unforgettableFOXfire
I serve MacPhisto
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2001
- Messages
- 2,053
Biggest... Post... EVER!
Alright everyone, time for me to make another post here since the conversation has picked up again.
Garibaldo - Some of this is kinda for you, and kinda not. Its really to try and clear up any misconceptions that people are having, but its doing so from my point of view, which I try to keep pretty objective, but thats not always possible. Nothing I say is intended to be an attack on conservatives, or Americans (again, Im very much appreciative of the US) but Im going to try to put things into a bigger picture. I picked up on some of the stuff you said, truth be told, it was because sometimes I find what you say kinda grates on me a little, Im a sucker for stress and punishment or something. However, I noticed that you had a lot of stuff which was very valid, and also very lighthearted at times (which suprised me, because yeah, I dont know you very well, and my limited experiance was a negative one at best, but I suppose its all in the interpretation of reading, perhaps it was sarcasm, or satire or something, who knows). Anyways, the last thing I want to do is start a big argument over this, its a place for discussion, and since we're being nice, Ill try to state what I have to say in an in-abbraisive manner, or as much as possible.
On with the post.
Hmm... So Ill attempt to clear some small things up as a Canadian and a Liberal-minded individual.
The whole idea of liberalism is the greatest good, for the greatest many people. Liberalism is about equality. To say that liberals are heartless without adequately qualifying that statement is very similar to calling Canada, Soviet Canuckistan, or as I am about to do, describe my experiance with the Conservatives of the world. To make a sweeping generalization, as I so often do to save myself pages and pages of explaination (again, this never going to be 100% true, 100% of the time, this is merely my experiance with most not all conservatives). Conservatives seem to be pro-helping people with money, and anti-helping people without it. Giving all the breaks to people who dont need it, didnt necessarily earn it legitimately, through time and effort, and all in all doing a successful job of screwing over the hard working lower classes. Pro-maintaining archaeic ways of life, resisting change, and scrutinizing those with radical ideas for mostly everything under the sun. The last time I checked, that was one of the causes of the French Revolution. In turn, the American Revolution.
People revolted against the US specifically, however that really wasnt the meaning of the attacks. On a grander scale, they were against the Western World that is 'oppressing' them - the figurehead of which, is America, most powerful nation on earth. Define oppressing as you like, but suffice to say the developing nations really are treated like shit and exploited for what theyre worth. Anyways, when you have a vastly large majority of people living in the western world holding almost all of the world's wealth, but most of the worlds non-wealthy population living in the non-western countries, you get a very large ammount of segregation. Canada is a nice place to live because of the large ammount of acceptance and refuge that can be found here that cannot be found anywhere else. We're not the richest, sure, perhaps not financially, but culturally we are one of the best. When a group of individuals is treated like shit for so long, theyre more than likely going to fight back, thusly all of the civil wars that people come to Canada in order to seek refuge from. On a global token, thus the attacks on the west.
The September 11th attacks werent attacks on the States. Well, in the literal sense they were, but in the figurative sense the September 11th attacks were attacks on the decadent way of life of the West. However, thats not as noble as it might sound, since it was carried out by religious fanatic militia men who were propagandized into doing so. The US didnt deserve it, the West deserved it. The loss of life is not justified. Those groups do have a reason, though it is somewhat perverse in nature. Reason doesnt make it excusable, and a general need for come-uppance does not warrent an attack on a specific group, nor does it warrent a loss of life. I could say this till the cows come home, and people would still argue, but Ill just stop there.
However, in defense of the liberals. Its not because we're heartless, and its not just because it was the us. Its because that as liberals and in my case as a canadian, the balance of equality, power, and the need for the majority of people to feel welcomed and not dejected. I myself feel sorry and ashamed that every 4 seconds, someone dies of hunger in 2nd and 3rd world nations. That shouldnt be happening. We have the power to stop it, yet here we are on our high horse fattening ourselves up, doing whatever we damn well please, living like kings. If we're not careful, we may find ourselves dethroned and perhaps decapitated if King Louis is any example of past events repeating themselves. We have the tools for change, we have the reason to change, and we have the knowlege of what will happen if things dont change. We just need to make it happen. Thats why I take the stand that I do, not because Im anti-american, and not because the conservatives are 'wrong' - because they arent in a lot of cases, but I do it because things would be so much better off if we could all put aside our own needs and think of someone else for a change.
Now, in retrospective, I realise that Garibaldo's comment was not really directed at me, because I wasnt the one whining about being called a whiner. Which is, exactly my point. When I started this thread, I never bitched about Buchanan calling us whiners. Canadians are pretty resillent, and while sure we do whine about this and that, we're generally too polite to open our mouths about it if and when theres a problem. I dont care that he called us whiners. My main problem with what he said was the whole allusion to us being an enemy of the United States.
Now, the issue of 'who let who' into each other's backyard... When you have 3 countries side by side, with nigh-unguarded borders on the land, its pretty obvious that no conclusion can be reached as to whose "fault" it is that someone uninvited decided to just show up one day and commit a heinous crime. We treat each other fairly well I think, Canadians and Americans dont just cross the border, vandalise and arson things, and then leave. Same goes with Americans and Mexicans. So unless Ive completely missed something, this open doors policy we have has worked pretty well up until now. Something like this happens, and its just an indication that perhaps some tighter security measure are in order to make sure that Bill on flight A isnt really Bill the Jihad Bomber en route to global devesatation.
I still stand by the fact that I feel there is a better way for us to check for terrorists without 'racial profiling' everyone coming in to our countries. The fact that all the terrorists were of middle eastern heritage, doesnt really act as an excuse to soley screen them. Anyone, anywhere, at any time could stab you in the back, or for that matter climb on board a plane and destroy a national monument. It isnt a bad idea, but it shouldnt be necessary, though quite frankly even I am seeing the merits of it in this case. But the question becomes, is segregating a race from the rest of a nation really going to solve problems, or cause more? If you pull aside every middle-eastern man, woman, and child but noone else... Thatd just make me more bitter, to see everyone else being treated with dignity and respect except me and my family. Im pretty sure thats the reason for screening randomly everyone who goes in and out of an airport.
And as for the ridiculous hijacking devices. Toothbrushes can be made into stabbing weapons by breaking the ends off. Chapstick can be made into dart guns. Keys can be made into slashing or stabbing weapons with realative ease. Its absolutely ludicrious some of the things theyre doing. I can see checking to see if someone has a large razor-blade in their shoe. But honestly. From a scientific standpoint, the C-4 explosive in the shoe: C4 can not be detonated by fire. C4 takes a large electrical charge to go off. Obviously if someone is sitting there fiddling with wires and a capacitor, theyre probably up to something. I think they just make people take off their shoes because they totally dropped the ball on that one, and theyre trying to cover their asses. But thats just my opinion on the issue. Either ban everything that could be construed to be a weapon (which is practically every tool/object known to man), or ban nothing but things which are actually weapons that could inflict serious harm. Which is pretty much guns and guns alone. Train the airport staff in a martial art, and you immediately eliminate the threat of every non-automatic projectile weapon that someone might manage to use on a plane. Youd save money in the long run from people dying, and youd save the general non-terrorist public from the hassle and sheer idiocy of having to remove their shoes every time they get on an airplane.
Alright everyone, time for me to make another post here since the conversation has picked up again.
Garibaldo - Some of this is kinda for you, and kinda not. Its really to try and clear up any misconceptions that people are having, but its doing so from my point of view, which I try to keep pretty objective, but thats not always possible. Nothing I say is intended to be an attack on conservatives, or Americans (again, Im very much appreciative of the US) but Im going to try to put things into a bigger picture. I picked up on some of the stuff you said, truth be told, it was because sometimes I find what you say kinda grates on me a little, Im a sucker for stress and punishment or something. However, I noticed that you had a lot of stuff which was very valid, and also very lighthearted at times (which suprised me, because yeah, I dont know you very well, and my limited experiance was a negative one at best, but I suppose its all in the interpretation of reading, perhaps it was sarcasm, or satire or something, who knows). Anyways, the last thing I want to do is start a big argument over this, its a place for discussion, and since we're being nice, Ill try to state what I have to say in an in-abbraisive manner, or as much as possible.
On with the post.
Hmm... So Ill attempt to clear some small things up as a Canadian and a Liberal-minded individual.
The whole idea of liberalism is the greatest good, for the greatest many people. Liberalism is about equality. To say that liberals are heartless without adequately qualifying that statement is very similar to calling Canada, Soviet Canuckistan, or as I am about to do, describe my experiance with the Conservatives of the world. To make a sweeping generalization, as I so often do to save myself pages and pages of explaination (again, this never going to be 100% true, 100% of the time, this is merely my experiance with most not all conservatives). Conservatives seem to be pro-helping people with money, and anti-helping people without it. Giving all the breaks to people who dont need it, didnt necessarily earn it legitimately, through time and effort, and all in all doing a successful job of screwing over the hard working lower classes. Pro-maintaining archaeic ways of life, resisting change, and scrutinizing those with radical ideas for mostly everything under the sun. The last time I checked, that was one of the causes of the French Revolution. In turn, the American Revolution.
People revolted against the US specifically, however that really wasnt the meaning of the attacks. On a grander scale, they were against the Western World that is 'oppressing' them - the figurehead of which, is America, most powerful nation on earth. Define oppressing as you like, but suffice to say the developing nations really are treated like shit and exploited for what theyre worth. Anyways, when you have a vastly large majority of people living in the western world holding almost all of the world's wealth, but most of the worlds non-wealthy population living in the non-western countries, you get a very large ammount of segregation. Canada is a nice place to live because of the large ammount of acceptance and refuge that can be found here that cannot be found anywhere else. We're not the richest, sure, perhaps not financially, but culturally we are one of the best. When a group of individuals is treated like shit for so long, theyre more than likely going to fight back, thusly all of the civil wars that people come to Canada in order to seek refuge from. On a global token, thus the attacks on the west.
The September 11th attacks werent attacks on the States. Well, in the literal sense they were, but in the figurative sense the September 11th attacks were attacks on the decadent way of life of the West. However, thats not as noble as it might sound, since it was carried out by religious fanatic militia men who were propagandized into doing so. The US didnt deserve it, the West deserved it. The loss of life is not justified. Those groups do have a reason, though it is somewhat perverse in nature. Reason doesnt make it excusable, and a general need for come-uppance does not warrent an attack on a specific group, nor does it warrent a loss of life. I could say this till the cows come home, and people would still argue, but Ill just stop there.
However, in defense of the liberals. Its not because we're heartless, and its not just because it was the us. Its because that as liberals and in my case as a canadian, the balance of equality, power, and the need for the majority of people to feel welcomed and not dejected. I myself feel sorry and ashamed that every 4 seconds, someone dies of hunger in 2nd and 3rd world nations. That shouldnt be happening. We have the power to stop it, yet here we are on our high horse fattening ourselves up, doing whatever we damn well please, living like kings. If we're not careful, we may find ourselves dethroned and perhaps decapitated if King Louis is any example of past events repeating themselves. We have the tools for change, we have the reason to change, and we have the knowlege of what will happen if things dont change. We just need to make it happen. Thats why I take the stand that I do, not because Im anti-american, and not because the conservatives are 'wrong' - because they arent in a lot of cases, but I do it because things would be so much better off if we could all put aside our own needs and think of someone else for a change.
Now, in retrospective, I realise that Garibaldo's comment was not really directed at me, because I wasnt the one whining about being called a whiner. Which is, exactly my point. When I started this thread, I never bitched about Buchanan calling us whiners. Canadians are pretty resillent, and while sure we do whine about this and that, we're generally too polite to open our mouths about it if and when theres a problem. I dont care that he called us whiners. My main problem with what he said was the whole allusion to us being an enemy of the United States.
Now, the issue of 'who let who' into each other's backyard... When you have 3 countries side by side, with nigh-unguarded borders on the land, its pretty obvious that no conclusion can be reached as to whose "fault" it is that someone uninvited decided to just show up one day and commit a heinous crime. We treat each other fairly well I think, Canadians and Americans dont just cross the border, vandalise and arson things, and then leave. Same goes with Americans and Mexicans. So unless Ive completely missed something, this open doors policy we have has worked pretty well up until now. Something like this happens, and its just an indication that perhaps some tighter security measure are in order to make sure that Bill on flight A isnt really Bill the Jihad Bomber en route to global devesatation.
I still stand by the fact that I feel there is a better way for us to check for terrorists without 'racial profiling' everyone coming in to our countries. The fact that all the terrorists were of middle eastern heritage, doesnt really act as an excuse to soley screen them. Anyone, anywhere, at any time could stab you in the back, or for that matter climb on board a plane and destroy a national monument. It isnt a bad idea, but it shouldnt be necessary, though quite frankly even I am seeing the merits of it in this case. But the question becomes, is segregating a race from the rest of a nation really going to solve problems, or cause more? If you pull aside every middle-eastern man, woman, and child but noone else... Thatd just make me more bitter, to see everyone else being treated with dignity and respect except me and my family. Im pretty sure thats the reason for screening randomly everyone who goes in and out of an airport.
And as for the ridiculous hijacking devices. Toothbrushes can be made into stabbing weapons by breaking the ends off. Chapstick can be made into dart guns. Keys can be made into slashing or stabbing weapons with realative ease. Its absolutely ludicrious some of the things theyre doing. I can see checking to see if someone has a large razor-blade in their shoe. But honestly. From a scientific standpoint, the C-4 explosive in the shoe: C4 can not be detonated by fire. C4 takes a large electrical charge to go off. Obviously if someone is sitting there fiddling with wires and a capacitor, theyre probably up to something. I think they just make people take off their shoes because they totally dropped the ball on that one, and theyre trying to cover their asses. But thats just my opinion on the issue. Either ban everything that could be construed to be a weapon (which is practically every tool/object known to man), or ban nothing but things which are actually weapons that could inflict serious harm. Which is pretty much guns and guns alone. Train the airport staff in a martial art, and you immediately eliminate the threat of every non-automatic projectile weapon that someone might manage to use on a plane. Youd save money in the long run from people dying, and youd save the general non-terrorist public from the hassle and sheer idiocy of having to remove their shoes every time they get on an airplane.