- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
hehe. high price prosecuter. that's cute. let me guess, the family bought Bush too ;D
Disillusioned said:He's a PhD at Ottawa, not Rick Mercer.
Sunday, November 21, 2004
Canadian Crack-up, Part II
The Diplomad had read without much interest a November 16 piece in the Toronto Star by Canadian columnist Thomas Walkom titled, "Should Canada Indict Bush?" The Diplomad, not very familiar with Walkom, dismissed it as just another easily "fiskable" piece of nonsense from the loony fringe and hardly worth noting. The Diplomad subsequently read the LGF commentary on the same article, and read with appreciation comments from common-sense Canadians ridiculing this idea, and figured, "OK, that's done with."
Wrong.
Turning on the cable news, the Diplomad ran across some Canadian law professor being interviewed on FOX by John Kasich's "Heartland" show. This professor, too, was making the case for Bush's indictment.
Coincidentally, Diplomad HQS received a report from one of our Diplomads on a Sunday (today) brunch conversation with a Canadian diplomat who seemed absolutely smitten with the idea. This Canadian relished the thought of having Bush "served" a bill of indictment or arrest warrant during the President's visit to Ottawa o/a November 30. He thought this an incredibly clever idea, and spit out the reasons for indicting Bush for "crimes against humanity" -- basically the ones contained in the Walkom column and the Kasich interview, e.g., aggressive war, no UNSC approval, mistreatment of POWs and civilian populations, etc. Fortunately our Diplomad had the presence of mind -- which neither Kasich nor Walkom showed -- of asking, "What do you think the US reaction would be?" Our northern "friend" seemed taken aback by the thought, and confused, said that, well perhaps, we would protest and file something or another in Canadian court, or invoke Bush's sovereign immunity, but that in the end we would have to deal with the issue in court, presumably in a Canadian court. Oh, really?
Canada was once a great country, a proud member of the Defense of the West League. On a per capita basis Canada, along with New Zealand, had among the highest casualties of any ally in WWI and WWII. It played key roles in NORAD and NATO, and in the shadowy intel battles of the Cold War. It was, in word and deed, a true ally. That said, we would be hard put to describe the Canada of today or of the past 10 or so years as an ally. Its government has become among the most politically correct and feminized in the world, turning Canada into a haven for global terrorists and criminals, and for some of the most irresponsible and "out there" politicians, academics and journalists found anywhere on the planet. It has dismantled its once proud military establishment, turning it into a second-rate Keystone Cops police force at the beck-and-call of Kofi "Oil-for-Money" Annan. It is now a country with no sense of national interest or purpose, no appreciation for its true friends or for its own history. Canadian politicians and academics have become -- at best -- mischievous little school boys, trying to play pranks on the aloof but kindly school headmaster, secure in the knowledge that at most they'll get an avuncular lecture, that never will they have to pay any serious consequences, and that the headmaster will always in the end protect them from the school bullies and street toughs.
We have written previously (September 13) about the Canadian Crack-Up, and see that the process continues apace. So with regret, The Diplomad must conclude that it would indeed be a good thing for Canada to indict George W. Bush as a war criminal. The ensuing US reaction should provide a lesson in reality to Canada's politicians (the same who send Canadian sailors to die in rusty, smoke-filled second-hand subs) and its increasingly insane Ottawa - Toronto - Vancouver chattering "elite" classes. US Consulates will stand by 24/7/365 to receive immigration applications from sane Canadians fleeing the howling wilderness that will become Canada once the link to the oppressive imperialist war-mongering USA is broken; once the border is solidly locked down to prevent movement either way of anything; once hateful US investments stop; and once Canada can no longer serve as a cheap backlot for Hollywood productions.
This is tough love, but at times it's the only way. We might have to destroy Canada to save Canada from Canada to make it again Canada.
Please proceed with your indictment; in the long run it's best for all of us.
I_am_John_Galt said:On the other hand, maybe there is a little more to this ... from some US Foreign Service Officers:
Ontario, Canada -- Canadian Terrence Phillips has grown more and more disturbed in the last few months about America's total non-interest in invading Canada
a_majoor said:Here we go again.
If the US wanted to invade countries for resources etc. they would have a long time ago. Why go half way around the world to Iraq when Alberta has a trillion barrels of heavy oil just a few hours north of the border? Check the fit on your foil hats people, and see the CQ if they feel a bit tight.
Guardian said:Buy a high-priced prosecutor? What on earth are you talking about?
Prosecutors work for, and are paid by, the State. No family can "buy" them. And many make far less than the defence lawyers they are pitted against.
Your point is ridiculous. Check your facts.
Disillusioned said:To all those who want Canada to eventually increase its power and prosperity as a sovereign country, I hope you've see this site, featuring many of the not-so-well-adjusted people in the White House.
www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm
We are in danger of squandering the opportunity and failing the challenge. We are living off the capital -- both the military investments and the foreign policy achievements -- built up by past administrations. Cuts in foreign affairs and defense spending, inattention to the tools of statecraft, and inconstant leadership are making it increasingly difficult to sustain American influence around the world. And the promise of short-term commercial benefits threatens to override strategic considerations. As a consequence, we are jeopardizing the nation's ability to meet present threats and to deal with potentially greater challenges that lie ahead.
Brad Sallows said:>it would take their entire 1.5million person army to bring us down with all the underground forces what would spring up as a result of invasion
What exactly do you suppose Canadians are prepared to die for that we would fear losing under the US "jackboot"? I've been to numerous destinations in the US, so I have a pretty good idea what to expect. I must admit I will regret losing some grocery shelf space to pork rinds.
If you promise to fight to the death, I promise to buy you a rifle and ammunition as long as I get to watch your last stand from a safe distance.
a_majoor said:We are in danger of squandering the opportunity and failing the challenge. We are living off the capital -- both the military investments and the foreign policy achievements -- built up by past administrations. Cuts in foreign affairs and defense spending, inattention to the tools of statecraft, and inconstant leadership are making it increasingly difficult to sustain American influence around the world. And the promise of short-term commercial benefits threatens to override strategic considerations. As a consequence, we are jeopardizing the nation's ability to meet present threats and to deal with potentially greater challenges that lie ahead.
Wow, sounds like what has ALREADY happened in Canada. Maybe they see something wrong with their political process at home and are thinking about how to make changes....?