Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

U.S. Says Canada Cares Too Much About Liberties

michael posted more than 11 years ago | from the when-canada-sneers-at-you-you-know-you're-in-trouble dept.

United States 1562

A cheeky writer at Canada's Ottawa Citizen newspaper has written a story about the U.S. State Department's 2002 Patterns of Global Terrorism.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

blame canada! (1, Funny)

paughsw (620959) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879607)

Blame canada! It's their fault

Re:blame canada! (-1, Flamebait)

anonymous cowfart (576665) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879695)

No. Bomb Canada.

Screw you, America (5, Insightful)

WolfeCanada (604888) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879614)

Oh give me a break......the US does not hold jurisdiction over Canada, and they can keep their grubby fingers out of my country, thank you very much. If I want to smoke pot in my own country, if that right has been 'allowed' by my own government, what gives the US the right to interfere in the sovereignity of Canada? F*CK OFF!!

Re:Screw you, America (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5879621)

Does Canada have any oil ressources?

Re:Screw you, America (2, Funny)

jilles (20976) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879646)

No the us have long ago 'liberated' alaska.

Re:Screw you, America (5, Informative)

Moofie (22272) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879775)

If by "liberated" you mean "purchased for cash money from the people who owned it at the time who were not Canadians", then yes, your sentence is true.

If by "liberated" you wish to draw spurious parallels between the purchase of Alaska and the deposing of Saddam, you're an idiot.

Re:Screw you, America (4, Informative)

Jason1729 (561790) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879669)

We have vast oil resources in Western Canada. It is exported to the US very cheaply, and here in Eastern Canada, we import oil from the Middle East at much higher prices.

Jason
ProfQuotes [profquotes.com]

Re:Screw you, America (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5879713)

We have vast oil resources in Western Canada. It is exported to the US very cheaply, and here in Eastern Canada, we import oil from the Middle East at much higher prices.

We also grow large quantities of wheat in Western Canada. However, we are forced to ship it to Eastern Canada first (Canadian Wheat Board). Then we get to buy it back at higher prices. If a farmer tries to circumvent this procedure they are thrown in jail.

Re:Screw you, America (1, Informative)

Jason1729 (561790) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879784)

You only ship the amount you don't use there (that you might want to export elsewhere). What do you mean you buy it back from higher prices? from who? We don't want or get any of you wheat anyway, Ontario produces plenty for our own use and to export to other provinces.

You're on shaky ground to begin with with agriculture as an example. Most farming in Canada is subsidized by the federal goverment, and most of that money comes from Ontario.

What is this hatred you Westerners have against being a part of Canada? My comment was that you give cheap oil to a foreign country instead of your fellow countrymen, and your response is that you are forced to sell your surplus wheat within your own country instead of outside as if that were a bad thing.

Jason
ProfQuotes [profquotes.com]

Re:Screw you, America (5, Insightful)

bandit450 (118835) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879672)

Yes, actually...Alberta's full of it.

Great, now I'm fearing for my life...next thing I know some "glorious" American army is going to "liberate" me from my "prison".

You all know the sayings:
War is peace
Freedom is slavery
Ignorance is strength

Re:Screw you, America (5, Informative)

York the Mysterious (556824) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879679)

They put out a huge ad in the NY Times earlier this year just to let everyone know that they were the US' largest supplier of oil. Apparently not many people know. -Tim

Re:Screw you, America (1)

praksys (246544) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879703)

No, but they have the next best thing [petro-canada.ca] .

Re:Screw you, America (4, Insightful)

gilroy (155262) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879649)

Blockquoth the poster:

the US does not hold jurisdiction over Canada

Not yet, anyway. But just wait until we finish off Syria and North Korea and a few other small countries. After all, if Iraq looked easy, imagine how trivial invading across an undefended border would be....


Sad to say, this scenario is no longer really beyond the imaginable. Sometimes my own government makes me ill. No, wait, let me say "the government of my own country" -- there is no way I'll lay claim to this cowboy administration.

Re:Screw you, America (5, Funny)

91degrees (207121) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879708)

imagine how trivial invading across an undefended border would be....

I dunno... General Hull tried this in 1812, and got his ass whipped.

Re:Screw you, America (1)

Drakin (415182) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879740)

Though, at the time they were trying to fight both the Canadains, and the British (mainly the british).

Re:Screw you, America (1)

mpe (36238) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879753)

Not yet, anyway. But just wait until we finish off Syria and North Korea and a few other small countries. After all, if Iraq looked easy, imagine how trivial invading across an undefended border would be....What makes you think that the US-Canadian border won't be defended by that time. Assuming the US hasn't exhausted it's military might by fighting wars all over the planet and hasn't made the mistake of attacking some "small country" capable of either defending itself or launching a counter attack.

Re:Screw you, America (4, Insightful)

TC (WC) (459050) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879711)

I'm Canadian as well, but guess what? This is how international politics work. You try to influence policies in other countries that you think will negatively affect your own position.
This isn't just something the US does...

The country that they're trying to influence can then tell them to fuck off, or decide that their approval is worth bending their policies for. It isn't like the US is going to invade Canada and truely interfere in our sovereignity. It's Canada's choice as to whether we'll let the US affect policy, as it's our choice to decide whether any external political forces should affect our policies.

Re:Screw you, America (1)

mondoterrifico (317567) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879782)

"It isn't like the US is going to invade Canada and truely interfere in our sovereignity."

I guess you havent been paying attention lately. This is their (The US's) world, we only live here.

Re:Screw you, America (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5879730)

I have no problem with BC allowing pot, as long as they don't export any of their "crop" over the border. In fact, round up the potheads here in the US and send them all to Vancouver. They can enjoy the socialized medicine up there too. Good riddance.

Tomorrow's headlines in the U.S. (1, Insightful)

inkswamp (233692) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879616)

"Bush says invading Canada only way to free citizenry."

"Bush administration expresses concern about Canada's weapons of mass destruction."

Re:Tomorrow's headlines in the U.S. (3, Funny)

lovebyte (81275) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879674)

Canada's weapons of mass destruction.

I agree. Canadians must answer their unleashing of Celine Dion on the free world.

Re:Tomorrow's headlines in the U.S. (3, Funny)

borgdows (599861) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879734)

Moreover, Celine Dion is from Quebec!! She's a secret weapon of the French to invade North America!!

Re:Tomorrow's headlines in the U.S. (1)

cperciva (102828) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879685)

"Bush administration expresses concern about Canada's weapons of mass destruction."

The crazy thing is, Canada is far more capable of producing nuclear weapons than Iraq ever was. Canada has lots of highly trained nuclear scientists and has large reserves of uranium. But Canada decided early on that it didn't want to get involved in the nuclear arms race.

Re:Tomorrow's headlines in the U.S. (1)

Some Guy (21271) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879714)

They actually had a nuke program before the US politely asked them to stop.

Re:Tomorrow's headlines in the U.S. (5, Informative)

ArcticCelt (660351) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879781)

Completely wrong. Canada used to have nuclear weapons but realised that the nuclear arm race was an insane business. In 1978, Canada Prime Minister Trudeau stated, at the U.N., that Canada was the "the first nuclear armed country to have chosen to divest itself of nuclear weapons. USA never asked Canada to stop. In fact USA was very pissed off because Canada did not continue to build more weapons with them.

wow (5, Funny)

Pompatus (642396) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879617)

You mean I not only get to smoke pot, enjoy less crime, and get free healthcare, I get my civil liberties too!!!!

Re:wow (5, Funny)

crodak (630241) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879702)

I've heard it explained many times, that the reason why America is targeted by terrorists is that "certain elements" are simply jealous of our outstanding quality of life. They want to destroy what they can't build for themselves.

If you're right about Canada -- what, with all the pot smoking, low crime rates, free healthcare, and civil liberties -- I would expect Canada to rise to the top of the terrorists' hit list. So, maybe instead of trying to get the damned Canadians to cooperate with us, we should simply launch an advertising campaign in the Islamic world explaining that Canada is the more logical target for their anti-western fringe element.

Re:wow (-1, Redundant)

Billly Gates (198444) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879737)

" You mean I not only get to smoke pot, enjoy less crime, and get free healthcare, I get my civil liberties too!!!!" ...and %50 tax! Yep, its not free you know. I chose my lower taxes over that thank you.

Re:wow (0, Flamebait)

TMB (70166) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879776)

Always good to know where your priorities are.

Re:wow (5, Informative)

shamilton (619422) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879785)

Uh, 50% income tax? Maybe 30% on a healthy salary... the highest is around 43% above ~$100,000 CAD.

And round here, these things aren't enforced nearly as much. House is worth $1,000,000, paying property tax for $300,000? Nobody cares to hear about it. And you're certainly not getting thrown in JAIL for dodging taxes.

In the meantime at the White House (5, Funny)

borgdows (599861) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879618)

Colin Powell : Mr President, Canada Cares Too Much about liberties.

Bush,Rumsfeld,Cheney (CHORUS) : Bomb them!! Bring canadians democracy!!

Canada! (3, Insightful)

devilspgd (652955) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879619)

Yeah, heaven forbid we don't give up our freedoms. Who really believes the homeland security act will be used responsibly by the authorities?

CANADA (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5879620)

The 51st State

Re:CANADA (1)

borgdows (599861) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879633)

sorry... 51st State is Great Britain

Canada is only 52st!

Re:CANADA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5879657)

I could've sworn that the 51st was Australia. Or maybe that's just Johnnie Howard's wet dream.

Re:CANADA (1)

LittleStone (18310) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879662)

Really, 52nd is Alberta. There's a significant part of Canada will fight to death not joining US.

Re:CANADA (1)

lateralus_1024 (583730) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879722)

I thought that was Israel.
Or Australia.
Canada is #53.

I wonder what Jean Poutine has to say about this? (0)

Viking5150 (97471) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879622)

He'll probably say we should send Rick Mercer down to the US for another TV Special [canoe.ca] .

Way to go hoser! Now take off, eh!

Re:I wonder what Jean Poutine has to say about thi (1)

Jason1729 (561790) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879681)

The Prime Cretin is too busy screwing up the country's finances to care about the US right now.

Jason
ProfQuotes [profquotes.com]

Respecting Canada (2, Interesting)

JohnFluxx (413620) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879626)

I'm a brit, but things like this make me respect Canada. Particularly after watching Bowling For Columbine (watch it if you haven't).

Of course, SP reduces that respect, as it tells me to hate canada. And they do have funny accents. And flapping heads.

Re:Respecting Canada (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5879658)

My son, who is to blame for all this??!
'uhh.. Canada, sir?'
yes, yes of course. but how will you know them when they come for you?
'they have little beady eyes and great flapping heads!'
Excellent, George my lad. They'll never call you Shrubya again!

Re:Respecting Canada (2, Informative)

EGSonikku (519478) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879709)


http://www.revoketheoscar.com/

Bowling for Columbine is mostly a work of FICTION.
Some people do anything for notoriety. It's even sader when people accept things as fact without any thought to research.

Re:Respecting Canada (4, Insightful)

JohnFluxx (413620) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879754)

>Bowling for Columbine is mostly a work of FICTION

It might be, but the url you gave, gives no proof of this. It doesn't actually contradict anything in the film, just says it doesn't like what it hears, and says it is a work of fiction, without following it up.

Do you have any better links?

Re:Respecting Canada (1)

mako (30489) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879738)

Just be sure to watch it as the entertainment [ufies.org] that it is, as opposed to an actual documentary. Moore, as his unkempt appearance suggests, is a sloppy and lazy thinker. He uses very little fact [nrawinningteam.com] in his opion pieces.

Even the bloodiest of liberals such as Roger Ebert [suntimes.com] realize this. There are many Moore links to be found showing the intelectual dishonesty rampant in MM's ravings, but, I'm not going to do your homework for you.

Hysteria. (5, Insightful)

Mr2cents (323101) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879627)

That's all I can say about it. OK, so terrorism claimed 700 lives last year. In Belgium alone (that tiny country you can never find on the map) 1500 people died in car accidents. Not to mention how many died of the flue. So why is such a pathological, marginal fenomenon causing so much panic? Right. Hysteria. That's always a good way to ruin people's rights.

Re:Hysteria. (1, Flamebait)

pviceic (531225) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879634)

Yeah ! Bomb cars!

IN SOVIET RUSSIA (0, Flamebait)

anonymous cowfart (576665) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879717)

Car bombs! Yeah!

Re:Hysteria. (5, Funny)

Danse (1026) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879712)

You just don't understand. Dubya just wants to take our rights and keep them in a safe place for us. That way the terrorists can't get them, don't ya see? All our rights are still there. We may even get to take our kids to see them someday. They'll be preserved in pristine condition in hermetically sealed jars. We should thank Dubya for taking such good care of our rights!

Re:Hysteria. (5, Insightful)

fiiz (263633) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879729)

My friend you have hit the spot *exactly*.

And the answer is...because it gives a wonderful excuse for any sort of action, and a convenient way of attacking those you don't like for economic, political or geostrategic reasons. Read the arab states, at the moment.

It gives an unquestionable moral high ground for what the likes of Noam Chomsky call *state terrorism* -i.e. direct wars and state sponsored terrorism. Look at Algeria, Colombia, Israel for recent examples of state sponsored terrorism, some with links to the US...

See this is Reagan's cold war all over again, a great way of shaping foreign policy to your convenience, and with a heavy hand.

And the best thing is that the public is buying it!

Thanks Canada for doing it right ;-p

Evolution of the State (4, Insightful)

mindpixel (154865) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879632)

If we're very very lucky, in 200 years most countries will be like Canada is now. I was going to type a joke here, but I just discovered, I'm serious.

Re:Evolution of the State (4, Insightful)

samael (12612) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879701)

Well, Canada does seem kinda European...

Re:Evolution of the State (3, Insightful)

Drakin (415182) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879728)

Sad fact is, the US has had more time to evolve than Canada...

Maybe it's not evolution though. It's more of a growing up. The parent nation of the US smacked them around a few too many times, and the US fought back, they figured that fighting back was a good way to get what you wanted. This set the course for how the US is.

Canada on the other hand, benifited from the US fighting back, they got treated better by the same parent nation, and grew into a more stable, responsible country...

Maybe it's time to teach the US to be responsable, and make it grow up into something more than the school yard bully?

(just talking out my ass here... I've got nothing against the US, some of it's policies are stupid... but then again, it's not like it's that much better here in Canada.

Anyone else notice the lack of the AC checkbox?)

Re:Evolution of the State (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5879756)

It's too bad your not joking, because the Government of Canada is arguably one of the most inept governments in power today. It's not screw-the-civil-liberties inept, it's just plain stupidity.

Our Prime Minister routinely puts his foot in his mouth and chomps down, hard. When they aren't busy bumbling around SARS, or pissing off other countries, they (somewhat) ignore Quebec and the Western Provinces. You may have heard that Quebec want(ed) to separate? Now there is a small, but growing, separatist movement in Western Canada.

It's too bad, because this really is a great country. However, we desparately need to lose the current administration. The Prime Minister has stated he's going to retire, and doesn't seem to give a damm anymore; he basically deprecated himself when he announced his retirement. Paul Martin seems to be the man for the job right now. I think he's the only one with a chance at winning over most of the Liberal entrenched Ontario.

Oh great. (5, Funny)

eidechse (472174) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879635)

Now government agencies have even stopped pretending that the U.S. is the paragon of freedom.

sigh (3, Insightful)

kabulykos (213285) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879636)

I have a friend from Canada, who came down to the States for college in part because he was tired of the Canadian government crushing his liberty with excessivlely high taxes etc. Thanfully after 4 years here (and 2 years of Bush) he's learned better -- Americans fondness of liberty is mainly a scam. Too many are just too scared or stupid to care.

(oh I'm not bitter.)

Re:sigh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5879733)

Wait, he was tired of the Canadian government crushing his liberty with excessivlely high taxes

You are kidding, arn't you? What does taxation have to do with cival liberties? Do you and your friend understand what cival liberties are, and what taxation is?

I paid 17.5% tax on a t-shirt I bought the other day. The man is keeping me down!

Meanwhile (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5879637)

We all hope that Michael moves away to Canada.
Cheeky writer?

not another one (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5879639)

you'd think Michael would post about interesting stuff instead of trolling the Intarweb for his pet peeves. Canada, Microsoft, spam, ad nauseum. Does it hurt having such a big tight ball of hate mick? Well, does it?

LISTEN CANADA, DO AS WE ORDER (2, Interesting)

jsse (254124) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879641)

or we'll re-initiate the invasion plan [straightdope.com] against you.

In response... (4, Funny)

toriver (11308) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879644)

... the leaders of China and Myanmar nodded vigorously in agreement that liberties are bad for you.

Chretien in a speech declared USA to be part of an "Axis of Oppression" and said "those that are not with the Commonwealth is with the oppressors".

"Too much emphasis"? (5, Insightful)

geekwench (644364) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879651)

The very fact that the government of the United States is claiming that Canada (or any other country) places "too much emphasis on civil liberties" says something profoundly disturbing about the state of our State, and the Evil Old (and young) Men currently infesting Washington.

I know that I will sleep much more soundly the day that Ashcroft is forced to clean out his desk.

Re:"Too much emphasis"? (1)

TubeSteak (669689) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879742)

In Soviet Russia, Canada Criticizes You!

on a serious note, i have to agree. not only does the Pres/Ashcroft want to chip away at our civil liberties, but he plans to take away everyone elses. I'd like to hear what the ACLU has to say on the matter.

P.S.Canada did have a set of anti-terror laws ready to pass, but they were tabled when it was proved that the hi-jackers didn't come into the US of A through Canada.

Author's words, not State Department's (4, Informative)

Galvatron (115029) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879751)

As far as I can tell, the headline is simply the author's interpretation of the State Department's report, not the wording of the US government. In actual point of fact, the State Department seems mainly concerned with police funding (which has nothing to do with civil liberties), low penalties for marijuana possession (also not a civil liberty) and privacy laws. Privacy obviously is a fairly important civil liberty, and clearly the US government is going too far with its anti-terrorist legislation, but the headline is also a tad too alarmist. Indeed, the article does not even specify which privacy related laws the US objects to in particular.

Re:Author's words, not State Department's (4, Informative)

AndrewRUK (543993) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879787)

What ths State Dept. report says is
"Some US law-enforcement officers have expressed concern that Canadian privacy laws, as well as funding levels for law enforcement, inhibit a fuller and more timely exchange of information and response to requests for assistance. Also, Canadian laws and regulations intended to protect Canadian citizens and landed immigrants from Government intrusion sometimes limit the depth of investigations." (http://www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/pgtrpt/2002/html/19 987.htm)
Sounds to me like they're complaining that Canada cares too much about privacy and preventing Government intrusion, and I would consider that to be caring about liberty.

I am Shocked! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5879652)

Shocked! ... .. Well not that shocked.
-Fry

Re:I am Shocked! (0, Offtopic)

Pompatus (642396) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879691)

and awed

Dillema's (4, Insightful)

John_Renne (176151) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879663)

There's definately some tension between privacy, political freedoms, law-enforcement and anti-terrorism-measures.

I'm just concerned about the way the US is trying to tell the rest of the world how to handle this tension. Every country for itself should make it's own descision in how to solve these challenges.

A different way isn't allways a worse way

Great... (0)

msh104 (620136) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879666)

Everyone knows america is only playing games, show the world a great war that makes people think they are doing a good job fighting terorism, but they forget their own people. and because the press is so busy with all the war stuff it even gets less attention. i think it is time for the U.S. to start looking at their own people instead of pretending to be the good guy.

Canada != USA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5879667)

Canada is so different from the USA... that I would like to *LIFE* there...

Mice And Elephants (4, Insightful)

Farley Mullet (604326) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879673)

I think it was former Prime MInister Pierre Trudeau who used the metaphor of the mouse in bed with the elephant to describe Canada-U.S. relations. In a lot of ways it's a good metaphor.

Canada has to walk a tightrope: on the one hand our economic prosperity as a nation depends on our trade relationship and close economic ties with the U.S. (Canada is the U.S.'s largest trading partner, and vis versa), and certainly Canada's national security is largely tied to that of the U.S. But on the other hand, Canada is a distinct sovereign nation, and it's important to protect our sovereignty, and not become an extension of the U.S. The article mentions the Canadian government's long-standing flirtation with legalizing pot, and not to downplay issues like that [1], there are other, bigger, issues to consider. The current U.S. administration has shown a cavalier attitude towards environmental protection, weakening the EPA and making efforts to open up protected areas in Alaska for oil exploration and exploitation. Canada has been (awkwardly at times) tracing out it's own environmental policy, balancing the need to preserve our unique and precious ecological heritage, while at the same time preserving our resource based economies. It'd be a real shame if that balancing act was thrown out of whack by pressure from south of the border. The situation with freshwater policy is similar, and will perhaps become even more important.

Canada/U.S. relations loom large over Canadian politics, just as the movements of the elephant loom large in the thoughts of the mouse that it's in bed with. So when U.S. officials make "rumblings", the Canadian government can't help but take note.

[1] I'm for it. The war on drugs has been an abject failure, especially as far as pot is concerned

Their evaluation of France (5, Insightful)

Mostly a lurker (634878) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879675)

France has provided outstanding military, judicial, and law-enforcement support to the war against terrorism.

Unfortunately, they do not support attacks on countries, justified by the war on terrorism, based on a combination of manufactured and inadequate evidence.

Re:Their evaluation of France (5, Funny)

lovebyte (81275) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879705)

I think Bush put it thus:
"The problem with the French is that they don't have a word for entrepreneur."
-George W. Bush, discussing the decline of the French economy with British Prime Minister Tony Blair

Re:Their evaluation of France (1)

fluch (126140) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879777)

Lukily France still has their own will. As every state should have.

Re:Their evaluation of France (1)

Tycho (11893) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879783)

Apparently you didn't get the new memo, we attacked Iraq to remove an evil man, Saddam, from power.

if the Yanks cared so much about civil liberties, (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5879683)

they'd slaughter the true terrorists and elect a REAL leader. George Shrubya, Rumsfeld, Poindexter the Criminal, and Ollie the crook North would all go under the knife, and other countries would be free of the threat of hostile invasion by a "liberating" force.
Honestly, do Americans really believe that the war in Iraq is more than a sham to bolster a weakling's public image? more than an oil grab? I pity the lot of 'em. Eh.

Cheeky? (1)

TC (WC) (459050) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879686)

I really don't understand what's cheeky about this article. It appears to be at least as well referenced and researched as any other 'hard' news story posted here. It doesn't seem to contain any sort of mocking undertones that one would expect from something labelled as cheeky. For something to be cheeky, one would expect something to be at least mildly offensive to some, due to the manner that the facts were presented it.

Re:Cheeky? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5879772)

are you kidding? that's the cheekiest article I've ever read! that article is so cheeky my cheeks are embarrased to be called cheeks for fear of being associated with that cheeky-ass article!

they did forgot themselves (1)

ifi_domin8r (670985) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879690)

If there is a report about "global terrorism" I'm just wondering why they are not talking about internal (USA related) terrorist activities. Perhaps about the mysterious white powder they found or the oklahoma bombing.

Isn't it a little bit strange to write something about global terrorism as a single country? How would such a report look like, if it was writte by northcorea? ;)

And Marijuana (2, Interesting)

OldMiner (589872) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879698)

A little policy issue thrown at the bottom of that article. The U.S. administration is unhappy that marijuana possession in Canada is now a ticketing offense (parking meter sort of thing) instead of a criminal offense. I'm sure someone will have to draw the paralel that's been brought before that the "war on terrorism" has allowed the broadening of police powers which are being used for the "war on drugs". I'm voting Democrat in 2004, and I'm a Libertarian.

Re:And Marijuana (2, Informative)

TC (WC) (459050) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879726)

The U.S. administration is unhappy that marijuana possession in Canada is now a ticketing offense (parking meter sort of thing) instead of a criminal offense.

Well... not quite yet... The intention to do this has been announced, but no legislation has yet been passed.

from the country that brought us (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5879707)

the RIAA, MPAA, DMCA, PATRIOT Act, infinite copyright extensions, and last but not least, true terrorism disguised as "liberation of the people." What a jolly surprise.

What's next, mandatory lobotomies to bring the rest of the world into line with their ridiculous regime? Sadly, that wouldn't surprise me in the least.

Won't it be easy to invade Mexico? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5879720)

A hell of a lot warmer by all accounts.

Create a wee buffer zone between the US and those hordes of illegal aliens.

Already done! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5879771)

Create a wee buffer zone between the US and those hordes of illegal aliens.

It's called Texas! Man, where were you during History classes?

Wait- we're the ones (4, Insightful)

Fat Casper (260409) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879721)

With a Bill of Rights. The Constitution protects our rights to freedom of speech, free assembly, to keep and bear arms, privacy, a speedy trial, legal counsel and not to be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process.

Wow. Watching the news for the last year and a half made me forget all that. Hey, Bush- remember this? "I, George W. Bush, do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and I will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States." Try reading it instead of wiping your ass with it.

It's not fair. We're the ones with these rights guaranteed, and Canadians are the ones getting them. It's not my fault; I voted for the other loser machine politician.

Let me get this straight (4, Insightful)

Billly Gates (198444) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879723)

During the American revolution Canada went one way while the states went the other. Before then they really was no Canada except by the french in what is now Quebec.

Representatives from upper and lower Canada including Ontario were originally part of the continental congress during the American revolution but backed off when the declaration of independance was signed.

It was then when loyalist for England moved north into Canada while freedom loving rebels stayed in the states or moved south from Canada.

How is it that today Canada is more free then the US?

Americans love freedom and credit the revolution but support the president and look at anyone non conformist as unpatrotic. Guess what?

Bush is the one who is unpatrotic. I really hope he is not re-elected. Many Americans are becoming wary of not only his economic record but his horrendous foreign policy. Bush advisors mentioned that he will start his reelection on ground zero this september 11 and run on a foreign policy campaing. I think it will fail. They do not look Bush or Powell twisting everyones and threatening everyone they see fit. I think Powell definetely acted inapropriatly in Syria yesterday.

I was on yahoo messages boards and found many are upset and look at Bush as reckless and a threat to global stability more then anyone else. He really could overreact and create a nuclear war if he is not carefull. Some republicans do not like what is going on with the patriot act and even view bush as more pro-government then Clinton.

Remember why 9/11 happened... (4, Insightful)

weave (48069) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879724)

Bush claimed shortly after 9/11 that we were attacked because they hate us because of our freedoms.

So what a great way to prevent a future terrorist attack. Remove those freedoms so they (theoretically) have no reason to hate us anymore.

(Of course, that is a bunch of crap. "They" hate us now more than ever.)

Terrorists won already (5, Insightful)

LittleStone (18310) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879731)

Americans, look what your lives have change.

It's just amazing that, when you walked into any government related building in DC, you gotta go through a metal detector. All visitors are treated as potential terrorists.

Then it's always a pain to fly. All those hassle, especially if you have the wrong look (I thought being a Chinese Canadian is easier, not so. Security officer in airports like to pick me, because they know for sure there's nothing to look at, just to pass the quota.)

How about Americans visiting other countries? Better pretended to be Canadians.

That's how the terrorists won. Canadians, on the other hand, just refuse to live like that. The first step Canadians do: be friendly to others. Respect the difference, accept other's value. No matter how inefficient or stupid Canadian governments sometimes are, Canadians still can live peacefully.

So, if you have the right to vote in US, exercise your right and tell your government what you think.

Re:Terrorists won already (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5879779)

Reading this reminded me of something I read in my local newspaper (Canadian) a few weeks after 9/11.

It was basically a transcribed message (or something like it) from Osama bin Laden saying, essentially, that they (al Queda) had already won. Supposedly, the idea behind their attacks was not to kill citizens, or destroy landmarks. It was to kill liberties, and destroy freedom. Apparantly Osama wanted the citizens of the US to live in fear, and to loose their freedoms. He wanted them to experience life as other countries did, with checkpoints, searches, and the constant fear of attacks.

It would seem he succeeded admirably.

Canada should follow our lead! (2, Funny)

Gregg M (2076) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879732)

It's called Diplomacy! [gwu.edu]

a la beavis and butthead (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5879735)

US: Canada don't make me have to kick your ass.

Canadian Terrorists?? (1)

redkingca (610398) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879747)

Since I don't belive that a single act of terrorism has been enacted by a Canadian citizen or Canadian immigrant against the US since the war of 1812. And the last acts of terrorism in Canada were during the FLQ crisis in the 60's. I don't see how the US has right to talk about Canada and our government policies.

Mexico (1)

Soul Colossus (638172) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879748)

Yea as if all of the pot in the US comes from canada and not MEXICO

lives lost in in city slums (1)

realkiwi (23584) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879750)

How many kids were shot dead in East LA and other inner city "hot spots"?

That is where people live in terror IMVHO

Interesting read but.. (4, Interesting)

praksys (246544) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879760)

Privacy is not liberty, nor is it a "civil liberty", although it might be a "civil right". A liberty is a right to carry out some type of action without being obstructed by anyone else. Privacy rights restrict the actions of others (to obtain or publish information about you) which makes them claim-rights. So the US complaint about Canadian privacy laws has nothing at all to do with liberty.

This [geocities.com] gives a pretty good introduction to the theoretical classification of rights.

The stuff about legalizing dope is of course another matter entirely. I have no idea why American politicians gets so wound up about dope, when most Americans have used it without comming to much harm.

Denmark (1)

tcdk (173945) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879768)

Denmark also made noteworthy contributions to the war on terrorism. On the economic front under its European Union (EU) Presidency leadership, in forging a workable EU Clearinghouse they froze assets of terrorist groups, even those not taken to the UN Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) 1267 Sanctions Committee. On the military front, they continued their commitment to Operation Enduring Freedom through the Danish-Norwegian-Dutch F-16 contingent at Manas Airbase.

Makes me all fussy and warm inside. NOT.

The current danish goverment is so pro-US it's sickening. They are alienating us from the rest of europa, so fast it's unbelivable.

When Bush tells our Primeminister to jump he goes "I would love to Mr Bush, but as you are currently also fcking me up the arse it's a bit hard for me to comply"...

Well, well, this freedom thing is probably overrated anyway. I mean, how I can reject slavery when I haven't even tried it ...

Crime in Canada (5, Interesting)

ottawanker (597020) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879769)

.. suggests that while Canada has been helpful in the fight against terrorism, it doesn't spend enough on policing and places too much emphasis on civil liberties.

This is interesting.. the following are some stats I found on crime in Canada and the US (and Sweden, see this page.) [www.ccsd.ca]
- Homicides per 100,000......Canada-1.8..US-5.5
- Assault/Threat per 100,000.Canada-4.0..US-5.7
- Prisoners per 100,000......Canada-118..US-546

Grim Shadow! (3, Insightful)

glenebob (414078) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879770)

U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell said although there has been great progress in the last year, terrorism still "casts its grim shadow" across the globe.
The War on Terrorism is casting a grim shadow across the globe, and I dare say it's darker than the one terrorism ever cast. I am honestly one hell of a lot more afraid of what this administration will do next than I am of any potential terrorist attack.

Is it just me or is GW the puppet and Rumsfeild the insane puppet master? Or maybe he's got me fooled and they're both insane.

Bomb the webservers! (0)

Omicron32 (646469) | more than 11 years ago | (#5879786)

I declare Jihad upon the infidel US webservers!
Suicide Slashdotting!

canadian forces? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5879789)

Using the telephone to call the US for military help is not "canadian forces".

Even many canadians admit that canada has been riding on the US military backs (and blood) for far too long.

Nice to have the privelege of doing so.

Is canada building aircraft carriers? Boosting its mounties? Shedding canadian blood in the worldwide fight on terrorism?

Did canadian "forces" spill any blood in the fight to depose modern day hitler?

Suspend your anti-American, pro-french language laws pursuit for a year or two, tighten your damn borders, and ask a few extra questions of the young and middle aged arab male illegal aliens fleeing the US temporarily for your sanctuary. We'll spill American blood to protect ourselves, and you can ride our coattails, as is normal for the course.

An occasional "thank you" instead of the usual stab in the back would be appreciated once in a while.

Cheeky? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5879790)

What is cheeky about the article?

I was expecting to read a humorous or... well... I expected the article to be cheeky, but it wasn't.

Or is it "cheeky" just because it investigates odd and scary comments done by US, and by definition anything criticising or disagreeing with US is "cheeky"?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?