature of priestly power (one of several unique models in addition to Kingly Power, Revolutionary, Economic, etc. ).

Why was Bush re-elected? Why will Harper get a majority within the next year or so? Why is the progressive moderate Left no longer able to communicate to the critical mass of voters, so that it can translate its vision into substance and successful policy backed by a majority?

Don't get angry at the messenger, people.

neocon, I never said or wrote that : economics is a set of constructs to serve those who utilize them.

Which shows that you're dreaming up your facts and ideas.

Marx and Engels would have done anything for the working class, except joining it. Marx was a filthy bum, who let his children starve, like neoclassical economists are criminals today for letting millions of children starve to death in the interest of "globally competitive market capitalism".

If you claim that my statements on the deregulated banking, and money creating system are system are false, you're welcome to prove me wrong!!!!!!

The banking system, the neoclassical economic theory and the neolib/neocon ideology, globalization, are fradulent, criminal attempts to enslave the world.

By the way, I have lived under every known ideology and this is why I don't support any of them. What I say is all based on long established physical laws economists have been trying to break since the beginning of written history and obviously, always have failed and will fail.

As far David Dodge, Greenspan, Milton Friedman, etc. are concerned, they all are frauds and I'd be happy to debate and cut them to pieces at any time, as I have done with many World Bank economists in the past.

Ed Deak.

Sorry nightbloom - I'm not exactly sure I see you as any kind of a reliable messenger, but....

Let's leave religion out of this for the moment and deal with the military and the policy. The fact that I believe a strong case can be made for values notwithstanding – I tend to disagree with you about how one gets there – preferring, in fact learning and demonstration, logic and knowledge to the more dogmatic methodology of the traditional and problematic mythical approach.

That's where this started - to wit - a discussion of the way the police and CSIS - both of them more than happy to get their time in the spotlight and on camera - were indulging in a paroxysm of paranoia over the arrest of a rag-tag group of certain co-religionists for the possession of ersatz fertilizer. I also tend to believe that the military command structure in this country is also complicit in this sort of smoke and mirrors with respect to Canada's 'role' in Afghanistan.

I don't see how it is even debatable that, if more top officials at the Pentagon had been willing to resign over the planning of the predictably-disastrous adventure in Iraq, the Bush White House could not have proceeded with its insane plans. As I said before, in a democracy where the role of the military always tends to be ‘ready, aye ready’ the mess we - and the Americans - have now got our valuable young people into is not going to help your freedom and democracy anti-oppression narrative at all. In my view, quite the contrary: We are in the process of losing and squandering everything we might have been proud of representing and the hope of moving forward toward a more positive future in a part of the world where we have already created numberless victims through ignorance and self-centeredness and greed.

In my view that’s a great shame.

Very interesting theory Coyote - and could be true.
I think it's because they have been schooled in the ways to advance - and lead - whether they had already put that information to use or not.

You must be a survivor - especially to withstand the BS of Basic training - and later, sometimes incompetent leadership.

Quite frankly, I believe that all Canadian youth could significantly benefit by spending a year in the military. It would definitely improve "buddy" values - which is the basis of this article.

Fiat

I believe this is a rarity in the military because lies are easily uncovered. Every military branch is a very close-knit community.

Don't forget the civilian beaurocracy which is the real power behind any government group. They are the wheeler dealers who suck up to the minister and the generals therefore extorting the picture.

Should clarify that my comments refer only to the Canadian military.

Say what--? "Dogmatic methodology"? "Problematic mythical approach"--? You're becoming incoherent.

You haven't addressed the fundamental reality that the policies you're criticizing were given a 'pass' and voted back into being.

That's fact, not myth.

That's reality, not dogma.

The people got what they voted for, and the Left has been totally ineffective in spite of a huge swing in public opinion on this issue. Why is that?

That's what this website and the posters on it should really be asking.

I'm less certain about the existence of "buddy values", but perhaps that's just me. No doubt, for many, it does exist at some level. Nonetheless, it is entirely possible, nay more than likely, it would be useful to a future truly independant Canada, much depending upon US reactions to such a new continental reality, and assuming that we ever actually do get it sufficiently together to secure it, that there was some kind of a "universal military training system" embracing all males and females. The entire population thereby serving as a back up "defensive/emergency force" to a smaller, highly mobile "progessional military" system, with an emphasis upon "light infantry" attributes and support. My view being that there is nothing quite like an entire people prepared and trained to defend themselves and the nation, as a deterrant to the possible "invasive adventurist notions" of outside, especially "imperial" interests.

But what is most immediately absent from the current military system is first, a competent civilian political leadership committed primarily to a concept of the terrirorial, political and especially economic "self-sufficiency" integrity of the Canadian nation-, and a military command and operational structure "totally" controlled by them and committed to the defence needs of the homeland exclusively. And I do think there needs to be the introduction of "democratic values and structure" within the military system as well, and public "democratic control" over the war making capabilities of the nation. Meaning, popular vote control over ANY proposed foreign wars particularly-, all of which, as a general rule, I am opposed to on principle.

It really is interesting though, that there are quite a number here with various military backgrounds, and widely disparate "ideological committments" that have come out of that. Interesting.

Just like the Canadian public at large, Coyote.

We're generally a representative cross-section of the society from which we come.

That's why I resist broad-brush mischaracterizations of the nature, character and composition of the volunteer militaries of the Western democracies.

Jack's, have you ever known an army admitting to losing a battle ? They always win and then engage in "strategic withdrawal", sometimes using some of their men and generals as scapegoats to divert attention.

As I said many times before, the German army was winning WW2 until the signing of the armistice. Their radio was broadcasting the news of great victories till the last minute. Dr.Goebbels made his last victory broadcast, then went home, dodging Russian bullets, poisoned his children and shot himself.

As far young people serving their countries, I knew a young German once who was born in divided Berlin. I believe, there was some agreement between the 2 Germanies at the time, preventing the drafting of kids born in occupied Berlin into their armies. In anycase, his guy as drafted and served in some civilian ambulance service in West Germany.

I think, some similar, constructive projects could be developed, instead of teaching kids how to kill. As I was for 5 years.

Ed Deak.

Actually the outcome of the last election was a very close shift - so close that it's hard to determine what the public wanted.
But it shows that democracy is far from perfect and left/right swings are normal over a period of time.
Would anybody want Mulroney back? We suppose he had his usefulness in that he certainly brought us closer to the U.S. - or maybe I should say, the jaws of the U.S.

nightbloom
For someone who says he "resist(s) broad-brush mischaracterizations" you certainly don't seem to mind doing a job on the 'Left' from time to time, do you?

I'd be more than prepared to treat your cherished military with a bit more leniency if you weren't so dogmatic with your own broad brush treatment of progressives in this country.

8-D LOL. Wow!

Talk about having an out of whack impression of oneself.

You are too much, nightbloom. And we'll leave it at that. With you impaled there upon your own petard. :-)

TFM.

I shouldn't figure so prominently your presentation of your own views Gwest....What, you'll be unfair to the military in your argumentation just to spite me--? That's actually what you're saying, silly as it sounds.

I stand by my critique of radical fundamentalist secular nihilist Left ideologues. There's nothing broad-brush about it .... Moderate liberals need have no fear of nightbloom's pen. What would be "broad brush" of me would be if I tried to apply that label where it clearly didn't fit (for example, to a moderate poster on this thread, or for example in the manner that I have occasionally be mischaracterized and equated with the radical and murderous religious fundamentalists of Islam due to my defence of the utility of tolerating moderate manifestations of religion...I don't recall you or Alcibiades or anyone else rushing to my defence on any of those occasions). It's not my fault you seem to identify personally with my characterization of said ideologues. Maybe you should join my critique, Gwest.

And once again, my unacknowledged and unriposted argument: why has the doctrinaire Left been so ineffective as tapping into the full-spectrum disenfranchisement and dissent that exists out there?

Somehow, at some pathetic level though nightbloom, you actually do typify the sorry state of this country-, I regret to say.

Coyote:

G.West
With respect G. No he can't he is so blinded by his own opinions there is no room for anyone else's.
Nightbloomers is extremely myopic and has a hard time understanding that his is not the only opinion that counts .
Harpo will get a majority when pigs fly .

Alcibiades, Gwest

The current Canadian military, is a reflection of our nation, it harbours the good and the bad. In my day most soldiers voted NDP, and officers Conservative. Nowdays I would suspect most voted CPC thanks to the dismal performance of the Liberals and NDP in regard to defence matters.

While some of the Generals are mainly political animals, I think you will be surprised at how inclusive our military is, take Lt Greene who is recovering right now from an axe wound, not exactly the picture of the raving killer that people would like to paint our people with. Some of the comments written in this thread about our military are just a form of racism poorly disguised. I expect the “keepers of the eternal Liberal flame of justice” to maintain a higher standard. Nightblooms description is accurate, it’s the Hollywood BS that isn’t. As for those that served before, even I realize that the army I served in and the army today is two different things. A private soldier in the Canadian army likely has a higher level of education and training them most officer in third world armies. Western militaries have changed greatly in the last decade. Very few troops are the “dumb as stumps” variety that could be found previously. Our armies are to small and operate to much expensive & complex equipment to allow for the “cannon fodder” mentality.

Possibly so. Strategic withdrawals are part of military strategy and not to be confused with surrender. An action taken under the threat of impending annihilation. The soldiers, both privates and generals know the feeling of strategic withdrawals. All through history surrender has been associated with dishonour.
However today's media is so prevalent it's difficult to lie about a military situation. Casualty numbers in Vietnam were 'controlled' but that type of order didn't come from generals....it was from the political administrative branch.

I love the German people but your references are mainly about Hitler's Germany and it's a fact that there was dishonesty in reporting situations for obvious reasons.

Quit talking in the third person Nightbloomers it makes you sound idiotic.
Can't wait for you to start prefacing your arguements with the Royal'we'

nightbloom
Look, I'm more than willing to acknowledge that there may well be sensitive thoughtful people in the military - I just haven't seen or heard much from them lately - except for the few who had the intestinal fortitude to resign, and with respect, those were American voices. As for the Canadian group, apart from yourself and Colin and a run in with some ridiculous raiders from another site a few months ago here at the Tyee, I haven't heard anyone else speaking for the military at all. I think they are totally compromised and nothing I've read from you or outside sources has given me any indication that I'm wrong about that. As I said, I'm open to persuasion.

If you haven't read the several things I posted to the debate concerning the Bountiful situation in respect of supporting the need for values then you haven't been paying attention. I'm not in this to attack you or your pen, by the way...for an academic you come across as remarkably thin skinned.

I disagree, once again, with your last paragraph because I don't accept the so-called ideological basis of your claims – the left still hasn’t been in power in Canada – alas, in my opinion, so I’m not likely to accept that formula as the operative one for the mess we’re in – another fact you continually ignore. And I thought Ann Coulter was bad!

As for why I bother. Well, I read you as someone with intelligence and I can't understand why you think the way you do. I find it interesting and challenging in a way that isn't true of most of the rightwing claptrap that gets posted here - and I'm not saying you are necessarily right wing either - which I can happily ignore as devoid of either good sense or deeper meaning – motivated, as it almost always is by greed and out of control self interest.

I think you're kind of stuck in a rut that's getting in the way of your real development as a human being. Empathy, I think, is the most fundamental requirement of every person who really means to be a Mensch – I think you’re a little lacking in that department – that’s all.

Colin
I don't disagree that there are many fine idealistic young people in the Canadian military - Lt Green included. They are, unfortunately, again in my opinion, being sold a pig in a poke and some are giving up their lives both wastefully and unnecessarily.

I don't think you can bring democracy and nominal democratic values to anyone who doesn't want them and I think we are asinine to waste even one Canadian life on such a foolish attempt to try.

If the military is such a fine place full of idealism and sacrifice then why does it always resort to the kind of idiot dumb show every chance it gets whether it's to the benefit of Tim Horton's Coffee and doughnuts or Don Cherry's Paleolithic attitudes?

And why, for God's sake, if you want intelligent people to think they are being well-represented overseas by our troops would you pick an idiot like Hillier and let him get anywhere near a camera with his mindless drivel?

I'm quite sure there are some very fine technicians in the military and I respect the idealism of the folks who are there because they 'really' care about helping. That doesn't mean the whole nature of the exercise isn't mostly compromised and time serving much of the time. I’m further troubled by the attitude frequently inculcated in these people that they are somehow the only realistic pragmatic folks not afraid to do the real dirty work for a lazy and indolent population back home.

I've also spent a fair amount of time with military personnel in Victoria and was generally impressed with some of the Navy and Air Force personnel I go to know. As for the senior service, not so much: Most of the young people in the Army I know couldn't sustain an argument or discuss a book to save their still quite admirable souls. Alas. This is, of course, a far from representative sample and has absolutely nothing to do with my fundamental critique of the way our military (police and security services) are currently being misused. In my view.

Well if you don’t like Hiller, go talk to Chretin and Martin, he was groomed for the position under their watch.

Most of the young soldiers are acutely aware of world events, as they are directly affected by them, they just disagree with many of the views posted here. Not to mention it seems most of us regularly commenting here are old farts or farts getting old, which causes your view of the world to change.

I also know many people that are great at winning arguments or debates and totally useless in the real world and dealing with real world situations. Since WWII we have put our soldiers into some very bizarre and tough situations and with a few notable exception have carried themselves admirable. In many of the trouble spots, it often fell on the decisions of the Master Corporal to prevent 2 armies from killing each other. This new generation will fight hard when required and will make the right decisions when presented with complex problems.

Okay, Gwest. In my defence, I do take the heat quite well on most days. But yes, I can be a little thin skinned. And forgive me for not getting cozy & empathic on the thread where a leather-daddy code-named 'Coyote' keeps inserting regular innuendos about my nether orifice and the state of undies ;-) ... 'all walks of life' I guess...!

The question is, who will the new generation be fighting for? Really for Canada, or some international, globalizer ideology to put a special interest class into dictatorial power, bent on removing national boundaries for the free movement of "wealth creating" capital? As they are now in Afghanistan.

Ed Deak.

Which about summarizes it, with as fine a point as one can put on it.

As they used to say, " And that's the $64,000 question."

*******

nightbloom,

Ohhh, I think here again, as you do around many issues, you are reading much more to do with your own fantasies than reality into many of my comments. And in any case, where there is that odd dig, what makes you think we hetero males don't take "digs" about our sexuality, all the friggin' time-, only they get specially classed as "politically correct".

Stand up straight there boy. Tuck your chin in, stick out your chest, suck in that bloody gut and dry your fukin' tears. Take it like a man, ya little puke. :-)

If you're going to dish it out, you'd better be prepared to take it as well, or get the fuk home to your momma. :-)

Wednesday, June 14 2006 @ 08:40 AM MDT
Sovereignty Watch
THE NEW WORLD DISORDER
Contributed by: jensonj
THE NEW WORLD DISORDER
Bush sneaking North American super-state without oversight?
Mexico, Canada partnership underway with no authorization from Congress

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: June 13, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern

By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com

Despite having no authorization from Congress, the Bush administration has launched extensive working-group activity to implement a trilateral agreement with Mexico and Canada.

The membership of the working groups has not been published, nor has their work product been disclosed, despite two years of massive effort within the executive branches of the U.S., Mexico and Canada.

The groups, working under the North American Free Trade Association office in the Department of Commerce, are to implement the Security and Prosperity Partnership, or SPP, signed by President Bush, Mexican President Vicente Fox and then-Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin in Waco, Texas, on March 23, 2005.

The trilateral agreement, signed as a joint declaration not submitted to Congress for review, led to the creation of the SPP office within the Department of Commerce.

The SPP report to the heads of state of the U.S., Mexico and Canada, -- released June 27, 2005, -- lists some 20 different working groups spanning a wide variety of issues ranging from e-commerce, to aviation policy, to borders and immigration, involving the activity of multiple U.S. government agencies.

The working groups have produced a number of memorandums of understanding and trilateral declarations of agreement.

The Canadian government and the Mexican government each have SPP offices comparable to the U.S. office.

http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=50618
(38 Views:)

You're actually pretty close to the mark. The Parliamentary Nation-State won out over its totalitarian competitors during the course of the last century (those competitors and alternative models being the Fascist State and the Communist State). In this sense only, Fukuyama was correct.

But now the Nation-State is morphing, and ideologies of all stripes are on the wane. We're seeing the rise of the polyglot multinational Market-State, in which electoral democracy will be only one of several catalyzing principles, deflected and moderated by veiled bureaucratic authoritarianism and corporatist collective interest moderation. We're already half-way there - we (i.e. Western democracies) have unknowingly been moving in that direction since the early Seventies. But now we're on fast-forward. A couple more international crisis will kick the gears 'round real fast on us, and then we'll really start to see the difference.

Hillier was NOT groomed under Chretien and Martin's watch .He was wholly created by the idiot Harpo .

If you're going to dish it out, you'd better be prepared to take it as well, or get the fuk home to your momma. :-)

Too right Coyote.Well said .
Nightbloomers is obviousley in love with the sound of his own voice .
His arguments are so off the wall I am surprised that anyone bothers responding especially now that he refers to himself in the third person.

Sheesh! Get oiver yourself Nightbloomers you ainlt impressing anyone with the drivel you spout .

The national state is basically an administrative unit, which is supposed to be controlled by the people under any form of democracy. At least in theory.

The main purpose of free trade "treaties", not "agreements", because they infringe on people's democratic decision making powers, is the destruction of democracies and their replacement with fascistic corporate dictatorships under cartels and oligopolies.

As we have it now to a very great extent with the global control of oil, grain, beef, food etc. prices in the hands of a few.

Chapter 11 of NAFTA is the prime example of the loss of democratic privileges, and the now negotiated WTO/GATS treaty will remove all local and national decision making powers right down to municipal zoning and garbage collection levels.

In other words, phoney free trade market economy can not exist in any real democracy and vice versa.

If people vote for corporate fascism it will be their decision and downfall. But they can not claim that they haven't been warned.

Only the brainwashed faithful still claim that market economy is some form of democracy. Just like the countries behind the Iron Curtain used to call themselves, and China still does, People's Democracies, where the people had no right to say anything, except "yes" to the orders of the rulers, which then was claimed to be "freedom from decision making".

The same for globalized market capitalism

Ed Deak.

Hannibal - Do you have have a counter-argument to present or are you just being jackass again?

Murray Dobbin: This is one of the best articles I've read from you in a long time. It deserves an A+ for obvious reasons (although you don't need the grades anymore, any writer who puts out pieces like this one doesn't need the acknowledgement... much :-).

Your connected dots between indivudualist Americans and Bush fear, is commendable in itself, but your differentiation between Americans and Canadians in terms of foreign policy until Harper (and to some degree, Martin) and in communities, cannot be denied. In every way, Canadians are BETTER OFF than Americans in this sense.

Most of us in Canada know, or want to know who our neighbors are. We are, for the most part, a friendly bunch, and our current PM doesn't suit the values and foreign policy of our country in any way that I know of, other than to entice the selfish, selfcentered voter who wants their way at "everyone elses expense". Thank God, they don't happen to be a majority in this country.

We are currently living in an environment where human rights are being sold for the cause of globalization and the privatization of ESSENTIAL SERVICES. We had Bush to shake our heads with on how corrupt his administration truly is. Now, we have Shrub, (a little bush), a man who clearly worships the stars and stripes along with U.S. foreign policy. The sooner we get rid of this gutless, warmongering U.S. ass kissing nut, the better off we will all be.

ED DEAK: You had a piece up there that was also nothing short of brilliant!
:-) Cheers!

http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?print=yes&id=15497

Bush Administration Quietly Plans NAFTA Super Highway
by Jerome R. Corsi
Posted Jun 12, 2006

Quietly but systematically, the Bush Administration is advancing the
plan to build a huge NAFTA Super Highway, four football-fields-wide,
through the heart of the U.S. along Interstate 35, from the Mexican
border at Laredo, Tex., to the Canadian border north of Duluth, Minn.

Once complete, the new road will allow containers from the Far East
to enter the United States through the Mexican port of Lazaro
Cardenas, bypassing the Longshoreman’s Union in the process. The
Mexican trucks, without the involvement of the Teamsters Union, will
drive on what will be the nation’s most modern highway straight into
the heart of America. The Mexican trucks will cross border in FAST
lanes, checked only electronically by the new “SENTRI” system. The
first customs stop will be a Mexican customs office in Kansas City,
their new Smart Port complex, a facility being built for Mexico at a
cost of $3 million to the U.S. taxpayers in Kansas City.

As incredible as this plan may seem to some readers, the first Trans-
Texas Corridor segment of the NAFTA Super Highway is ready to begin
construction next year. Various U.S. government agencies, dozens of
state agencies, and scores of private NGOs (non-governmental
organizations) have been working behind the scenes to create the
NAFTA Super Highway, despite the lack of comment on the plan by
President Bush. The American public is largely asleep to this key
piece of the coming “North American Union” that government planners
in the new trilateral region of United States, Canada and Mexico are
about to drive into reality.

Just examine the following websites to get a feel for the magnitude
of NAFTA Super Highway planning that has been going on without any
new congressional legislation directly authorizing the construction
of the planned international corridor through the center of the
country.

• NASCO, the North America SuperCorridor Coalition Inc., is a “non-
profit organization dedicated to developing the world’s first
international, integrated and secure, multi-modal transportation
system along the International Mid-Continent Trade and Transportation
Corridor to improve both the trade competitiveness and quality of
life in North America.” Where does that sentence say anything about
the USA? Still, NASCO has received $2.5 million in earmarks from the
U.S. Department of Transportation to plan the NAFTA Super Highway as
a 10-lane limited-access road (five lanes in each direction) plus
passenger and freight rail lines running alongside pipelines laid for
oil and natural gas. One glance at the map of the NAFTA Super Highway
on the front page of the NASCO website will make clear that the
design is to connect Mexico, Canada, and the U.S. into one
transportation system.

Continued......

Continued....

• Kansas City SmartPort Inc. is an “investor based organization
supported by the public and private sector” to create the key hub on
the NAFTA Super Highway. At the Kansas City SmartPort, the containers
from the Far East can be transferred to trucks going east and west,
dramatically reducing the ground transportation time dropping the
containers off in Los Angeles or Long Beach involves for most of the
country. A brochure on the SmartPort website describes the plan in
glowing terms: “For those who live in Kansas City, the idea of
receiving containers nonstop from the Far East by way of Mexico may
sound unlikely, but later this month that seemingly far-fetched
notion will become a reality.”

• The U.S. government has housed within the Department of Commerce
(DOC) an “SPP office” that is dedicated to organizing the many
working groups laboring within the executive branches of the U.S.,
Mexico and Canada to create the regulatory reality for the Security
and Prosperity Partnership. The SPP agreement was signed by Bush,
President Vicente Fox, and then-Prime Minister Paul Martin in Waco,
Tex., on March 23, 2005. According to the DOC website, a U.S.-Mexico
Joint Working Committee on Transportation Planning has finalized a
plan such that “(m)ethods for detecting bottlenecks on the U.S.-
Mexico border will be developed and low cost/high impact projects
identified in bottleneck studies will be constructed or implemented.”
The report notes that new SENTRI travel lanes on the Mexican border
will be constructed this year. The border at Laredo should be reduced
to an electronic speed bump for the Mexican trucks containing goods
from the Far East to enter the U.S. on their way to the Kansas City
SmartPort.

• The Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) is overseeing the
Trans-Texas Corridor (TTC) as the first leg of the NAFTA Super
Highway. A 4,000-page environmental impact statement has already been
completed and public hearings are scheduled for five weeks, beginning
next month, in July 2006. The billions involved will be provided by a
foreign company, Cintra Concessions de Infraestructuras de
Transporte, S.A. of Spain. As a consequence, the TTC will be
privately operated, leased to the Cintra consortium to be operated as
a toll-road.

The details of the NAFTA Super Highway are hidden in plan view.
Still, Bush has not given speeches to bring the NAFTA Super Highway
plans to the full attention of the American public. Missing in the
move toward creating a North American Union is the robust public
debate that preceded the decision to form the European Union. All
this may be for calculated political reasons on the part of the Bush
Administration.

A good reason Bush does not want to secure the border with Mexico may
be that the administration is trying to create express lanes for
Mexican trucks to bring containers with cheap Far East goods into the
heart of the U.S., all without the involvement of any U.S. union
workers on the docks or in the trucks.

=

I am not near so committed to "private enterprise" as Fait Lux, whose view I much nonetheless respect, but more to the encouragement of a new "co-operative" model of economic activity and development, hand in hand with the profound "democratization" of necessary large scale enterprises such as are already or may in the future evolve and be needed. (At least as an essential transitional phase away from the current "private wealth" Corporatist model, in my view.) Though I am also reluctant about drawing any hard and fast rules either, that do not evolve "democratically" from the bottom up and grow organically out of people's real economic activity experience. And I certainly do think there is a place for ongoing small scale, and even initial "start-up" private enterprise, for as far into the future as I am able to see anyway. (It's just that the key to me is the development of a "co-perative" rather than "competitive" direction moving model.)

That said, again, I have great respect for Fait's economic analyses, such as he has presented here this thread, and we have many of us discussed since the early appearance of Tyee. I do think that around such a reality grounded analyses and critique of the current economic arrangement of society, that there is the seed possibility of a future grand alliance of the left and progressives in this country. And without such a coalescing occurring around such a central economic analysis base as Fait has been helping to develop here, there is no challenge to the reigning status quo economic and political arrangement that can lead us, this country certainly, out of the current morass in which it finds itself.

For that is the next stage that has to occur at some point, I would say to all of us here, or we are all just about so much hot air and verbosity; that coalescing around a central set of ideas and analyses about the economy, society and the country. Which then needs to organize itself in a way that can move on up and out of the current dead end radical and more moderate progressives are boxed in, and challenge the status quo political movements and ruling class centred socio-economic realities in a serious struggle for power.

My own early hope, having been a militant trade unionist myself, was that there would be a movement of working class level society led by the trade union movement, emerge to set that end of the social spectrum in motion, as politics within the country was also radicalized more or less along with it, or if that word "radical" bothers you, made more challenging of the status quo. I think that still has to occur, though it is not likely to do so soon or with the current "business union" committed leadership of the trade union movement. So there are things which have to occur there first, or outside of it, which sow different seeds in that august and languishing body politic.

For I think there are two realities which have to feed one into the other here, in order for there to be the socio-economic transformation of current society that is needed, at least in my view. There has to be that ferment and bubbling up from the bottom, without which the brew is stagnant and lifeless, that creates a similarly "alive" political atmosphere and new development possibilities. Each thereupon facilitating, and serving to encourage the further development and strengthening of the other.

Continued next post...

From previous post...

All of which is currently pretty much absent and needing to begin to come to life, save for in still relatively isolated pockets such as this, within a fairly healthy online radical and progressive community challenging the extreme Neocon right. A large part of the problem being, I suspect, knowing myself :-)and a few others here, an aging, relatively war weary "progressive/radical" population and a cynical but disengaged more youthful one.

Which latter element is what most needs to be changed, for that is truly where the future lies, and preaching alone, in my experience, does not do that, though it can assist-, but mostly they/youth will have to come to see the need for activist "engagement" themselves.

Still, there are some modest grounds for optimism-, rooted in that disengagement from and cynicism about current society and politics oddly enough, so widespread everywhere. One first has to have been made cynical about the status quo, and so non-desirous of even participating in it, to have removed the rose coloured glasses, if nothing else. (Check out the non-participation rate in even the basic, so-called democratic electoral process.) And we are there. It just also has to sooner or later move beyond merely that.

I'll apologize in advance for my eggheady attempt to answer.

I believe it is a logical consequence of post-modernism in the social sciences and the acceptance of moral relativism.

The ability to describe the world or determine true/false has been undermined by the radical uncertainty of post-modernism and moral relativism. I think post-modernists and relativists were initially engaged in an important critique of hegemonic discourses, but fail to see how their critique lacks an epistemological foundation to posit anything.

If all views are to be tolerated and seen as valid, how can we marshal our collective activities to improve the world? At least liberalism and marxism tries to describe the world in concrete terms. Post-modernism leaves us with an incomprehensible mess due to the attempt to sound sophisticated.

Of course not all views are actually seen as valid by those who claim to champion tolerance. (Diversity is tolerated as long as someone is not a conservative or a small-l liberal.) Therein lies the hypocrisy of the activist left: there is a tendency to undermine hegemonic discourses (eg liberalism, natural sciences) through epistemological critique, yet fail to see how the epistemological critique undermines their ability to posit a better future -- e.g. how can we support sustainable development if we cannot agree on right and wrong without reference to subjective perspectives, values and culture? We are left with ad hominem arguments and use of force.

Since among nihilists/subjectivists it is impossible to provide valid arguments for a policy, the tendency is to replace valid argument with preachy evangelistic rhetoric and ad hominem attacks for the skeptical (e.g. Hannibal's posts). I think many Canadians distrust this kind of "reasoning".

Steve P- An argument dear to my heart, but articulated much more concisely than I could have managed.

Just so you know, the current Manitoba highway proposed for this NASCO project from the US border to Winnipeg is essentially un-passable by transport trucks.

Years of neglect have the road in such a dismal condition that any semi driver dumb enough to use the road might join the others whose axles have been torn off.

If the mexicans want to buy us a new road, please don't stand in their way.

And don't tell them we have daily cargo flights to Shanghai.

Steve P
Without disagreeing about the generally accurate assessment you've provided above and although I am in general agreement with nightbloom’s comment I’d have to add that it's hardly a one way street.

There may be the odd knee-jerk from the left around here but I've found it is usually in reaction, to some kind of nominal offence and disrespect from the right. And there is a great deal of that around - coming from, not least and most appallingly, from the current Prime Minister - reference his recent remarks about the Toronto arrests. Surely, if the man wishes to be considered as a serious contender for a real ‘leader’ then he needs to smarten up in a major way.

And, I'd further hasten to add, the ability of anyone (of whatever political or ideological stripe) to post on this site without fear of censorship or banning is something to be cherished. And something that exists almost nowhere among those sites that bill themselves as conservative or right wing.

Using myself as an example, it became apparent to me - quite some time ago - that right-wing sites were never, repeat never, willing to let my comments (which were no different than they are here in language or philosophy) stand.

Take from that what you will. But without some degree of effective respect and empathy for each other (and I don’t mean just tolerance, which amounts to nothing more than a ceasefire) we are in dire straits as a society.

GWest:

Agreed.

For example, anyone posting a critique of Anne Coulter on Proud to be Canadian's blog will discover a lack of tolerance for any view that is not arch-conservative.

I may be disatisfied with some arguments from the activist community (although my heart often agrees with where they are coming from), but I keep coming back to the Tyee, lumps and all ...

Our real hope lies with moderates who are willing to talk -- and listen -- to each other =^)

Now, even while nightbloom is attempting to bask in some of the reflected credit for this analysis of Steve Ps, I certainly do not recall anything remotely similar falling from his proverbial "learned" pen here. A lot of the throwing around of similar academic words and phrases, but without nearly the coherance.

Outside of that, while I have some concern about how we are going to define "moderates" here, who is and is not so, and never having been accused of being "moderate" myself :-), I still think your comments are largely correct. Even if I find some of the "language" unfamiliar, perhaps even a tad strange to my more "Old Left" ideas grounding.

That said, with exceptions as always exist to prove the rule of course, I do think that Tyee, in the diversity that has occurred across a wide spectrum here, has demonstrated that there is a broad "progressive" discourse that is possible, even without excluding the more raving elements of the extreme right. Indeed, it is necessary and far more preferable, in my view, to defeat their ideas, rather than administratively or by decree, by exposing the self-serving fallacies of the ideas, social and economic assumptions and solutions positions they advocate and defend for. That, and evolving real life must demonstrate it so as well.

For there is a lot of objective reality here that is outside our ability to control, and one might as well acknowledge that.

While we must demonstrate a superior grasp of reality to the Conservative right, which is fortunately not too difficult of itself, save for their favour by ruling class monetary and media largesse, we should not expect that we will be perfect or infallible for all time and situations either. For we will not be, and we likely need "the right" snapping at our heels to keep us vigilant and mindful of the risks of that. :-)

And we will also need to be mindful that, if and when we are finally successful at transforming society into a quite different direction, what constitutes "the right", after a time, is likely to shift along the spectrum line and morph into something quite different as well. (I mean, where is the old feudal/aristocratic advocating "right" anymore, the old Monarchists and British Empire Loyalists, this far after the time of the landed aristocracy? (Become US Empire Loyalists?) If they are still there, as I'm sure they are, they are harmless and way, way out there.

The right of that time has morphed into the new capitalist ruling class "conservative" right, from its "left" position in feudal society at the time of the English Civil War, when it advocated for the overthrow of the monarchy."

Everything is relative and everything changes. It is the only immutable law that I know.

Dunno where you get off saying some of the things you do, Coyote-daddy. It seems we can add "selective reading" and "senility" to your growing list of credits. And your posts are just as fatuous and self-obsessed as anything else posted on these threads, so get over yourself and look to the splinter in your own eye.

Steve P, welcome to the fray! - Keep posting! =)

Chuckling.8-D

Once complete, the new road will allow containers from the Far East
to enter the United States through the Mexican port of Lazaro
Cardenas, bypassing the Longshoreman’s Union in the process. The
Mexican trucks, without the involvement of the Teamsters Union, will
drive on what will be the nation’s most modern highway straight into
the heart of America. The Mexican trucks will cross border in FAST
lanes, checked only electronically by the new “SENTRI” system. The
first customs stop will be a Mexican customs office in Kansas City,
their new Smart Port complex, a facility being built for Mexico at a
cost of $3 million to the U.S. taxpayers in Kansas City.

Incredible. I'd not heard of this before.

The absorption of Canada into a new US dominated SuperState needs a new, bigger, wider and generally honkier Super Highway, to carry even more cars and trucks. Of which there is obviously not near enough already. Build it, and they will come.

And the process of de-unionization and impoverishment of the North American ruling class continues apace.

Thanks for this, Fait.

"And the process of de-unionization and impoverishment of the North American ruling class continues apace."

although it works in an "ironic" context, it should read...

"And the process of de-unionization and impoverishment of the North American working class continues apace."

Coyote, will you please shut up?

Man, you're misguided. You need to understand the facts of (working ) life and bury your ideologies.

Thankfully unions are slowly dying and so is the leftist mindset.

Look at the newest geneeration of Quebecers for instance. The realize that seperatism and left wing flightiness is a good way to get left behind.

Rolling on the floor, laughing at the image of this speech delivered on a normal bunch of beer-chugging, soccer-watching working folks ...

Fiat..

Yeah, right - and the Teamsters are going to allow that to happen?

We will have a whole new brand of terrorism.

I never said I was a populist ... =^)

Although I do think that a normal bunch of beer-chugging, soccer-watching working folks don't take moral relativism and post-modernism seriously. It is self-evident to most that, since some things are always wrong (torturing babies, etc.), there is the possibility of objective moral reasoning. That is, the question of whether it is moral to torture babies may be answered with a "true" or "false".

The people I hope to convince with my argument are those who take postmodern relativism seriously -- like almost every grad student in the social sciences these days.

Coyote:

Thanks for reading my post. I respect the Old Left for its unapologetic desire to control state power. They at least spell out what they hope to achieve.

The New Left with its orientation toward community control and moral transformation makes me worry because I wonder if I'm being told the full extent of their actual programme. (I suppose this is the same criticism I would level toward the religious right.) Many of their proponents draw upon postmodern critiques to lambaste liberal capitalism, but fail to see how the same critiques shoot down their own claims to knowledge about sustainable development. I buy into sustainable development, so I reject postmodernism and moral/cultural relativism.

I tend to the small-l liberal approach to defining moderates: moderates are defined by their means more than their ends. If you are using legal methods, elections and persuasion (ideally, good arguments), then you are moderate enough for me.

Nightbloom:
thanks for the encouragement and posting a good question.

Which disturbs me some, in that this definition renders me moderate. Though I would only add, while this is certainly the preferred course, folks, the left and progressive in especially a neocon/fascist drifting social environment should keep their powder dry and be prepared for just about anything.

Which what? Parks my arse on the bloody mugwamp fence between radical and moderate? :-) I leave it to y'all to judge. :-)

Save perhaps for this unavoidable ambiguity/quandry, in a time when it still relatively easy to talk of a "peaceful transition" to a new social and economic arrangement, I find much that is otherwise useful in your analysis.

Hopefully, we will see more of you here, brother.

Neocon,

It ain't over 'til it's over. And history hasn't run its full course yet, last time I looked. And I'm still on the right side of the grass. :-)

In any case, unless the weather does another unexpected flip-flop, y'all shall get a few days respite from me anyway, starting NOW.

(Meanwhile, I talked the old lady into us getting a new KitchenAid mixer. A bundle of cash but a beauty. I've been a baking fool, or as nightbloomers might say, a proper little house bitch since we got it. Right now I hear the oven alarm announcing some Hermit cookies are ready to come out. Mmmmmmm. Drooool. Luuuuv cookies. :-)

Sorry to disappoint (well, maybe not). =^)

You can still feel passionate about the views you implement through moderate means, if it helps you feel more romantic and radical =^)

But your point about fascism is important (although you do invoke the f-word more frequently than me, as I think there are important differences between fascism and neoconservatism, but this is another story).

My argument re: moderates is only valid within relatively stable liberal democracies, wherein persuasion and legal recourse are (at least theoretically) available for whomever wants to participate politically.

In other circumstances, some violent struggle may be necessary to create the conditions for moderation to be possible.

As you note there is, of course, a point at which political violence is justified. Just what that point is, I'm sure you'll agree, is an extraordinarily difficult condition to pin down! But achieving something like consensus on that problem will help us understand when violence by our expeditionary forces is justified.

"...our expeditionary forces..." A novel concept for a puppet invasion force, entered into another country, that we are part of at the behest of the US Empire.

Anyway, no time to deal with that right now, and which is transparent enough anyway-, for most familiar with these threads.

Mostly, before slipping away upon the early morrow though, I just thought I would pass along that CBC is reporting that Russia and China, along with "a number of other Asian states", and no more than that said, have formed a formal "military bloc".

In announcing it, Putin, while discrediting that it was an "anti-US" military bloc especially, did say that it was made necessary by the US continuing to "throw its weight around in the world."

Another step towards WWW3 kiddies, arising out of these imperial Western, primarily US Empire initiated and arm twisted adventures into the Middle East. Watch this development and the tone this new "bloc" takes toward the US Empire and its puppets, which include us, over the coming weeks and months. In my view, a dangerous development that heightens the danger of our flunky role joined at the hip with the US-, though some may choose to call it a more discreet and harmless "expeditionary force."

Guffaw!

Also, it is only possible Steve, that I throw the "f" word around a lot more because having "perhaps" again beem around a little longer in the real world than yourself, I see the face of the one in the other a little quicker off the mark than yourself. That is, the lurking and evolving "fascist" in the "neocon Conservative". (Not yet an inevitability and with significant differences to be sure, but "drifting" that way. And the warning does need to be sounded. My view.)

Just maybe? :-)

Now that is the absolute last word from moi for a few days. I'm up, up and away at the crack of dawn, and you don't stay pretty like me, and attractive to the ladies, :-) without your beauty sleep.

Catch ya's later.

Russia/China military bloc ? Bring it on. You know the old saying ' The NDP couldn't run a lemonade stand.'
What a bunch of baffoons. This alliance does not scare me.They couldn't fight their way out of a paper bag.
The Americans, on the other hand, can kick their but from here to China.
Thank God

Late to the party as usual but I bet I'm the only one that brought his own beer. (Canadian-made and owned of course)

IAMC, you want to spell buffoon with a "u" and butt with two t's.

As for the NDP, who wants to be doing the serving for $6 an hour? That's more of a Socred thing, we prefer to run the whole juice company.

IAMC:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction

Yeah... That dont scare me neither... them baffooons... good thing the amerikkans looking after us... they'll take care of us and kick sum but.
i love amerikkka thank god for that ...

you quisling... why dont you just frick off down to that shithole if you love it so much.

IAMC..

I understand that a lot of weapons manufactured in the U.S. are falling into the hands of terrorist fighters both in Afghanistan and the U.S.

Surely the U.S. - which is the biggest arms producer in the world - is not selling weapons to the people whom it is trying to annihilate.

Further we all know that the U.S. is trying to democratize Iraq and Afg. - whether they want it or not.
It's like telling a small child to "eat your spinach because it's good for you".
Both the Iraqis and Afghans don't give a tinker's damn about democracy. All they want is peace in their own countries - without occupying forces!!

Coyote wrote

Old news, they been at it for awhile, mostly economic and political is where their clout is, the three major players have all fought against each other, so it is a alliance of convenience. They hold the occasional military exercise. India is playing both sides to gain maximum advantage.

I have to laugh how the latest figures on arms sales neglect to include Russia and China, guess because they don’t bother giving out “state secerts”

Hannibal
Sorry, wrong again

Throughout his career, General Hillier has had the privilege and pleasure of commanding troops from the platoon to multi-national formation level within Canada, Europe, Asia and the United States. He has worked as a staff officer in several headquarters, first at the Army level in Montreal and later at the strategic level in Ottawa.
In 1998 General Hillier was appointed as the first Canadian Deputy Commanding General of III Corps, US Army in Fort Hood, Texas. In 2000 he took command of NATO's Stabilization Force's (SFOR) Multinational Division (Southwest) in Bosnia-Herzegovina.
In May 2003 General Hillier was appointed as Commander of the Army and subsequently, in October 2003, he was selected as the Commander of the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Kabul, Afghanistan.
General Hillier was promoted to his present rank and assumed duties as the Chief of the Defence Staff on 4 February 2005.
http://www.cds.forces.gc.ca/pubs/bio_e.asp

In other words, Gen.Hillier is the ultimate universal soldier who doesn't give a damn which country he serves, as long as there's a uniform and bigger bangs go with it.

I'm not a betting man, but I'd bet odds that he has a US uniform in his closet and looks at it every night, drooling over when he can wear it openly in a "deep integrated" North America, and a sold out Canada. Afghanistan is just the testing station for the absorbtion of the Canadian military in the some "continental" force to further the colonizating efforts of the "wealth creating, global market economy".

Otherwise known as globalized fascism.

The professional soldiers of history have been the largest sector of turncoats, often changing sides on the battlefields.

The Wehrmacht officers and pro NCOs of nazi Germany could hardly wait to don the uniforms of the occupiers and organize the West and East German armies. This list of turncoat professionals is endless, going back to the beginning.

Ed Deak.

Colin
I could care less where Hillier came from, he seems a perfect example of the Canadian armed services these days - any organization that would put that character in front of a camera and permit him to lead human beings into mortal danger in the service of a lie (whether it is a Liberal, Harperite or American lie) in this day and age is in serious trouble. I see McNaughton’s grandson has just been promoted too – why am I not surprised! The Victorian tradition marches on.

Maybe you can get all of them together with their biggest fan, Don Cherry, on Hockey Night in Canada – oops! Or is it Afghanistan?

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1150408210180&call_pageid=970599109774&col=Columnist969907618300

Interesting Richard Gwyn piece in today's Toronto Star. No better place to post it than under Bush's picture right now. Just something for all you capitalists to ponder.

Gwest, Andy Leslie's a great guy. Smart as a whip, friendly and quite progressive. He's one of the sharper minds at NDHQ. You should be applauding his elevation.

Yea, you're right Coliin. But he(Hillier) got a major promotion under Harpo.
Putting him in charge of Pee Wees great Afghani advenure .With more to come as O'Conner has promised even more troops on the ground in Afghanistan come the fall .
First he has 15,billion to blow on new toys for the troops .
I wonder which one of the manufacturers O'Conner used to shill for will get the contract.Talk about a conflict of interest.

He's dreaming if he thinks Canada will approve of these expenditures .

We have already purchased 8,billion dollars worth of Chinook 'copters to start delivery in '08 .

OTTAWA -- Prime Minister Stephen Harper says he's "nobody's puppet" and U.S. President George Bush doesn't pull his strings.

"I see from time to time that the Liberals and members of the Bloc say that I am George Bush's puppet and other things like that," Harper said in a wide-ranging television interview with Radio-Canada that will air Sunday.

"Even if I think that people don't always agree with me, they understand that I'm nobody's puppet," Harper told the French-language program Les Coulisses de pouvoir.

Harper has been criticized by his political adversaries and some commentators for being too cosy with Bush on issues such as the Kyoto Protocol and the military.

Harper also said during the interview that some Canadians don't understand that terrorism is a global threat.

"I think that a lot of people in Canada are naive," he said. "The reality is that the terrorism threat is worldwide. We cannot escape it by closing our eyes.

"That's the reason why we've have been in Afghanistan for several years. We are there because of the deaths of about 30 Canadians in the World Trade Centre," he said.
Okay, so you're a marionette .
Puppets don't have strings .

Hannibal

The CPC was in power in Feb 2005???

Conner’s was the rep for Airbus, who aren’t even likely to be considered in this latest deal and for good reason, so that kind of blows that theory away. The only viable options are the C-17 or one of the Russians aircraft. Although I think Russia can build decent kit, parts, training and quality control are all real issues. Since Australia, US and UK are all buying some, it makes sense to tap into something that is flying right now. The Liberals have ignored the problem for so long that you can’t play games anymore. The same with the most of the kit in the military, it’s like your roof, you can put plastic on it only so many times, before it collapses.

Ed
Well it’s a good thing that this country is full of raving foolish individuals that will always question government policy as opposed to the “collective community” that worked so well in Russia and Germany.

To replace the ones we sold to the Dutch, who are now giving us rides in them when they can. Although I can't remember which idiots were in power when they did this, but it was truely stupid.

Yea, I think it was the Mulroney gang that sold the choppers .
Still and all I have to agree with G.West that the bellicose Hillier should be kept far,far from a microphone as humanly possible .
Hillier took over from Pat Stogran(SP) in Afghanistan .
Stogran was actually well liked by the troops and is considered a soldiers soldier.
I remember the ramp ceremony for Leger,Green et al.
It was moving and it was obvious that Stogran was deeply affected by it .
Friendly fire my ass!

Yea,Colin the neo's are buying the planes untendered.What does that tell 'ya ?
Here we go again another huge kick back scandal waiting in the wings and this time the neo's will wear it .
Why can't they just but off the rack like everybody else ?
I don;t give a rats patooty who O'Conner workes for he has no business being in procurement.Period. End of story .
The opposition have pointed this out many times .
Can't wait for the envelopes stuffd with money to start changing hands in dimly lit restaurants .

Full article from the New York Times on the upcoming meeting of the Shanghai Co-operation Organizetion, lead by Russia and China, which is to feature Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as its main guest speaker. All of which indicates the clear direction in which this so-called "War on Terra" is developing, and the interpretation that others, such as these SCO folks, are putting on their own war against "terror".

http://www.iiss.org/whats-new/iiss-in-the-press/june-2006/the-most-dangerous-unknown-pact

A dangerous world it is The US Empire and its Neoconservative puppet allies has launched us into, no doubt. Outside of formal appearances, it is the same old, same old Cold War set of players reforming up their armies on the field of the new Global War scenario.

Very interesting Coyote.Thanks for the link.
This is America's cumuppance to be sure .

America's influence in waning badly.
And about time .
As China relies on Iran for 17% of its oil they are duty bound to make concessions .
Interesting to see how this all plays out in the future .

All disinformation, typical of the current regime. But what bothered me on reading this bit of the article was the "logical" leap being made, that the second sentence's information is supposed to demonstrate that Harper isn't playing the fear card every bit as much as Bush does. Hence the CSIS/RCMP full-dress uniform grandstanding, which frankly would NOT have happened without his blessing. Bush tosses jokes off about people wanting to kill him, too; it only adds to his lustre of self-importance. Remember how Reagan's popularity went up after the Hinckley thing?

There's an overall drift of militarist hoopla on-air these days, especially on the big networks and not just CBC; Global's "online poll" the other night was "are xxx Canadian trooops enough to conquer the Taliban?" - yes or no. Not "Will enough troops ever be enough?", which is more like it. Then there's the maudlin flag-wrapping about our dead soldiers and how grateful we are to the military for rescuing that secret-homosexual pacifist ingrate who doesn't appreciate the military enough (until now).

We're being sold. Anyone who's worked in sales or advertising should be able to see it. Now we have to "support our troops" by not questioning the war - an old Vietnam-era disinformation/detraction technique. And so on. But, if not so much on this side of the Rockies, Canadians are overall a bunch of SHEEP and are so used to believing in their politicians and media that, well, with the right cotton-batting you can pull the wool over anybody's eyes with enough bafflegab (to thoroughly mix the metaphors).

I'll be back; just some thoughts on the article as it stands; but also to mention that just because Harper appears to not be grandstanding doesn't mean he isn't.

Well,Skookum1 if CSIS and the RCMP had a clue they would be dangerous .
They are a bunch of Inspector Jacques Clouseau's running around with their mellons chopped off .Clueless to the core .
The Republican playbook is transparant and always has been .
Our Boy Scout image got blown to hell like a virgins cherry on prom night .
We used to lead the world as the best country on the planet.Now ?
Of course Harpo is grandstanding what else can he do.
The rhetoric is right out of Bush's stupid yap"They hate us for our freedoms and because of who we are "
Yea,yea, yea .
I on the other hand don't beleive we are sheep it is just that we believe strongly in the democratic process .
After all 3 out of 4 Canadians didn't vote for the twit and that has to say something .

The only sheep Skookum1 are of the neo-con persuasion .End of story .

What really interests me about all this has little to do with the Middle East actually, or the increasingly clear negative fate that awaits Imperial Amerikkka per se, against a whole growing host of enemies, whom Martin and Harper have now invited to our own shores with their flunky ruling class set of interests that have brought us to stand too close and intimately next to The Empire.

Which is not to say that I do not care whatsoever about the fate of the Arab peoples, even the US people, or The Peace, because I do, but that there is another over-riding interest I have in all this, in a world where it is increasingly likely that we will have to look after our own best interests first.

And that is, such as hinges upon, what is the shape of the world likely to be like, and what new developments will there be once the US Empire is finally routed from the Middle East, by whatever combination of opposing forces? (And I think the history of all previous imperialisms everywhere tells as that that they will indeed be sent fleeing for the Gulf and home here.)

And there are some things that are immediately obvious and of interest to me as a Canadian about that likelihood.

First, that it will signal the end of the US Empire as the over-riding force or influence over the future development of the world-, and no less ourselves. That much is immediately obvious, it seems to me. Less immediately obvious but of great possibility and driving that conclusion as well, is a highly likely economic collapse, or at least precipitous slide, in the aftermath of this global defeat that could pose the most serious threat and consequence to the capitalist economic system itself, the greatest since the last Great Depression of the 1930s.

Secondly, out of that entire confusion and disarray there emerges, in my read of the possibilities, a breakdown at least of this country's dependancy on the United States-, though they may in fact desire us more than ever, it will be much less reciprocle almost certainly. Which will represent the first truly new situation and possibility for this country since the collapse of our previous dependancy on the old British Empire.

It is going to force a rethinking of old previously held political assumptions and conjecture about what is the likely most beneficial direction of this country's future national development. The assumptions underpinning current ruling class policy around NAFTA and capitalist globalization is likely all to quickly come crashing down thereafter as well, in Amerikkka's rush to look after itself exclusively, such as it really does anyway, but with new and greater consequences for us-, throwing the entire socio-economic system into disorder, and possibly even chaos and collapse.

A bad thing one might say, if one is a Neocon US Empire Loyalist, for sure, but a good thing, at least with new and even radical possibilities for a change in the direction of the country's national and economic development direction if one is less than enthusiastic about our current colonial relationship with the United States and the entire "Corporatist System".

Continued next post...

From previous post...

Amerikkkas has chosen a course which puts all its eggs in securing and holding in perpetuity, onto a global, ever expanding empire to match its need for endless growth, and especially control over the Middle East and much of oil rich Africa. A dream which is finally bringing it into conflict with other powerful, and organizing global interests-, and which no great Empire in history has in fact been able to hold onto forever anyway, and we are now in a world, in fact, of accelerated technological and social reality development, and a widespread Middle East social upheaval. The point at which it all comes undones is that where an Empire's reach exceeds its ability to hold onto and control it, and where the costs of Empire exceed the benefits derived from it. And the US Empire is already straining economically, militarily and politically.

So, for those of us of a left or "progressive" nationalist social bent, while there is danger to us and the nation in the period ahead, no doubt, there is also likely emerging a situation and opportunity, if not without the risks of trauma, such as which this nation has not had for a very, very long time, to break out of the box of foreign dependancy it is in. ( What? Since McKenzie and Papineau?)

Which I think is a good thing and the opportunity of this period, which has to be watched and worked for by patriots, progressives and radicals.

For the first one now is often later to be last, the old order's road is rapidly aging. :-)

Haanibal
Our Herc fleet was bought in 64-67 and the rest 1987, they are old, tired and heavily used. I don’t suppose you remember the Herc last year shedding it’s wings firefighting over California? We could have done a proper contract process 10 years ago, but that’s what happens when you ignore problems for to long.

You are right on one thing, for China it’s all about oil and they will look after their own interests. The Liberals were big on sucking up to the Chinese, I suspect the politburo saw them as “Useful idiots”. To bad the neo-liberals here spend so much time venting on the US, I guess it’s easier and safer than going after the Chinese.

Nahhh. You have to know better than that Colin. It's way easier going after the Chinese in this part of the world.

What is funny though, you can see the Chinese "oil interest", done in negotiated deals at "market prices" with the national interests concerned, say Iran or Sudan, but smacked in the face with it in Afghanistan and Iraq, you can't or more like refuse to see the US "oil interest" acting itself out in quite another, more warlike, imperial way.

And I ain't saying China or Russia are angels. They sure as hell are not. But they certainly don't have troops occupying territory in the Middle East, at least yet. (Though the Russians did try to occupy Afghanistan as well.)

It is yourself who is taking the line of least resistance on this issue Colin-, trying to look out onto the world through US focused, as opposed to Canadian "national interest" eyes. It is what you share with the Neocons, though you may differ in some other regards, not yet apparent, and is the major weakness point in all your analyses here as a consequence.

And let's face it, even the major urgent impetus to suddenly secure "heavy lift" aircraft, is again not determined by Canadian "national interest" but to get Canadian forces arms and asses over to the Middle East to serve the US Empire "empire interest".

Even though, it might in the future be determined, when and if there is ever a Canadian military reorientation upon the "national interest" and "homeland defences", as part of a "go it alone" and "self-sufficient" Canada,there may be a determined future need still for some heavy lift capacity for the rapid deployment of defence forces around "within" the country.

Which is still not the reason this purchase is being made-, or Hannibal is right, there is time to put it out to tender or better yet, build them in Canada. This purchase is being proposed the better to get our lips up into the vicinity of kissing Amerikkkan ass. Again.

Colin
Have to remind you that 'neo-liberal' is what the rest of the world (outside of N America) labels what we here call neo-conservatives. Your reference to neo liberal above, given that fact, doesn't scan.

Yea, I know Colin my wife used to work for Spar Aero Space and they have the refit contract for the Hercs .The entire fleet has had major upgrades over the past 5,years .
If Amerikka is so concerned with our ability at rapid deployment why don't they provide us with the aircraft at cost ?
They keep telling us we are their best friend and all, so prove it !
What this signals is a major shift in our military and its deployment .
We were doing alright renting the Ukranian Antanovs when we needed to be somewhere in a hurry .
Or as Coyote has mentioned why not build them in Canada with Bombardier or someone else ? God knows we have provided them with plenty of capital over the years .
Fact is we still don't have the numbers of forces requred for rotations to occur on a set schedule and it will be many years before we get the numbers up as it takes time to train the forces .
I don't begrude them their equipment it is just the method of procurement I have a problem with .

Along with a thorough review of our entire foreign policy and foreign relationship strategy, and a re-orientation of the country in a "self-sufficient" and "democratic economy and political" development direction away from US Empire reliance, we need to reassess the state and role of our national military-, similarly directed away from US service and dependency. That's my fundamental view.

As part of that, I agree with Hannibal; that otherwise, I don't begrudge the Canadian military the equipment they actually need. The caveat being, to serve the "real national interest" of the country. And unless, like I say, the intent is simply to get the equipment the US wants us to have, and to get the exposed asses of our forces into the Middle East to serve the Amerikkkkans, there is time for proper "due process".

And until that is done, we should get our forces out of Afghanistan and harms way for the US Empire, like yesterday.

If it walks like a Neocon, Colin, and it talks like one, the chances are, regardless of the professed opinion it has of itself, it IS a Neocon.

I'm damned sure though, that most true small "l" liberals will resent my being included in with them. :-) I resent it as well. :-) Too wishy washy. Besides, they will more likely feel about standing too close to me, the way I feel about this country standing too close to the United States. 8-D LOL (Though I certainly am prepared to work with "liberals", issue by issue and on a long term strategy, anytime. Where we agree. And a "liberal" is certainly not necessarily a "Liberal".)

But then, there seems to be a great deal of gender confusion around Tyee in any case-, from my particular partisan perspective. :-) That said, save for the Neocon US Empire Loyalists, the one true enemy, I love y'all. :-) (More chuckling.)

Many of you will love this.....

The TV camera was focussed on Harper in the stands in Edmonton at last night's playoff game - and Harry Neal said...

"He (Harper) could be given a job as scout when he loses the next election!"
With emphasis on the word 'when'.

Harry knows something we don't know - or may be hoping for?

Jack's loved the comment as well but it was actually Bob Cole who let loose with this pearl of wisdom .

Absolutely Coyote we must back away from Amerikka as soon as possible before we get sucked into any more of their adventures.
Amerikka creates a lot of gravity and we are being sucked down by it .
That O'Conner shopping list was in all probabilitty drawn up by an Amerikkan General .
How much of our GDP are we willing to toss to the military ?

What an excellent and accurate way to put it-, within the context of global capitalism. Amerikkka is a great jessus black hole. :-)

Amen Coyote amen .

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/17/AR2006061700999.html

From yesterday's Washington Post. Just a little more grist for the mill about our American allies and the way they 'do' war.

Interesting read GWest. It is highly like that this history of treatment of Amerikkka's own war prisoners, whether they themselves consider them "legal" prisoners of war or not... (Which I think they clearly are.) ... is likely to be a major element in the treatment accorded to these two recent US soldiers captured south of Baghdad, and now in the news. It is regrettable, of course, but I for one would certainly not blame any element of the Iraqi Insurgency for any display of bitterness or hatred which might befall these soldiers. I hope not, but... they forgot the cardinal rule of, "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."

Everybody in warfare forgets that at their peril, which is part of the spinning into madness of this kind of warfare.

Though it is also possible, the Insurgency might feel they are a more important asset in bartering for cash 'n military stuff too, or the freeing of key people in US hands, important to themselves. Hopefully that is how it will work out-, assuming that US forces are smart enough. Which is a stretch, I know.

Depending on how this all plays out in the final days of the war, and how badly the US Empire is ultimately defeated of course, and rendered vulnerable to war reparations and retribution etc., there is a real "moral" need to see much of the US militarty and political leadership on trial for war crimes in the International Court of Justice, leading off with Bush and Rumsfield for starters.

Coyote
I came across another piece, speaking of Rumsfeld, written by another retired general John Batiste the other day, you can find it here:

http://www.sltrib.com/portlet/article/html/fragments/print_article.jsp?article=3919708

Why is it these guys only speak up openly once they've retired, I ask rhetorically?

GWest,

It seems to me that I've heard an interview with this guy somewhere. But then there are so many of these "retired" general types coming out of the war closet of late, it's hard to keep track.

My personal favourite, though I'm under no illusions as to his real loyalties or politics, is Murtha, an up from the bottom "grunt". I like his grumpy, straight and forthright style, being deliberately provocative in his efforts to move things to another entire plane of facing up to their reality.

Hope you're having a good day, brother.

Coyote wrote a few days ago:

Hardly a novel concept. Our forces in WWI were an expeditionary force, in close cooperation with the Brits. Same empire as today (the anglosphere), but with different leadership. I don't associate "discrete" or "harmless" with the word "expeditionary force" -- we had 10% of our people in uniform in WWI.

C'mon Coyote -- I know you can do better than this. Real arguments, please.

I think there is danger of crying wolf, and then being ignored when real fascists appear. Just like the MSM who describe every social struggle as a "War on X" -- they are left struggling for vocabulary to describe a real war because they have run out of superlatives.

Past fascists arose from nationalist socialist parties (not conservatives) who were able to cajole frightened conservative governments into accepting fascists into government.

Fascists rarely performed well in elections (I think their support maxed out in Germany at ~30% of the voting public), unlike the Republic Party in the USA.

Conservative governments who were stable were not tempted to flirt with fascists for support.

Also, past fascists created huge party institutions to shadow state institutions, especially when they couldn't control the state. Past fascists also mobilized paramilitary thugs and engaged in fierce street battles against communists and their sympathizers.

In sum, I believe there are (still) significant differences between our neo-cons/neo-libs and past fascist movements.

BTW, my thoughts on this topic have been influenced by Paxton's Anatomy of Fascism (http://thereitis.org/displayarticle195.html).

I may disagree with how you perceive your shades of gray, but when uniformed paramilitaries illegally shut down the Tyee and fight in the street, I'll see you in the Resistance =^)

Not quite accurate, Steve P.
The proportion of the voters who cast ballots for the Nazis in Reichstag Elections from 1924 - 1933 are as follows:
May 1924 - 6.5%; Dec 1924 - 3.0%; 1928 2.6%; 1930 - 18.3%; Jan 1932 - 37.4%; Nov 1932 - 33.1%; Jan 1933 - 43.9%.

When Hindenburg offered the Chancellorship to Hitler and he accepted on Jan 30, 1933 he was the leader of the largest party in the Reichstag and, as such, entitled to head the government - perfectly legally. Between 1928 and 1932 Nazi support grew from 2.6% to 33.1% while the next largest party the Social Democrats, had shrunk from 29.8% to 20.4%. The only other party to grow during that period was the Communist Party, which increased from 10.6% to 16.9%.

One also has to remember that, subsequent to 1933, the Nazis used plebiscites frequently and almost never gained less than 90% approval for their programs and policies.

Plebiscites aren't electoral success. But I'll concede the point on the Jan 1933 election, but they still required a coalition with the German Worker's party to control the Reichstag.

In any case, it doesn't debunk my point that there are significant differences between fascists and neoconservatives/neoliberals.

Steve P
Why would you say that about plebiscites? If they are the only democratic instrument available, what else would they be but a confirmation of electoral success and popular feeling?

In the Nazi case I think the plebiscites were exactly that, a strong conformation of electoral success. I haven't got the data in front of me, but the Nazis were very successful at mobilizing business and industry behind their programs - long before the war ever started.

I think there are strong echoes of fascism in neo con programs - not least because the neo cons also tend to 'use' information and the media in very manipulative ways and they also have a very definite 'program' in mind - just as the fascists did.

Looking at the relative health of American popular democracy: Did you know, for example, that the voters return to House of Representatives 98% of its incumbents from election to election? And the Senate is almost as hidebound.