h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Oooooh. Don't get me started about that.

Did you know the current PM is retiring and his long time enemy is taking his place in his (dominant) party? I think some of this (Pot decriminalisation, US comments, etc.) is his way of leaving him with a great big middle finger. Talk to me in a year.

Quick!! Zoomer CBC news has some guy in the Canadian cabinet who has proposed to apply for USA Statehood! The strange thing is he is a Liberal and had as previously as March of this year Distanced himself from Washington. Do you think he is a covert agent of the ultra right wing allience?

Now what was his name? Chretien....? Jean....?

Is everything ok up there my northen brother? I had heard rumers of 'Regime' change in Febuary 2004 but has it secretly occured?

I had posted this in another thread as a reply to Della's question: "At the risk of antagonising you, Lentilla, I have to ask - why did you (the USA) think that International Law could be shrugged off for your pragmatic purposes - and you could invade Iraq in the first D*mn place? - so it would 'do you some good?' Now it's gone pear-shaped and Al Qaeda (Bush's favourite bogeymen) *might* be plotting another attack on *your* sacred heads, all of a sudden, it's boo hoo, it didn't work. What was it supposed to do for you?"

This was my reply:

In my personal opinion, this is a giant, huge, horrific mess.
If you're asking me why the U.S. government thought they could circumvent International Law, I don't know. I've never been for the war in Iraq. I objected to the Bush administration and its total disregard of international law. I asked repeatedly why they didn't go through the UN when it was RIGHT THERE. Then the censorship came down, and we couldn't talk about any of this for a month.

• 9/11 happened because the U.S. (at least when it's controlled by the Republican party) has been very active in foreign affairs, trying to shape world events so that economies prosper, thereby helping America to prosper. Now this may sound pleasant and wonderful. It isn't. It's reprehensible. (Research the PNAC, for those of you who are interested - it's a resurrection of the Monroe Doctrine, which I had thought was staked through the heart long ago.)

• The invasion of Iraq happened because the Bush administration saw a chance to remedy the poor foreign policy choices of the father, George Bush Sr. Dubya invaded Iraq on the suggestion of his policy advisor, Wolfowitz. There was no reason for us to invade Iraq. There are no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. The evidence that talked about Iraq having weapons in the first place stated unequivocally that they had been destroyed. Evidence that Al-Queda has been working with Iraq is flimsy at best. We invaded Iraq because the American people wanted a target. They wanted to be able to point to a map and say 'that's our enemy.' You can't drop a bomb on Al-Queda.

What drives me bonkers is that before the invasion happened, the media was all over WMD. After the invasion, when no weapons had been found, the media was trumpeting how 'happy' the Iraq people were to have been liberated. Bull***t. They were happy to see Saddam go, sure. But they hate America. There's no question. They would rather have gotten rid of Saddam themselves and not be obligated to the U.S. for solving their problem. And what about those weapons? The reason we invaded? There's a tub or two of nerve gas, sure. But no nuclear bombs, no dirty bombs, nada.

So what we have is a terrorist event, followed in response by exactly the sort of behavior that the terrorist event was supposed to protest. That's why I say 'fat lot of good invading Iraq did us.' Not only did we kill off many innocent civilians in the name of peace, but it antagonized the terrorist groups even more.
Trying to kill off all the terrorists is ridiculous. It's not a small minority that can be excised. It's a school of thought - a way of looking at the world that was caused by proactive behavior. It won't be solved by the same behavior.

Anyway, I can go on about this for hours, and I don't have hours. This stuff drives me nuts, and it just keeps getting worse. More Americans are becoming 'pro-American' and looking suspiciously at anybody that doesn't toe the party line - and that makes me really scared. We're entering a post World War II sort of era, when McCarthyism was rampant, patriotism was at an all-time high, and if you complained, you were against the American government and trying to drag down the country. I can't wait until election day, when I can try to vote the b****** out of office and maybe get somebody sane in place!

And no, you didn't antagonize me! This has been bothering me, and the more I hear about it, the more worried I get.

As an aside:

Della, don't believe what the media is telling you. There's a lot more going on around here than CNN or Fox News is letting on. The Democrats in the Texas Legislature actually walked out on the Republicans to keep them from being forced to sign a redistricting amendment. There's protests every day about the current war. People are being fired left and right for speaking their minds - the VP of CBS is a good example. (Commented that the documentary on Hitler and the German people was well-timed for our particular situation.)

The hands of the French aren't clean either. They had exclusive rights to drilling in Iraq before the war. Most of their protests were about losing those rights, not about the Iraqi people.

Anyway, there's something cooking, and I expect that it's going to taste pretty nasty when the timer goes off.

"CBC news has some guy in the Canadian cabinet who has proposed to apply for USA Statehood! The strange thing is he is a Liberal and had as previously as March of this year Distanced himself from Washington. Do you think he is a covert agent of the ultra right wing allience?"

More information, please.

I believe it was meant as something of a joke. The liberal in question is the present Prime Minister, the leader of the Liberal Party. He continues to distance himself quite vocally from the policies of the Bush Administration. The "regime change" refered to is the retirement of the present leader of the Liberal Party (and Prime Minister) after four decades of service to the country in various elected offices. His successor as leader of the Liberal Party will be chosen by the votes of members of the Liberal Party. It is simply the election of a new party leader, hardly a regime change.

http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2003/05/28/us_reax030528

keep defending your skepticism, R. Daneel.

Something of a Joke? I guess Della is right that americans do not do irony. {a facetious response to Canada Prime Minister signing on to the now mutual missle defence program}

Starbirth must now accept that he has no career as a satirical commentator

"{a facetious response to Canada Prime Minister signing on to the now
mutual missle defence program}"


R. Daneel:

I feel obliged to point out that Canada has not "signed on" to anything of the sort. Canada has "entered into discussions" about the possibility of participating, in part "to reinforce Canada's opposition to the weaponization of space", as our Minister of National Defence told the House of Commons.

http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2003/05/30/missile_defence030530

Is this the quote you are looking for Gosho?

"Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned round on you - where would you hide, Roper, the laws being all flat? This country's planted thick with laws from coast to coast - man's laws, not God's - and if you cut them down - and you are just the man to do it - do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil the benifit of the law, for my own safety's sake."
Robert Bolt
Bravo! It certainly is appropriate.
eggs
rosi

Oops,I forgot to mention that my last posting refers to the first one on this thread.

My personal favourite (and this is no pro-semite or anti-anything, just a plea for caution);

First They Came for the Jews

First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.


Pastor Martin Niemöller

that has always stayed with me

I bad, I should have said agreement to sign on.

I bad, I should have said agreement to sign on.

"I should have said agreement to sign on"

only if you wanted to continue promulgating an inaccuracy. If you wanted to be accurate, you should have said something like: "decision to discuss the program and bilateral and multilateral issues surrounding it, including the possibility of taking part or not, depending on information forthcoming in the aforementioned discussions, no decisions being possible at the moment due to a lamentable paucity of anything approaching details of a coherent plan for the program." But I guess that's just a little too detailed and accurate to be used as a soundbite on the Fox network.

Always liked that Address Zoomer. Funny how a few well placed words can cause such strong visualizations and emotions in the human psyche.

That's in my history textbook!

That is good Eto it is a poignant parable.

sorry was going to apply to above post by della and hit button by mistale

So Della you finally admit it. Damn them Yankees!!! It is all their fault all 280 million right down to the last sworn in immigrant and new born.

You might want to read up on a little history of the French and their colonial impact on the middle east. 1916 {Sykes Picot agreement} involving France,Russia and UK might be a good point to begin right up to there exclusive oil contracts with Saddam.

{nothing but spite and rumer} Did you have a straight face when you typed that?