Blatant Attack on Canada, by the far right (VIDEO)

[PrairieDawg]

some people are loudmouth arrogant a$sholes and dont speak for an entire country, keep that in mind.

[GeoQuadzilla]

Of course it's about anti war... Why can't your country just let other countries exist... To make their own mistakes and to fix them. That's why people around the world has a bad image on the states... You're like the big bully in the school yard who pushes kids around... until one day a smaller kid i.e. Iraq, Vietnam stands up to you and smacks you in the nose. How would you feel if Iraq came over and occupied your country... Yourself walking down the street and all you see is tanks and machine guns... Wouldn't be a great feeling i'm sure. After this war is all said and done... What are you guys really going to take away from it? Oil? well i'm glad all the blood shed is worth a fuel thats going to kill us all in the long run anyway... There are many great people from america... there were many great leaders... George Bush is not one of them.

So your anti-war is that what this is all about? This war is more about islamo-facism than WMD's bro, It's a much bigger picture than that. maybe you should try to read my post about WWIV. That might give you a sense of why we went to Iraq, and are fighting these people on there own land. I'd rather fight them there then in NYC.

http://67.18.108.244//showthread.php?t=136662

[radar1234]

maybe jdawg50 vs. everybody.guys like him probably find fault in everything.

[GeoQuadzilla]

that's pretty much what this thread is... seeing as how the rest of the guys from the U.S. who posted were civil and well spoken. I don't recall any of them saying "Screw em, they're just as bad as the french" Which was a classy quote I might add

can someone rename this thread to jdawg50 vs. canada?

[Jdawg50]

can someone rename this thread to jdawg50 vs. canada?

Please man, Is that really what you think? I don't hate Canada. I simply cannot understand why Canada hates the US so much. I think we should name this thread 37 AR Canadian boys vs JDawg.

[TooSmall]

Please man, Is that really what you think? I don't hate Canada. I simply cannot understand why Canada hates the US so much. I think we should name this thread 37 AR Canadian boys vs JDawg.

yes that is really what i think because that is what you choose to display

the fact that you post ****ty biased articles dosent help anything either

[Jdawg50]

yes that is really what i think because that is what you choose to display

the fact that you post ****ty biased articles dosent help anything either

****ty bias articles? did you read the source? that's a canadian source bud?
honestly I really could care less.

[Jdawg50]

that's pretty much what this thread is... seeing as how the rest of the guys from the U.S. who posted were civil and well spoken. I don't recall any of them saying "Screw em, they're just as bad as the french" Which was a classy quote I might add

OH yea mr. Class act should be your new fing nickname. Did you miss your post about me with a beard and not having been laid. Your about as unclassy as they come.

[Jdawg50]

Of course it's about anti war... Why can't your country just let other countries exist... To make their own mistakes and to fix them. That's why people around the world has a bad image on the states... You're like the big bully in the school yard who pushes kids around... until one day a smaller kid i.e. Iraq, Vietnam stands up to you and smacks you in the nose. How would you feel if Iraq came over and occupied your country... Yourself walking down the street and all you see is tanks and machine guns... Wouldn't be a great feeling i'm sure. After this war is all said and done... What are you guys really going to take away from it? Oil? well i'm glad all the blood shed is worth a fuel thats going to kill us all in the long run anyway... There are many great people from america... there were many great leaders... George Bush is not one of them.

The big bully my freind is Osma et al. Not the US, They started this and your just pissed we have the balls to finish it. THANK GOD GW got re-elected.

[Blown_SC]

Just b/c it is written does not make it so.......
I grew up in Canada, and was in the public, christian, and catholic school systems over the course of 14 years, and in none of those years was I subjected to what is written...

[Jdawg50]

Just b/c it is written does not make it so.......
I grew up in Canada, and was in the public, christian, and catholic shoot systems over the course of 14 years, and in none of those years was I subjected to what is written...

Oh OK, because you say it makes it true then huh? How about you find a source that refutes the one I posted? At least I have been able to find several articles backing exactly what I have been saying about anti-americanism, and by the tone in this post it seems pretty darn true.

[SickNasty]

The big bully my freind is Osma et al. Not the US, They started this and your just pissed we have the balls to finish it. THANK GOD GW got re-elected.

exactly what does terrorism have to do with being a bully,

all you canadians are proving the point that you dislike the U.S.

It's only logical to happen, who is usually the rivalry in football teams, the team closest to you its human nature so lets stop discussing it.

we are different and we hate each other for it

[Blown_SC]

Oh OK, because you say it makes it true then huh? How about you find a source that refutes the one I posted? At least I have been able to find several articles backing exactly what I have been saying about anti-americanism, and by the tone in this post it seems pretty darn true.

Yes, it does make it true..
A source of info? I AM the source, as are the other members contributing to this thread...
I don't need articles bro... it's called 'living'...
Who would write an article about us NOT doing what is said in that lame article?
Who would write it?

[TooSmall]

****ty bias articles? did you read the source? that's a canadian source bud?
honestly I really could care less.

"Yes, it does make it true..
A source of info? I AM the source, as are the other members contributing to this thread...
I don't need articles bro... it's called 'living'...
Who would write an article about us NOT doing what is said in that lame article?
Who would write it?"



exactly
i've been in canadian schools my whole life, not only am i telling you thats a ****ty article, i'm telling you that the information isnt true or blown out of proportion

and about it being written by a canadian? so what? there are people who live here that dislike their situation and choose to spread propaghanda, just as there are in the states

major example: michael moore

[Jdawg50]

"Yes, it does make it true..
A source of info? I AM the source, as are the other members contributing to this thread...
I don't need articles bro... it's called 'living'...
Who would write an article about us NOT doing what is said in that lame article?
Who would write it?"

Ha! In my 2+ year history at AR in the political section.. that may be the worst rebuttle I have ever read. Your 1 great anectdote is a better source then the 2 I posted? Seems to me like you have no clue about what your talking about. I'll take my 2 well documented sources over your first person account..."Its called living"... hehehehehe! Try doing a little research bud it might do you some good. Obviously you have not done your research and that is why you have no true understanding of what my points are.

exactly
i've been in canadian schools my whole life, not only am i telling you thats a ****ty article, i'm telling you that the information isnt true or blown out of proportion

and about it being written by a canadian? so what? there are people who live here that dislike their situation and choose to spread propaghanda, just as there are in the states

major example: michael moore

Great there's 2 anecdotes!

Comon guys I'll give you a clue
Google: Search: Canadian Anti-Americanism unfounded.
Give it a try see what you come up with.


Oh yea to the guy that posted "Owned" maybe you should try posting Owned after this post.

[Jdawg50]

WWIV?

Yes, WW4
If your to dumb to see that, Well I feel sorry for you. take some time and refute the article I posted on this particular issue.

[Jdawg50]

Incase you didn't read the news after 9/11 some of the terrorist were Saudi Nationals, so how come you didn't attack them, oh yeah you can't do that since you buy their oil.

OMG, No blood for Oil right? Please if you honestly think that all this war was about oil you are sorely mistaken. There was this thing called 9-11, and what we are trying to do is instill Democracy into the Middle east, so that the Islamic-Facist can be defeated, and Its begining to work. IE: Lybia. This war is much more about fighting terrorism on a global scale than fighting for Oil.

Case Closed
From the November 24, 2003 issue: The U.S. government's secret memo detailing cooperation between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden.
by Stephen F. Hayes
11/24/2003, Volume 009, Issue 11

Editor's Note, 1/27/04: In today's Washington Post, Dana Milbank reported that "Vice President Cheney . . . in an interview this month with the Rocky Mountain News, recommended as the 'best source of information' an article in The Weekly Standard magazine detailing a relationship between Hussein and al Qaeda based on leaked classified information."

Here's the Stephen F. Hayes article to which the vice president was referring.

-JVL

OSAMA BIN LADEN and Saddam Hussein had an operational relationship from the early 1990s to 2003 that involved training in explosives and weapons of mass destruction, logistical support for terrorist attacks, al Qaeda training camps and safe haven in Iraq, and Iraqi financial support for al Qaeda--perhaps even for Mohamed Atta--according to a top secret U.S. government memorandum obtained by THE WEEKLY STANDARD.

The memo, dated October 27, 2003, was sent from Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas J. Feith to Senators Pat Roberts and Jay Rockefeller, the chairman and vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. It was written in response to a request from the committee as part of its investigation into prewar intelligence claims made by the administration. Intelligence reporting included in the 16-page memo comes from a variety of domestic and foreign agencies, including the FBI, the Defense Intelligence Agency, the Central Intelligence Agency, and the National Security Agency. Much of the evidence is detailed, conclusive, and corroborated by multiple sources. Some of it is new information obtained in custodial interviews with high-level al Qaeda terrorists and Iraqi officials, and some of it is more than a decade old. The picture that emerges is one of a history of collaboration between two of America's most determined and dangerous enemies.

According to the memo--which lays out the intelligence in 50 numbered points--Iraq-al Qaeda contacts began in 1990 and continued through mid-March 2003, days before the Iraq War began. Most of the numbered passages contain straight, fact-based intelligence reporting, which some cases includes an evaluation of the credibility of the source. This reporting is often followed by commentary and analysis.

The relationship began shortly before the first Gulf War. According to reporting in the memo, bin Laden sent "emissaries to Jordan in 1990 to meet with Iraqi government officials." At some unspecified point in 1991, according to a CIA analysis, "Iraq sought Sudan's assistance to establish links to al Qaeda." The outreach went in both directions. According to 1993 CIA reporting cited in the memo, "bin Laden wanted to expand his organization's capabilities through ties with Iraq."

The primary go-between throughout these early stages was Sudanese strongman Hassan al-Turabi, a leader of the al Qaeda-affiliated National Islamic Front. Numerous sources have confirmed this. One defector reported that "al-Turabi was instrumental in arranging the Iraqi-al Qaeda relationship. The defector said Iraq sought al Qaeda influence through its connections with Afghanistan, to facilitate the transshipment of proscribed weapons and equipment to Iraq. In return, Iraq provided al Qaeda with training and instructors."

One such confirmation came in a postwar interview with one of Saddam Hussein's henchmen. As the memo details:


4. According to a May 2003 debriefing of a senior Iraqi intelligence officer, Iraqi intelligence established a highly secretive relationship with Egyptian Islamic Jihad, and later with al Qaeda. The first meeting in 1992 between the Iraqi Intelligence Service (IIS) and al Qaeda was brokered by al-Turabi. Former IIS deputy director Faruq Hijazi and senior al Qaeda leader [Ayman al] Zawahiri were at the meeting--the first of several between 1992 and 1995 in Sudan. Additional meetings between Iraqi intelligence and al Qaeda were held in Pakistan. Members of al Qaeda would sometimes visit Baghdad where they would meet the Iraqi intelligence chief in a safe house. The report claimed that Saddam insisted the relationship with al Qaeda be kept secret. After 9-11, the source said Saddam made a personnel change in the IIS for fear the relationship would come under scrutiny from foreign probes

decisive moment in the budding relationship came in 1993, when bin Laden faced internal resistance to his cooperation with Saddam.

5. A CIA report from a contact with good access, some of whose reporting has been corroborated, said that certain elements in the "Islamic Army" of bin Laden were against the secular regime of Saddam. Overriding the internal factional strife that was developing, bin Laden came to an "understanding" with Saddam that the Islamic Army would no longer support anti-Saddam activities. According to sensitive reporting released in U.S. court documents during the African Embassy trial, in 1993 bin Laden reached an "understanding" with Saddam under which he (bin Laden) forbade al Qaeda operations to be mounted against the Iraqi leader.
Another facilitator of the relationship during the mid-1990s was Mahmdouh Mahmud Salim (a.k.a. Abu Hajer al-Iraqi). Abu Hajer, now in a New York prison, was described in court proceedings related to the August 1998 bombings of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania as bin Laden's "best friend." According to CIA reporting dating back to the Clinton administration, bin Laden trusted him to serve as a liaison with Saddam's regime and tasked him with procurement of weapons of mass destruction for al Qaeda. FBI reporting in the memo reveals that Abu Hajer "visited Iraq in early 1995" and "had a good relationship with Iraqi intelligence. Sometime before mid-1995 he went on an al Qaeda mission to discuss unspecified cooperation with the Iraqi government."

Some of the reporting about the relationship throughout the mid-1990s comes from

a source who had intimate knowledge of bin Laden and his dealings. This source, according to CIA analysis, offered "the most credible information" on cooperation between bin Laden and Iraq.


This source's reports read almost like a diary. Specific dates of when bin Laden flew to various cities are included, as well as names of individuals he met. The source did not offer information on the substantive talks during the meetings. . . . There are not a great many reports in general on the relationship between bin Laden and Iraq because of the secrecy surrounding it. But when this source with close access provided a "window" into bin Laden's activities, bin Laden is seen as heavily involved with Iraq (and Iran).
Reporting from the early 1990s remains somewhat sketchy, though multiple sources place Hassan al-Turabi and Ayman al Zawahiri, bin Laden's current No. 2, at the center of the relationship. The reporting gets much more specific in the mid-1990s:


8. Reporting from a well placed source disclosed that bin Laden was receiving training on bomb making from the IIS's [Iraqi Intelligence Service] principal technical expert on making sophisticated explosives, Brigadier Salim al-Ahmed. Brigadier Salim was observed at bin Laden's farm in Khartoum in Sept.-Oct. 1995 and again in July 1996, in the company of the Director of Iraqi Intelligence, Mani abd-al-Rashid al-Tikriti.
9 . . . Bin Laden visited Doha, Qatar (17-19 Jan. 1996), staying at the residence of a member of the Qatari ruling family. He discussed the successful movement of explosives into Saudi Arabia, and operations targeted against U.S. and U.K. interests in Dammam, Dharan, and Khobar, using clandestine al Qaeda cells in Saudi Arabia. Upon his return, bin Laden met with Hijazi and Turabi, among others.

And later more reporting, from the same "well placed" source:


10. The Director of Iraqi Intelligence, Mani abd-al-Rashid al-Tikriti, met privately with bin Laden at his farm in Sudan in July 1996. Tikriti used an Iraqi delegation traveling to Khartoum to discuss bilateral cooperation as his "cover" for his own entry into Sudan to meet with bin Laden and Hassan al-Turabi. The Iraqi intelligence chief and two other IIS officers met at bin Laden's farm and discussed bin Laden's request for IIS technical assistance in: a) making letter and parcel bombs; b) making bombs which could be placed on aircraft and detonated by changes in barometric pressure; and c) making false passport [sic]. Bin Laden specifically requested that [Brigadier Salim al-Ahmed], Iraqi intelligence's premier explosives maker--especially skilled in making car bombs--remain with him in Sudan. The Iraqi intelligence chief instructed Salim to remain in Sudan with bin Laden as long as required.
The analysis of those events follows:


The time of the visit from the IIS director was a few weeks after the Khobar Towers bombing. The bombing came on the third anniversary of a U.S. [Tomahawk missile] strike on IIS HQ (retaliation for the attempted assassination of former President Bush in Kuwait) for which Iraqi officials explicitly threatened retaliation.

IN ADDITION TO THE CONTACTS CLUSTERED in the mid-1990s, intelligence reports detail a flurry of activities in early 1998 and again in December 1998. A "former senior Iraqi intelligence officer" reported that "the Iraqi intelligence service station in Pakistan was Baghdad's point of contact with al Qaeda. He also said bin Laden visited Baghdad in Jan. 1998 and met with Tariq Aziz."


11. According to sensitive reporting, Saddam personally sent Faruq Hijazi, IIS deputy director and later Iraqi ambassador to Turkey, to meet with bin Laden at least twice, first in Sudan and later in Afghanistan in 1999. . . .
14. According to a sensitive reporting [from] a "regular and reliable source," [Ayman al] Zawahiri, a senior al Qaeda operative, visited Baghdad and met with the Iraqi Vice President on 3 February 1998. The goal of the visit was to arrange for coordination between Iraq and bin Laden and establish camps in an-Nasiriyah and Iraqi Kurdistan under the leadership of Abdul Aziz.

That visit came as the Iraqis intensified their defiance of the U.N. inspection regime, known as UNSCOM, created by the cease-fire agreement following the Gulf War. UNSCOM demanded access to Saddam's presidential palaces that he refused to provide. As the tensions mounted, President Bill Clinton went to the Pentagon on February 18, 1998, and prepared the nation for war. He warned of "an unholy axis of terrorists, drug traffickers, and organized international criminals" and said "there is no more clear example of this threat than Saddam Hussein."

The day after this speech, according to documents unearthed in April 2003 in the Iraqi Intelligence headquarters by journalists Mitch Potter and Inigo Gilmore, Hussein's intelligence service wrote a memo detailing coming meetings with a bin Laden representative traveling to Baghdad. Each reference to bin Laden had been covered by liquid paper that, when revealed, exposed a plan to increase cooperation between Iraq and al Qaeda. According to that memo, the IIS agreed to pay for "all the travel and hotel costs inside Iraq to gain the knowledge of the message from bin Laden and to convey to his envoy an oral message from us to bin Laden." The document set as the goal for the meeting a discussion of "the future of our relationship with him, bin Laden, and to achieve a direct meeting with him." The al Qaeda representative, the document went on to suggest, might provide "a way to maintain contacts with bin Laden."

Four days later, on February 23, 1998, bin Laden issued his now-famous fatwa on the plight of Iraq, published in the Arabic-language daily, al Quds al-Arabi: "For over seven years the United States has been occupying the lands of Islam in the holiest of places, the Arabian Peninsula, plundering its riches, dictating to its rulers, humiliating its people, terrorizing its neighbors, and turning its bases in the Peninsula into a spearhead through which to fight the neighboring Muslim peoples." Bin Laden urged his followers to act: "The ruling to kill all Americans and their allies--civilians and military--is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it."

Although war was temporarily averted by a last-minute deal brokered by U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan, tensions soon rose again. The standoff with Iraq came to a head in December 1998, when President Clinton launched Operation Desert Fox, a 70-hour bombing campaign that began on December 16 and ended three days later, on December 19, 1998.

According to press reports at the time, Faruq Hijazi, deputy director of Iraqi Intelligence, met with bin Laden in Afghanistan on December 21, 1998, to offer bin Laden safe haven in Iraq. CIA reporting in the memo to the Senate Intelligence Committee seems to confirm this meeting and relates two others.


15. A foreign government service reported that an Iraqi delegation, including at least two Iraqi intelligence officers formerly assigned to the Iraqi Embassy in Pakistan, met in late 1998 with bin Laden in Afghanistan.
16. According to CIA reporting, bin Laden and Zawahiri met with two Iraqi intelligence officers in Afghanistan in Dec. 1998.

17. . . . Iraq sent an intelligence officer to Afghanistan to seek closer ties to bin Laden and the Taliban in late 1998. The source reported that the Iraqi regime was trying to broaden its cooperation with al Qaeda. Iraq was looking to recruit Muslim "elements" to sabotage U.S. and U.K. interests. After a senior Iraqi intelligence officer met with Taliban leader [Mullah] Omar, arrangements were made for a series of meetings between the Iraqi intelligence officer and bin Laden in Pakistan. The source noted Faruq Hijazi was in Afghanistan in late 1998.

18. . . . Faruq Hijazi went to Afghanistan in 1999 along with several other Iraqi officials to meet with bin Laden. The source claimed that Hijazi would have met bin Laden only at Saddam's explicit direction.

An analysis that follows No. 18 provides additional context and an explanation of these reports:


Reporting entries #4, #11, #15, #16, #17, and #18, from different sources, corroborate each other and provide confirmation of meetings between al Qaeda operatives and Iraqi intelligence in Afghanistan and Pakistan. None of the reports have information on operational details or the purpose of such meetings. The covert nature of the relationship would indicate strict compartmentation [sic] of operations.
Information about connections between al Qaeda and Iraq was so widespread by early 1999 that it made its way into the mainstream press. A January 11, 1999, Newsweek story ran under this headline: "Saddam + Bin Laden?" The story cited an "Arab intelligence source" with knowledge of contacts between Iraq and al Qaeda. "According to this source, Saddam expected last month's American and British bombing campaign to go on much longer than it did. The dictator believed that as the attacks continued, indignation would grow in the Muslim world, making his terrorism offensive both harder to trace and more effective. With acts of terror contributing to chaos in the region, Turkey, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait might feel less inclined to support Washington. Saddam's long-term strategy, according to several sources, is to bully or cajole Muslim countries into breaking the embargo against Iraq, without waiting for the United Nations to lift if formally."


INTELLIGENCE REPORTS about the nature of the relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda from mid-1999 through 2003 are conflicting. One senior Iraqi intelligence officer in U.S. custody, Khalil Ibrahim Abdallah, "said that the last contact between the IIS and al Qaeda was in July 1999. Bin Laden wanted to meet with Saddam, he said. The guidance sent back from Saddam's office reportedly ordered Iraqi intelligence to refrain from any further contact with bin Laden and al Qaeda. The source opined that Saddam wanted to distance himself from al Qaeda."

The bulk of reporting on the relationship contradicts this claim. One report states that "in late 1999" al Qaeda set up a training camp in northern Iraq that "was operational as of 1999." Other reports suggest that the Iraqi regime contemplated several offers of safe haven to bin Laden throughout 1999.


23. . . . Iraqi officials were carefully considering offering safe haven to bin Laden and his closest collaborators in Nov. 1999. The source indicated the idea was put forward by the presumed head of Iraqi intelligence in Islamabad (Khalid Janaby) who in turn was in frequent contact and had good relations with bin Laden.
Some of the most intriguing intelligence concerns an Iraqi named Ahmed Hikmat Shakir:


24. According to sensitive reporting, a Malaysia-based Iraqi national (Shakir) facilitated the arrival of one of the Sept 11 hijackers for an operational meeting in Kuala Lumpur (Jan 2000). Sensitive reporting indicates Shakir's travel and contacts link him to a worldwide network of terrorists, including al Qaeda. Shakir worked at the Kuala Lumpur airport--a job he claimed to have obtained through an Iraqi embassy employee.
One of the men at that al Qaeda operational meeting in the Kuala Lumpur Hotel was Tawfiz al Atash, a top bin Laden lieutenant later identified as the mastermind of the October 12, 2000, attack on the USS Cole.


25. Investigation into the bombing of the USS Cole in October 2000 by al Qaeda revealed no specific Iraqi connections but according to the CIA, "fragmentary evidence points to possible Iraqi involvement."
26. During a custodial interview, Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi [a senior al Qaeda operative] said he was told by an al Qaeda associate that he was tasked to travel to Iraq (1998) to establish a relationship with Iraqi intelligence to obtain poisons and gases training. After the USS Cole bombing in 2000, two al Qaeda operatives were sent to Iraq for CBW-related [Chemical and Biological Weapons] training beginning in Dec 2000. Iraqi intelligence was "encouraged" after the embassy and USS Cole bombings to provide this training.

The analysis of this report follows.


CIA maintains that Ibn al-Shaykh's timeline is consistent with other sensitive reporting indicating that bin Laden asked Iraq in 1998 for advanced weapons, including CBW and "poisons."
Additional reporting also calls into question the claim that relations between Iraq and al Qaeda cooled after mid-1999:

27. According to sensitive CIA reporting, . . . the Saudi National Guard went on a kingdom-wide state of alert in late Dec 2000 after learning Saddam agreed to assist al Qaeda in attacking U.S./U.K. interests in Saudi Arabia.

And then there is the alleged contact between lead 9/11 hijacker Mohamed Atta and an Iraqi intelligence officer in Prague. The reporting on those links suggests not one meeting, but as many as four. What's more, the memo reveals potential financing of Atta's activities by Iraqi intelligence.






The Czech counterintelligence service reported that the Sept. 11 hijacker [Mohamed] Atta met with the former Iraqi intelligence chief in Prague, [Ahmed Khalil Ibrahim Samir] al Ani, on several occasions. During one of these meetings, al Ani ordered the IIS finance officer to issue Atta funds from IIS financial holdings in the Prague office.
And the commentary:


CIA can confirm two Atta visits to Prague--in Dec. 1994 and in June 2000; data surrounding the other two--on 26 Oct 1999 and 9 April 2001--is complicated and sometimes contradictory and CIA and FBI cannot confirm Atta met with the IIS. Czech Interior Minister Stanislav Gross continues to stand by his information.
It's not just Gross who stands by the information. Five high-ranking members of the Czech government have publicly confirmed meetings between Atta and al Ani. The meeting that has gotten the most press attention--April 9, 2001--is also the most widely disputed. Even some of the most hawkish Bush administration officials are privately skeptical that Atta met al Ani on that occasion. They believe that reports of the alleged meeting, said to have taken place in public, outside the headquarters of the U.S.-financed Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, suggest a level of sloppiness that doesn't fit the pattern of previous high-level Iraq-al Qaeda contacts.

Whether or not that specific meeting occurred, the report by Czech counterintelligence that al Ani ordered the Iraqi Intelligence Service officer to provide IIS funds to Atta might help explain the lead hijacker's determination to reach Prague, despite significant obstacles, in the spring 2000. (Note that the report stops short of confirming that the funds were transferred. It claims only that the IIS officer requested the transfer.) Recall that Atta flew to Prague from Germany on May 30, 2000, but was denied entry because he did not have a valid visa. Rather than simply return to Germany and fly directly to the United States, his ultimate destination, Atta took pains to get to Prague. After he was refused entry the first time, he traveled back to Germany, obtained the proper paperwork, and caught a bus back to Prague. He left for the United States the day after arriving in Prague for the second time.

Several reports indicate that the relationship between Saddam and bin Laden continued, even after the September 11 attacks:


31. An Oct. 2002 . . . report said al Qaeda and Iraq reached a secret agreement whereby Iraq would provide safe haven to al Qaeda members and provide them with money and weapons. The agreement reportedly prompted a large number of al Qaeda members to head to Iraq. The report also said that al Qaeda members involved in a fraudulent passport network for al Qaeda had been directed to procure 90 Iraqi and Syrian passports for al Qaeda personnel.
The analysis that accompanies that report indicates that the report fits the pattern of Iraq-al Qaeda collaboration:


References to procurement of false passports from Iraq and offers of safe haven previously have surfaced in CIA source reporting considered reliable. Intelligence reports to date have maintained A that Iraqi support for al Qaeda usually involved providing training, obtaining passports, and offers of refuge. This report adds to that list by including weapons and money. This assistance would make sense in the aftermath of 9-11.
Colin Powell, in his February 5, 2003, presentation to the U.N. Security Council, revealed the activities of Abu Musab al Zarqawi. Reporting in the memo expands on Powell's case and might help explain some of the resistance the U.S. military is currently facing in Iraq.


37. Sensitive reporting indicates senior terrorist planner and close al Qaeda associate al Zarqawi has had an operational alliance with Iraqi officials. As of Oct. 2002, al Zarqawi maintained contacts with the IIS to procure weapons and explosives, including surface-to-air missiles from an IIS officer in Baghdad. According to sensitive reporting, al Zarqawi was setting up sleeper cells in Baghdad to be activated in case of a U.S. occupation of the city, suggesting his operational cooperation with the Iraqis may have deepened in recent months. Such cooperation could include IIS provision of a secure operating bases [sic] and steady access to arms and explosives in preparation for a possible U.S. invasion. Al Zarqawi's procurements from the Iraqis also could support al Qaeda operations against the U.S. or its allies elsewhere.

CRITICS OF THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION have complained that Iraq-al Qaeda connections are a fantasy, trumped up by the warmongers at the White House to fit their preconceived notions about international terror; that links between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden have been routinely "exaggerated" for political purposes; that hawks "cherry-picked" bits of intelligence and tendentiously presented these to the American public.

Carl Levin, a senior member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, made those points as recently as November 9, in an appearance on "Fox News Sunday." Republicans on the committee, he complained, refuse to look at the administration's "exaggeration of intelligence."

Said Levin: "The question is whether or not they exaggerated intelligence in order to carry out their purpose, which was to make the case for going to war. Did we know, for instance, with certainty that there was any relationship between the Iraqis and the terrorists that were in Afghanistan, bin Laden? The administration said that there's a connection between those terrorist groups in Afghanistan and Iraq. Was there a basis for that?"

There was, as shown in the memo to the committee on which Levin serves. And much of the reporting comes from Clinton-era intelligence. Not that you would know this from Al Gore's recent public statements. Indeed, the former vice president claims to be privy to new "evidence" that the administration lied. In an August speech at New York University, Gore claimed: "The evidence now shows clearly that Saddam did not want to work with Osama bin Laden at all, much less give him weapons of mass destruction." Really?

One of the most interesting things to note about the 16-page memo is that it covers only a fraction of the evidence that will eventually be available to document the relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda. For one thing, both Saddam and bin Laden were desperate to keep their cooperation secret. (Remember, Iraqi intelligence used liquid paper on an internal intelligence document to conceal bin Laden's name.) For another, few people in the U.S. government are expressly looking for such links. There is no Iraq-al Qaeda equivalent of the CIA's 1,400-person Iraq Survey Group currently searching Iraq for weapons of mass destruction.

Instead, CIA and FBI officials are methodically reviewing Iraqi intelligence files that survived the three-week war last spring. These documents would cover several miles if laid end-to-end. And they are in Arabic. They include not only connections between bin Laden and Saddam, but also revolting details of the regime's long history of brutality. It will be a slow process.

So Feith's memo to the Senate Intelligence Committee is best viewed as sort of a "Cliff's Notes" version of the relationship. It contains the highlights, but it is far from exhaustive.

One example. The memo contains only one paragraph on Ahmed Hikmat Shakir, the Iraqi facilitator who escorted two September 11 hijackers through customs in Kuala Lumpur. U.S. intelligence agencies have extensive reporting on his activities before and after the September 11 hijacking. That they would include only this brief overview suggests the 16-page memo, extensive as it is, just skims the surface of the reporting on Iraq-al Qaeda connections.

Other intelligence reports indicate that Shakir whisked not one but two September 11 hijackers--Khalid al Midhar and Nawaq al Hamzi--through the passport and customs process upon their arrival in Kuala Lumpur on January 5, 2000. Shakir then traveled with the hijackers to the Kuala Lumpur Hotel where they met with Ramzi bin al Shibh, one of the masterminds of the September 11 plot. The meeting lasted three days. Shakir returned to work on January 9 and January 10, and never again.

Shakir got his airport job through a contact at the Iraqi Embassy. (Iraq routinely used its embassies as staging grounds for its intelligence operations; in some cases, more than half of the alleged "diplomats" were intelligence operatives.) The Iraqi embassy, not his employer, controlled Shakir's schedule. He was detained in Qatar on September 17, 2001. Authorities found in his possession contact information for terrorists involved in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, the 1998 embassy bombings, the 2000 attack on the USS Cole, and the September 11 hijackings. The CIA had previous reporting that Shakir had received a phone call from the safe house where the 1993 World Trade Center attacks had been plotted.

The Qataris released Shakir shortly after his arrest. On October 21, 2001, he flew to Amman, Jordan, where he was to change planes to a flight to Baghdad. He didn't make that flight. Shakir was detained in Jordan for three months, where the CIA interrogated him. His interrogators concluded that Shakir had received extensive training in counter-interrogation techniques. Not long after he was detained, according to an official familiar with the intelligence, the Iraqi regime began to "pressure" Jordanian intelligence to release him. At the same time, Amnesty International complained that Shakir was being held without charge. The Jordanians released him on January 28, 2002, at which point he is believed to have fled back to Iraq.

Was Shakir an Iraqi agent? Does he provide a connection between Saddam Hussein and September 11? We don't know. We may someday find out.

But there can no longer be any serious argument about whether Saddam Hussein's Iraq worked with Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda to plot against Americans.


Stephen F. Hayes is a staff writer at The Weekly Standard.

[GeoQuadzilla]

Yeah I said that, Only because you said "Screw us" you left yourself wide open for it. But i'm done with the bickering... I refuse to be an internet mouth peice... Because fighting on the internet is like being in the special olympics... Even if you win, Your still retarded.

OH yea mr. Class act should be your new fing nickname. Did you miss your post about me with a beard and not having been laid. Your about as unclassy as they come.

[Jdawg50]

Yeah I said that, Only because you said "Screw us" you left yourself wide open for it. But i'm done with the bickering... I refuse to be an internet mouth peice... Because fighting on the internet is like being in the special olympics... Even if you win, Your still retarded.

Your right I did, and the reason I did was well documented in the articles above. If you leaders want to continue to push anti-americanism then yes screw Canada. If I see Canada being more like the Brits and watching our backs and less like the French, whom have done everything the can to interfere with US foriegn policy. I will be totally happy with Canada's foriegn policy, but at this point... I don't see that.

[Jdawg50]

Here's why we are in Iraq if you want a good anecdotal story

Over Najaf, Fighting for Des Moines
New York Times ^ | August 23,2004 | Glen G. Butler


Posted on 08/23/2004 6:43:01 AM PDT by NCjim


Najaf, Iraq — I'm an average American who grew up watching "Brady Bunch" reruns, playing dodge ball and listening to Van Halen. I love the Longhorns and the Eagles. I'm you; your neighbor; the kid you used to go sledding with but who took a different career path in college. Now, I'm a Marine helicopter pilot who has spent the last two weeks heavily engaged with enemy forces here. I'm writing this between missions, without much time or care to polish, so please look to the heart of these thoughts and not their structure.

I got in country a little more than a month ago, eager to do my part here for the global war on terror and still get home in one piece. I'm a mid-grade officer, so I probably have a better-than-average understanding of the complexity of the situation, but I make no claims to see the bigger picture or offer any strategic solutions. Two years of my military training were spent in Quantico, Va., classrooms. I've read Sun Tzu several times; I've flipped through Mao's Little Red Book and debated over Thucydides; I've analyzed Henry Kissinger's "Diplomacy" and Clausewitz's "On War"; and I've walked the battlefields of Antietam, Belleau Wood, Majuba and Isandlwana.

I've also studied a little about the culture I'm deep in the middle of, know a bit about the caliph, about the five pillars and about Allah, but know I don't know enough. I am also a believer in our cause - I put that up front just so there isn't any question of my motivation.

We marines are proudly apolitical, yet stereotypically right-wing conservative. I'm both. And I'd be here with my fellow devildogs, fighting just as hard, whether John Kerry or George W. Bush or Ralph Nader were our commander-in-chief, until we're told to go home.

The other day I attended a memorial service for an old acquaintance, Lt. Col. David (Rhino) Greene. He was killed July 28 while flying his AH-1W Cobra over the eastern edge of Ramadi. His squadron was composed of reservists: "old guys" like me who had been around a little while. But unlike me, these guys had gotten out of active duty to pursue other careers and spend more time with their families. Now, they were leading the charge against the Iraqi insurgency.

The night after the service, I sat around in an impromptu gathering of $10 beach chairs in the sand, watching the sunset and smoking some of Rhino's cigars with friends I hadn't seen in almost a decade. I listened in awe as they told me about their Falluja April, about how they had all cheated death, been shot down, again and again. We talked about the war, pretending to know all the answers, and we traded stories about home, bragged about our wives and kids.

We also talked about the magic bullet that ended Rhino's life. It could have been shot by a sniper who had slipped in over the Iranian border, or maybe it came from the AK-47 of a rebellious Iraqi teenager who viewed shooting at Yankee helicopters the same way mischievous American kids might view throwing rocks at cars. No matter, the single round pierced his neck, and within seconds a good man was dead, leaving his wife a widow and his two children fatherless. I won't soon forget that day, but it was quickly overshadowed by events to come, as I was thrust into the heat of battle in my own little slice of Mesopotamia.

On Aug. 5, after a few days of building intensity, war erupted in Najaf (again). When we had first come to Iraq, we were told our mission would be to conduct so-called SASO, or Security and Stability Operations, and to train the Iraqi military and police to do their jobs so we could go home. Obviously, the security part of SASO is still the emphasis, but our unit's area of operations had been very quiet for months, so most of us weren't expecting a fight so soon.

That changed rapidly when marines responded to requests for assistance from the Iraqi forces in Najaf battling Moktada al-Sadr's militia, who had attacked local police stations. Our helicopters were called on the scene to provide close air support, and soon one of them was shot down. That was when this war became real for me.

Since then my squadron has been providing continuous support for our engaged Marine brothers on the ground, by this point slugging it out hand-to-hand in the city's ancient Muslim cemetery. The Imam Ali shrine in Najaf is the burial place of the prophet Muhammad's son-in-law, and is one of the most revered sites in Shiite Islam. The cemetery to its north is gigantic, filled with New Orleans-style crypts and mausoleums. We had been warned it was an "exclusion zone" when we got here, that the local authorities had asked us to not go in there or fly overhead, even though we knew the bad guys were using this area to hide weapons, make improvised explosive devices, and plan against us. Being the culturally sensitive force we are, we agreed - until Aug. 5. Suddenly, I was conducting support missions over the marines' heads in the graveyard, dodging anti-aircraft artillery and rocket-propelled grenades and preparing to be shot down, too. My perspective broadened rapidly.

At first there were no news media in Najaf; now, I assume, it's getting crowded, although the authorities have restricted access after a group of journalists "embedded" with the Mahdi Militia muddied the problem and jeopardized others' safety. I haven't had time to catch much CNN or Fox News, and although I've seen a few headlines forwarded to me by friends, I don't think the world is seeing the complete picture.

I want to emphasize that our military is using every means possible to minimize damage to historical, religious and civilian structures, and is going out of its way to protect the innocent. I have not shot one round without good cause, whether it be in response to machine gun fire aimed at me or mortars shot at soldiers and marines on the ground.

The battle has been surreal, focused largely in the cemetery, where families continue burying their dead even as I swoop in low overhead to make sure they aren't sneaking in behind our forces' flanks, or pulling a surface-to-air missile out of the coffin. Children continue playing soccer in the dirt fields next door, and locals wave to us as we fly over their rooftops in preparation for gun runs into the enemy's positions.

Sure, some of those people might be waving just to make sure we don't shoot them, but I think the majority are on our side. I've learned that this enemy is not just a mass of angry Iraqis who want us to leave their country, as some would have you believe. The forces we're fighting around Iraq are a conglomeration of renegade Shiites, former Baathists, Iranians, Syrians, terrorists with ties to Ansar al-Islam and Al Qaeda, petty criminals, destitute citizens looking for excitement or money, and yes, even a few frustrated Iraqis who worry about Wal-Mart culture infringing on their neighborhood.

But I see the others who are on our side, appreciate us risking our lives, and know we're in the right. The Iraqi soldiers who are fighting alongside us are motivated to take their country back. I've not been deluded into thinking that we came here to free the Iraqis. That is indeed the icing on the cake, but I came here to prevent the still active "grave and gathering threat" from congealing into something we wouldn't be able to stop.

Weapons of mass destruction or no, I'm glad that we ended the dictatorship of Saddam Hussein. My brother and other American jet pilots risked their lives for years patrolling the "no fly zone" (and occasionally making page A-12 in the newspaper if they dropped a bomb on a threatening missile battery). The former dictator's attempt to assassinate George H. W. Bush, use of chemical weapons on his own people, and invasion of a neighboring country are just a few of the other reasons I believe we should have acted sooner. He eventually would have had the means to cause America great harm - no doubt in my mind.

The pre-emptive doctrine of the current administration will continue to be debated long after I'm gone, but one fact stands for itself: America has not been hit with another catastrophic attack since 9/11. I firmly believe that our actions in Afghanistan and Iraq are major reasons that we've had it so good at home. Building a "fortress America" is not only impractical, it's impossible. Prudent homeland security measures are vital, to be sure, but attacking the source of the threat remains essential.

Now we are on the verge of victory or defeat in Iraq. Success depends not only on battlefield superiority, but also on the trust and confidence of the American people. I've read some articles recently that call for cutting back our military presence in Iraq and moving our troops to the peripheries of most cities. Such advice is well-intentioned but wrong - it would soon lead to a total withdrawal. Our goal needs to be a safe Iraq, free of militias and terrorists; if we simply pull back and run, then the region will pose an even greater threat than it did before the invasion. I also fear if we do not win this battle here and now, my 7-year-old son might find himself here in 10 or 11 years, fighting the same enemies and their sons.

When critics of the war say their advocacy is on behalf of those of us risking our lives here, it's a type of false patriotism. I believe that when Americans say they "support our troops," it should include supporting our mission, not just sending us care packages. They don't have to believe in the cause as I do; but they should not denigrate it. That only aids the enemy in defeating us strategically.

Michael Moore recently asked Bill O'Reilly if he would sacrifice his son for Falluja. A clever rhetorical device, but it's the wrong question: this war is about Des Moines, not Falluja. This country is breeding and attracting militants who are all eager to grab box cutters, dirty bombs, suicide vests or biological weapons, and then come fight us in Chicago, Santa Monica or Long Island. Falluja, in fact, was very close to becoming a city our forces could have controlled, and then given new schools and sewers and hospitals, before we pulled back in the spring. Now, essentially ignored, it has become a Taliban-like state of Islamic extremism, a terrorist safe haven. We must not let the same fate befall Najaf or Ramadi or the rest of Iraq.

No, I would not sacrifice myself, my parents would not sacrifice me, and President Bush would not sacrifice a single marine or soldier simply for Falluja. Rather, that symbolic city is but one step toward a free and democratic Iraq, which is one step closer to a more safe and secure America.

I miss my family, my friends and my country, but right now there is nowhere else I'd rather be. I am a United States Marine.

[Blown_SC]

Yes, WW4
If your to dumb to see that, Well I feel sorry for you. take some time and refute the article I posted on this particular issue.

Tell me then, when was the 3rd? Now?

And regarding your attitude towards my intelligence:
If you are writing the short form for "you are", the correct spelling is "you're"...
Additionally, "refute" means to prove something is false.... I think you meant that I should "review" the article...

[Jdawg50]

Tell me then, when was the 3rd? Now?

And regarding your attitude towards my intelligence:
If you are writing the short form for "you are", the correct spelling is "you're"...
Additionally, "refute" means to prove something is false.... I think you meant that I should "review" the article...

WOW! Your an enlish major! Good for you! And yes I meant refute, obviously something you cannot do. As far as the you are comment, please. Spell check is one thing, acting like you know what your talking about is something totally different.

WWI, WWII, The Cold War (WWIII), and now WWIV, war against ISLAMOFACISM.

[Red Ketchup]

Please man, Is that really what you think? I don't hate Canada. I simply cannot understand why Canada hates the US so much. I think we should name this thread 37 AR Canadian boys vs JDawg.

It boggles the mind how so many Americans can't see the difference between hating the US and disliking your president and his cronies.

I like the US and wish americans all over only the best, but I also think your president is a freakin moron and his faith based administration the scariest thing since stalin and hitler.

This is how many Canadians think, some are more vocal than others. You'll never hear "The us sucks" or "americans are morons" here.... but plenty of people do think and say that they dislike dubya and think he's loony. On the other hand we hear PLENTY of insults and self rightious lies hurled at Canada and Canadians by ignorant Americans...

Red

[Jdawg50]

It boggles the mind how so many Americans can't see the difference between hating the US and disliking your president and his cronies.

I like the US and wish americans all over only the best, but I also think your president is a freakin moron and his faith based administration the scariest thing since stalin and hitler.

This is how many Canadians think, some are more vocal than others. You'll never hear "The us sucks" or "americans are morons" here.... but plenty of people do think and say that they dislike dubya and think he's loony. On the other hand we hear PLENTY of insults and self rightious lies hurled at Canada and Canadians by ignorant Americans...

Red

Thanks Red, But why are you teaching it in your schools?

[Blown_SC]

WOW! Your an enlish major! Good for you! And yes I meant refute, obviously something you cannot do. As far as the you are comment, please. Spell check is one thing, acting like you know what your talking about is something totally different.

WWI, WWII, The Cold War (WWIII), and now WWIV, war against ISLAMOFACISM.

I do know what I am talking about, regarding the sole issue I have addressed.
I live here, hence, I need not cite an article regarding a place I live in.
Your personal slams aren't needed, I haven't questioned your intelligence, nor have I insulted you...
I like where this is going though

[Jdawg50]

I do know what I am talking about, regarding the sole issue I have addressed.
I live here, hence, I need not cite an article regarding a place I live in.
Your personal slams aren't needed, I haven't questioned your intelligence, nor have I insulted you...
I like where this is going though

Personal slams huh? I have personally slammed you? If you feel that way then I must be doing something right. Still can't come up with anything good to refute what I have said? Yea, That's what I thought. If you like where its going then, as GW put it "bring it on". I can respectfully disagree with you, and call you on things that you have yet to establish as truth. That is what I have done, and that is what I will continue to do. If you want to continue to discuss this issue, then we can, and I will. By me saying "If you are too dumb to figure something out" is a personal attack (Which its not) then you have no idea what a personal attack is.

[larry3436]

I love canadian strippers!

[Blown_SC]

Personal slams huh? I have personally slammed you? If you feel that way then I must be doing something right. Still can't come up with anything good to refute what I have said? Yea, That's what I thought. If you like where its going then, as GW put it "bring it on". I can respectfully disagree with you, and call you on things that you have yet to establish as truth. That is what I have done, and that is what I will continue to do. If you want to continue to discuss this issue, then we can, and I will. By me saying "If you are too dumb to figure something out" is a personal attack (Which its not) then you have no idea what a personal attack is.

You're correct, bad judgement by me I suppose. I suppose I learned in school to be defensive, especially against what Americans say .

Regarding your article:

"America’s children are portrayed as being brought up in "filthy tenements, driven out upon the streets to play in `gangs’," according to a 1934 textbook that was prevalent in Canadian classrooms of the day.

As I have read, there is only one direct reference in that article, which was from a 1934 textbook. The rest was in someone's opinion. Please, I'd like to see more , maybe something more current as well, something that I would have seen while in school (late 80's, 90's, currently)...

"In contrast, Canadians are depicted as orderly, harmonious and gentlemanly."

This is true...
========

I'm sincerely interested in seeing other proof though, because I, and others that I went to school with, must have been educated much differently.

[Red Ketchup]

Thanks Red, But why are you teaching it in your schools?

I can guarantee that it's not the official program and it's not what are taxes are paying for... can your government controll EVERYTHING the teachers say and every book they use in the classroom? Neither can ours.

To be honest with you, until you reach the college level Canadian schools teach about as much about the US than the average American grade school teaches about Canada. NOTHING. They learn in "World geography" that the USA is under us on the map, their capital is Washington and thats about all there is to it.

Are you so self centered as to think Canadians spend all their time thinking, talking and teaching negatively about the USA? Puhleeeze.... we got enough home grown problems to occupy our mind here.

Of course we have our media clowns that like to rage against your president just as you have yours that rage against us... big deal. The reality is that the average joe doesn't care. As for raving lunatics like Carolyn Parrish, when she went from voicing her opinion to outright attacking dubya, she was kicked out of the Liberal Party and now has to siege as an independant MP.

Red

[Jdawg50]

You're correct, bad judgement by me I suppose. I suppose I learned in school to be defensive, especially against what Americans say .

Regarding your article:



As I have read, there is only one direct reference in that article, which was from a 1934 textbook. The rest was in someone's opinion. Please, I'd like to see more , maybe something more current as well, something that I would have seen while in school (late 80's, 90's, currently)...



This is true...
========

I'm sincerely interested in seeing other proof though, because I, and others that I went to school with, must have been educated much differently.

OK, I am proud of you bro! That' a lot better. Here's a little blerb from John Gibson that I think is pretty good. More of a comentary, but def some truth to it.

John Gibson
I must say I was a little befuddled watching George W. Bush in Canada.

There he was, saying nice things, making nice all over Canadians... and what were we hearing from the Canadian media and politicians?

They were wondering if they really ought to accept Bush's obvious apology, when they still wanted to dislike him enormously and still wanted to oppose and condemn U.S. policies like pre-emptive war... insisting that the guy who was trying to make nice was wrong, wrong, wrong.

It was so so tiresome.

Here is a country which cannot provide for its own defense, which insists nobody wants to invade it because they are so nice and don't tick people off (like those brutish bullies, the Americans.)

Here is a country which depends on America for 85% of its products for $1 billion a day in cross-border business, which depends on America to provide an audience for all those Canadian entertainers who would starve to death if they had to depend on a Canadian audience for their paychecks.


We're talking about a country which spends all its time comparing itself to its huge neighbor and saying to itself, "We're better. We're smarter. We're with the world, and America is out of step."

This is the country whose politicians called President Bush a moron, and referred to Americans as bastards, and refused to help in a war the U.S. wanted to fight — in fact, refuses to believe that the 9/11 attacks on America were unprovoked. The U.S. had it coming, they say.

OK, OK... it's a minority which says all those things, but the minority is the elected politicians and the snooty condescending media.

So here they were standing around saying, "OK, Bush is here to apologize... should we shake his hand or spit at his feet?"

Frankly, Canada, it's all a bit tiresome to us. Would you like us to just ignore you?

That's My Word.

Watch John Gibson weekdays at 5 p.m. ET on "The Big Story" and send your comments to: [email protected]

[Jdawg50]

Politically Incorrect
Poll: over 40% of Canadian teens think America is "evil"
by Arthur Weinreb, Associate Editor, Canada Free Press

June 30, 2004

Can West News Services, owners of several Canadian newspapers including the National Post as well as the Global Television Network commissioned a series of polls to determine how young people feel about the issues that were facing the country’s voters. Dubbed "Youth Vote 2004", the polls, sponsored by the Dominion Institute and Navigator Ltd. were taken with a view to getting more young people involved in the political process.

In one telephone poll of teens between the ages of 14 and 18, over 40 per cent of the respondents described the United States as being "evil". That number rose to 64 per cent for French Canadian youth.

This being Canada, the amount of anti-Americanism that was found is not surprising. What is significant is the high number of teens who used the word "evil" to describe our southern neighbour. As Misty Harris pointed out in her column in the Saskatoon Star Phoenix, evil is usually associated with serial killers and "kids who tear the legs off baby spiders." These teens appear to equate George W. Bush and Americans with Osama bin Laden and Hitler, although it is unknown if the teens polled would describe the latter two as being evil. Whether someone who orders planes to be flown into heavily populated buildings would fit that description would make a good subject for a future poll.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


The Liberal government came into power in 1993 gushing anti-Americanism. Former Prime Minister Jean Chrétien’s communications director, Francoise Ducros, made headlines when she referred to President Bush as a moron. Liberal MP Carolyn Parrish was picked up on a boom microphone saying, "**** Americans — I hate those bastards". Not only did Parrish not apologize for her remarks, but she later appeared on a television show hosted by alleged comedian Mike Bullard and laughed about the incident. Parrish played to the anti-Americanism of the youthful studio audience by saying that she couldn’t guarantee that she wouldn’t do it again.

Not only did then Prime Minister Jean Chrétien not take any action against his staff or caucus members, he himself engaged in America-bashing. The depth of his anti-Americanism surfaced shortly after the 9/11 attacks when he blamed the arrogance and greed of the West (read the United States) for those attacks.

When Paul Martin assumed office last December, the childish cheap shots ended but, if anything, anti-Americanism became stronger.

Anti-Americanism played a prominent role in the election strategy of the Liberals. Paul Martin portrayed himself as the saviour of Canadian medicare while saying that if Stephen Harper and the Conservative Party of Canada came to power they would introduce "American-style" health care. Martin was happy to take credit for cutting taxes and eliminating the deficit during the 1990s when he was Minister of Finance, but he referred to tax cuts included in the Conservative Party platform as being "American-style tax cuts". Canadians who favour lower taxes or the private delivery of health care services or smaller governments or anything similar to what is found in the United States were called "un-Canadian" by Paul Martin.

It is therefore not surprising that a high percentage of Canadian youth think that the United States is evil. Nor is it surprising that this feeling is more pronounced in Quebec where Bloc Quebecois leader Gilles Duceppe said that he would rather live under the United Nations than the Stars and Stripes. The left wing Canadian political parties, aided by their supporters in the elite media don’t seem to be able to say anything positive about Canada without denigrating the United States in the process.

The poll results reflect that anti-Americanism will be solidly entrenched in future generations of Canadians. As well as listening to the propaganda espoused by their political leaders and the media, these kids have no experience with what constitutes real evil. They live in a country that much like pre-9/11 America, thinks that terrorist attacks are something that happens in other countries. And as the World War II veterans slowly die off, they have no conviction of the evil that the allies risked their lives to defeat.

With anti-Americanism playing such a prominent role in this past election campaign, it is no wonder that the United States was viewed in such a negative light.

[Phillyboy1]

i would love to slap that dumb f-cking bitch ann in the face. she is a f-cking racist, redneck, arrogant, loud mouthed, bible thumping bitch that talks like she's mad cause shes never been f-cked in her life. that dumb bitch is sooo f-cking stupid, if you can listen to her and agree with her then you are just plain white trash with no educational thinking in your head, you also must have absolutly no f-cking common sense.

guys from canada, please dont listen to Jdawg, he is a ignorant peice of sh-t that thinks this the US owns the world, you can sense it with every f-cking post he makes. last time i checked we are all on this planet together, rather then fighting we all should realize that after we blow up everything there is absolutly no place to go. we may be able to crush the world if we wanted to with our military but because of rational thinking people we dont. i love canada and canadians, and montreal cause of all the strip clubs . but people like jdawg and that bitch ann are the reason this country is hated so much, and its what us normal thinking people have to deal with on a day to day basis. just yesterday i saw a stupid ass lady driving with a GWB sticker slapped up next to a "mothers against DUI" sticker. i told her it was funny and she must not now her leader that well. i said to her "you know geo has had numerous DUI's when he was younger" and all she could answer to me was "yes but the lord has saved him, so i forgive him" i answered back with "yes your right, having a daddy with alot of money helps"

us normal people in the USA both right and left have to deal with the few ignorants on a day to day basis. and as a whole they bring this country down to the sh-t heaps of civilization. and right now we have one of them in office. and its also sick that so many people backed him but now after the election they are actually showing the truth going on in Iraq and why most of his cabinet is resigning.

jdawg i must say, do you honestly think before you speak? do you think about anything, or anyone else before you spout out that sh-t? sure our country is great, but the is a big differance.

power is one thing, but its takes responsiblilty, and respect to only use that power when its needed. we shouldnt be just threatening the world cause we can, thats what we thought and look what happened to the World trade centers. **** we sure did show the world didnt we? let some idiots highjack our planes and fly them into buildings. oh yeah we are a super power, a super power that thinks we own the world, well all that BS thinking is gonna turn around and bite you in the ass one day, and it seems like it decided to start biting back on september 11th 2001

[GeoQuadzilla]

Now that was a post worth reading... Well said JC

i would love to slap that dumb f-cking bitch ann in the face. she is a f-cking racist, redneck, arrogant, loud mouthed, bible thumping bitch that talks like she's mad cause shes never been f-cked in her life. that dumb bitch is sooo f-cking stupid, if you can listen to her and agree with her then you are just plain white trash with no educational thinking in your head, you also must have absolutly no f-cking common sense.

guys from canada, please dont listen to Jdawg, he is a ignorant peice of sh-t that thinks this the US owns the world. we may be able to crush the world if we wanted to with our military but because of rational thinking people we dont. i love canada and canadians, and montreal cause of all the strip clubs . but people like jdawg and that bitch ann are the reason this country is hated so much, and its what us normal thinking people have to deal with on a day to day basis. just yesterday i saw a stupid ass lady driving with a GWB sticker slapped up next to a "mothers against DUI" sticker. i told her it was funny and she must not now her leader that well. i said to her "you know geo has had numerous DUI's when he was younger" and all she could answer to me was "yes but the lord has saved him, so i forgive him" i answered back with "yes your right, having a daddy with alot of money helps"

us normal people in the USA both right and left have to deal with the few ignorants on a day to day basis. and as a whole they bring this country down to the sh-t heaps of civilization. and right now we have one of them in office. and its also sick that so many people backed him but now after the election they are actually showing the truth going on in Iraq and why most of his cabinet is resigning.

jdawg i must say, do you honestly think before you speak? do you think about anything, or anyone else before you spout out that sh-t? sure our country is great, but the is a big differance.

power is one thing, but its takes responsiblilty, and respect to only use that power when its needed. we shouldnt be just threatening the world cause we can, thats what we thought and look what happened to the World trade centers. **** we sure did show the world didnt we? let some idiots highjack our planes and fly them into buildings. oh yeah we are a super power, a super power that thinks we own the world, well all that BS thinking is gonna turn around and bite you in the ass one day, and it seems like it decided to start biting back on september 11th 2001

[Red Ketchup]

In one telephone poll of teens between the ages of 14 and 18, over 40 per cent of the respondents described the United States as being "evil". That number rose to 64 per cent for French Canadian youth.

A loaded poll of teens by sensationalistic media... right... those who count indeed. I challenge you to do the same thing with American teens with the same questions about Canada and I strongly suspect you'll get the SAME results.

The Liberal government came into power in 1993 gushing anti-Americanism.

Ah yes, a minor incident here and there... most of them anti-BUSH not anti american. I guess the media can put any spin they want on a story eh?

Former Prime Minister Jean Chrétien’s communications director, Francoise Ducros, made headlines when she referred to President Bush as a moron.

In a *private* conversation that was her personnal opinion. We don't crucify people for having a personal opinion here you know.

Liberal MP Carolyn Parrish was picked up on a boom microphone saying, "**** Americans — I hate those bastards". Not only did Parrish not apologize for her remarks, but she later appeared on a television show hosted by alleged comedian Mike Bullard and laughed about the incident.

And she was punished for it by the prime minister and kicked out of the Liberal party. I guess that wasn't worth mentionning in the article.

Paul Martin portrayed himself as the saviour of Canadian medicare while saying that if Stephen Harper and the Conservative Party of Canada came to power they would introduce "American-style" health care.

And? Whats the problem with that? We happen to like our health care system (which is similar to the ones in most of the other civilised nations on the planet EXCEPT the USA). We do not want an "American-style" system.

Refering to and not wanting "American-style" health care, tax cuts or other programs has nothing to do with anti-American feelings... they are realities that are being spun into a rather poorly written article.

Nor is it surprising that this feeling is more pronounced in Quebec where Bloc Quebecois leader Gilles Duceppe said that he would rather live under the United Nations than the Stars and Stripes.

If you knew anything about Canadian politics, you'd know that Gilles Duceppe and his political party doesn't speak for Canadians nor does he even speak for the majority of Quebecois. He is a speratist who'se sole raison d'etre is destroying Canada and making Quebec even more communist than it already is.

They live in a country that much like pre-9/11 America, thinks that terrorist attacks are something that happens in other countries.

Darn, good thing the reporter failed to mention Canada had it's share of serparatist terrorism in the 70's and it was bad enough that PM Trudeau had to declare the War Measures Act (marshall law).

He also seemed to forget that post 9-11 Canada did everything it could to help the US, from taking all your incoming planes to closing your borders where you had no personnel. And when you went into Afghanistan we merrily went along and sent our troops (who are still there) along with france, germany, england....


As for dubyas visit to Canada, I guess your medias failed to mention there were NO mass demonstrations against him (like in england, your good friends) just minor ones here and there. I guess they also forgot to mention that during his speech in Halifax, the people there listened to what he had to say respectfully and he was well cheered and TV broadcasts all over the country were pre-empted so we could ALL hear what he had to say.

Red

[Phillyboy1]

Now that was a post worth reading... Well said JC

thanks, but honestly after seeing them two idiots talk in that video i wanted to reach in my computer and f-cking smash there faces in just for being so arrogant. people like that need to have there asses kicked. they are peices fo sh-t and thats about it

[GeoQuadzilla]

Oh I totally agree... But it's cool, Tucker carlson is gettin a rimmer from that blonde B|tch as we speak... and He's sucking her D|ck... Whatever your into I guess.

P.S. Nice bowtie you co<k eating clown

thanks, but honestly after seeing them two idiots talk in that video i wanted to reach in my computer and f-cking smash there faces in just for being so arrogant. people like that need to have there asses kicked. they are peices fo sh-t and thats about it

[RockSolid]

Thanks Red, But why are you teaching it in your schools?

bro, in the US there is a culture of hate against Canada, in schools in media in politics, especially from the new far right neocons.

I hope Canada doesnt build up its military, cause it will probably attack the US

Canada is a friend, a friend doesnt have to be a bitch and follow everything the US does, friends can have disagreements and still be friends.

saying **** like "we exploit" canadas resources and they are like hondorus, is not necessary.

Some people in the US think, everyone in the world owes the US alot of things.

If Canada is not a friend, name a friend we in the US have?

These far right people are the death of America im telling you, arrogance is a telling tale.

[RockSolid]

that is a good question, who are we defending Canada from?

[GeoQuadzilla]

Glad to see that you look at things this way bro... It's people like you that make Canadians and Americans... North Americans... Instead of trying to make us seperate.

bro, in the US there is a culture of hate against Canada, in schools in media in politics, especially from the new far right neocons.

I hope Canada doesnt build up its military, cause it will probably attack the US

Canada is a friend, a friend doesnt have to be a bitch and follow everything the US does, friends can have disagreements and still be friends.

saying **** like "we exploit" canadas resources and they are like hondorus, is not necessary.

Some people in the US think, everyone in the world owes the US alot of things.

If Canada is not a friend, name a friend we in the US have?

These far right people are the death of America im telling you, arrogance is a telling tale.

[Alex2]

This war is more about islamo-facism than WMD's bro, It's a much bigger picture than that.

That is not accurate bro. We all know that Saddam was against islamo-facism and if you go back and listen what GW was telling every one in the UN before war, you'll understand that the war was mainly about WMD's!

For your information, do you know who had provided these weapons (including anthrax and botulinum) to Saddam during 80's?

http://www.iranchamber.com/history/a...rming_iraq.php