New poll says most Canadians blame U.S. for 9/11 attacks
Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 14 Next
SireJoe @ Sat Sep 09, 2006 1:14 pm
GunPlumber GunPlumber:
BartSimpson BartSimpson:
"The first victim of war is truth."
There has been propaganda involved in every war and on every side of every war since the dawn of time. That's nothing new.
But that war was started and caused by Iraq and then Iraq compounded the problem by threatening Israel (a threat they later made good on) and Saudi Arabia (another threat they also made good on).
In retrospect it's too bad we didn't let Hussein steamroll the Saudis and their sick and twisted Wahhabist maddrassas that turned out the likes of Osama bin Laden & Co. but there were a lot of factors at play in that situation.
Not the least of which was the legitmacy of the UN.
Had the UN sat on its hands and watched as a member nation, a signatory to the Charter, was wiped away by an aggressive regime then the UN would become as irrelevant as many conservatives maintain it to be. Even China & Russia agreed that the invasion of Kuwait could not stand. Hell, the FRENCH supported that war.
I'm sure the baby incubator was not the only propaganda associated with that war - I was there and I remember seeing tales of derring-do that my unit had supposedly performed and it was news to us. We were really impressed with some of the things that never happened that were attributed to us and bear in mind that this propaganda wasn't public, it was within chain of command!
It took me two years to get rid of a commendation & formal citiation in my jacket for an action that I did not perform and was nowhere near when the event occured. You'd probably be impressed with the pressure from the brass for me to just go along and accept the citation even though it was known to be a fairy tale.
I also took umbrage at getting a second PH for a nasty scorpion sting while in position - not exactly a combat wound but I accepted it after some cajoling to just do so.
The war was the principle reason the USA got involved. Just the same as why we got involved in WW2 - British propaganda to get the USA into that war didn't do nearly as much to involve us as did German U-Boats and Japanese aircraft.
There has been propaganda involved in every war and on every side of every war since the dawn of time. That's nothing new.
But that war was started and caused by Iraq and then Iraq compounded the problem by threatening Israel (a threat they later made good on) and Saudi Arabia (another threat they also made good on).
In retrospect it's too bad we didn't let Hussein steamroll the Saudis and their sick and twisted Wahhabist maddrassas that turned out the likes of Osama bin Laden & Co. but there were a lot of factors at play in that situation.
Not the least of which was the legitmacy of the UN.
Had the UN sat on its hands and watched as a member nation, a signatory to the Charter, was wiped away by an aggressive regime then the UN would become as irrelevant as many conservatives maintain it to be. Even China & Russia agreed that the invasion of Kuwait could not stand. Hell, the FRENCH supported that war.
I'm sure the baby incubator was not the only propaganda associated with that war - I was there and I remember seeing tales of derring-do that my unit had supposedly performed and it was news to us. We were really impressed with some of the things that never happened that were attributed to us and bear in mind that this propaganda wasn't public, it was within chain of command!
It took me two years to get rid of a commendation & formal citiation in my jacket for an action that I did not perform and was nowhere near when the event occured. You'd probably be impressed with the pressure from the brass for me to just go along and accept the citation even though it was known to be a fairy tale.
I also took umbrage at getting a second PH for a nasty scorpion sting while in position - not exactly a combat wound but I accepted it after some cajoling to just do so.
The war was the principle reason the USA got involved. Just the same as why we got involved in WW2 - British propaganda to get the USA into that war didn't do nearly as much to involve us as did German U-Boats and Japanese aircraft.
So, let me pose a series of related questions:
1. What official reasons did Saddam give for the invasion of Kuwait, and in light of the post-war investigations, did his complaints have merit of being factual accounts of offences committed by the Kuwaiti government against Iraq.[hr]
2. Did Hussein seek to resolve the disputes by peaceful means, and did he expend all possible diplomatic options, before seeking to resolve the disputes by miltary means?[hr]
3. If the Kuwaitis were guilty of the offences that Hussein had accused them of, did they in any way signal that they would cease and desist from the illegal course of actions they had undertaken and did they indicate they would make reparations for the damage and theft which Hussein alleged they had perpetrated? Or did they avoid and rebuff any attempts (by the Iraqis) at finding a diplomatic solution?[hr]
4. Did any party, (like say,...um maybe,... the U.S. Governmant) outside of the dispute, encourage either the Kuwaitis to avoid a diplomatic solution or the counsel Iraqis to pursue a military one?[hr]
5. If you answered correctly to all of the above questions, congratulations!!
Now for bonus points, we pose one final question from the "morality" category.
If the disputes between Iraq and Kuwait were transposed to North America, with Canada playing the part of the poor aggrieved victim (Kuwait) and the U.S.A playing the part of the megalomaniacal villain, would you have any hesitation in justifying an invasion and conquest of the former by the latter?
I wanna know these answers! Tell me! I'll give you a cookie!
.....if I had one.
Maggiemygosh @ Sat Sep 09, 2006 2:10 pm
gunplumber are you from Nanaimo or Cowichan? Or worse Quebec ? You are behaving like those idiot ndpers from that area who are so disgusting that they are sickening and an embarrasment to us Canadians.
Try to accept that there are folks on here who post truth facts and reality.
We know for fact that you do not accept that because you do not understand any of that.
Geez are you still in grade one???
Zipperfish @ Sat Sep 09, 2006 2:21 pm
Jaime_Souviens Jaime_Souviens:
Zipperfish Zipperfish:
$1:
Bush wasn't in power for long before 911 happened, so if your going to blame anyone blame Clinton, do your homework.
Yes apparently the memo that the Clinton folks left for Condoleeza entitled "Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States" was not clear enough.
You shouldn't cheerlead for a guy who spent eight years refusing to accept his responsibilities while he watched as his country's soldiers and seamen were being killed overseas.
Of course, raping staff members can be a full time job, (if you make it one), so maybe he didn't have the time.
"Raping staff members"? You mean Sandy Berger? Or maybe Monica? That wasn't rape--it was assault wiht a friendly weapon.
GunPlumber @ Sat Sep 09, 2006 3:59 pm
Maggiemygosh Maggiemygosh:
gunplumber are you from Nanaimo or Cowichan? Or worse Quebec ? You are behaving like those idiot ndpers from that area who are so disgusting that they are sickening and an embarrasment to us Canadians.
Try to accept that there are folks on here who post truth facts and reality.
We know for fact that you do not accept that because you do not understand any of that.
Geez are you still in grade one???
Try to accept that there are folks on here who post truth facts and reality.
We know for fact that you do not accept that because you do not understand any of that.
Geez are you still in grade one???
MaggotsInMyGash, you IGNORANT slut!
Are you really so critically short of memory that you cannot even recall the threads (in which you've participated) where I've publically and proudly declared myself to be an Albertan? The difference between you and me is that, although I am quite proud of where I live, my feelings of pride do not depend on my casting aspersions on where other Canadians choose to reside (much less which political ideology they subscribe to). That "sickening and embarrassing" feeling you describe is called nausea. It is caused by your feeble intellect's inability to imagine a broad and diverse definition of citizenship that (grossly) exceeds what your narrow and bigoted psyche can grasp as possible.
And lets be serious here Gashie, your familiarity with "facts and reality" is as non-existent as my ability to design warp-drive propulsion systems. In my case, my lack expertise is due to the acknowledgedment of the non-existence of a fantasy world. Yours is due to a refusal to acknowledge that you dwell in a self-created fantasy world.
Yes Mags, I'm still in grade one. Which means there will pass another million or so years before someone in your family line acquires the ability to walk upright. Though, to be truthful, the thought that one as thoroughly retarded as you should be afforded the opportunity to pass down their gene puddle scares the bejeezus out of me, as nothing that Darwin theorized could explain the anti-evolutionary aberration that is your existence.
Blue_Nose @ Sat Sep 09, 2006 4:03 pm
twister @ Sat Sep 09, 2006 4:06 pm
PluggyRug PluggyRug:
BartSimpson BartSimpson:
Yep, and it was current US policy that led to the Munich murders in 1972, the siege of Constantinople, the siege(s) of Vienna, the occupation of the Iberian peninsula, the deaths in the Moscow Opera House, the 1993 WTC bombing, and the death of Anwar Sadat.
If a majority of Canadians polled cannot see common threads in history it isn't our fault.
If a majority of Canadians polled cannot see common threads in history it isn't our fault.
You forgot 'Old Yeller'
hey man.. that wasn't funny..... I loved that dog... but he had to be put down... he was eating chicken and humping the colnels leg... the true story now comes out... not rabid... just really horny...
Maggiemygosh @ Sat Sep 09, 2006 4:12 pm
geez Gunplumber you sound so much like an immigrant from Oinktown aka Toronto. Your attitude resembles the snotrag attitude from Oinktown where the worst NHL franchise exists, the Leafs. Heck Oinktown is the a.s.s.hole of Canada.
I lived on the prairies for over 15 years , 3 of them in Alberta. 2 years in Saskatoon which was a great place to live and five different times in Winnipeg.. So do I know how the qwesterners mostly behave? Yes. You do not sound like one of them.
I have faced reality during my career which includes armed conflicts and gthe developing of terrorist groups and cells around the world. We now have them here in Canada and are you a part of it?
There are over 360,000 websites on the internet that promote BS, Lies, Hate Mongering, Racism, Bigotry, Terrorism and the usual lefty nonsense.
SireJoe @ Sat Sep 09, 2006 4:40 pm
Only 360 000? I find that hard to believe there little mags. Seeing as how there are pretty much billions of websites. Im thinkin your figures are off a tid bit.
Zipperfish @ Sat Sep 09, 2006 4:54 pm
Maggiemygosh Maggiemygosh:
I have faced reality during my career which includes armed conflicts and gthe developing of terrorist groups and cells around the world.
Your career included the developing of terrorist groups and cells?
Zipperfish @ Sat Sep 09, 2006 4:55 pm
Bodah Bodah:
If Im reading this poll right, they only polled people in Quebec and Ontario , results aren't suprising
I live in Quebec but wasn't polled. Infact I've yet to be polled about anything.
I live in Quebec but wasn't polled. Infact I've yet to be polled about anything.
Oh, I'm sure you get poled all the time.
Calgary123 @ Mon Sep 11, 2006 12:00 pm
GunPlumber GunPlumber:
Maggiemygosh Maggiemygosh:
gunplumber are you from Nanaimo or Cowichan? Or worse Quebec ? You are behaving like those idiot ndpers from that area who are so disgusting that they are sickening and an embarrasment to us Canadians.
Try to accept that there are folks on here who post truth facts and reality.
We know for fact that you do not accept that because you do not understand any of that.
Geez are you still in grade one???
Try to accept that there are folks on here who post truth facts and reality.
We know for fact that you do not accept that because you do not understand any of that.
Geez are you still in grade one???
MaggotsInMyGash, you IGNORANT slut!
Are you really so critically short of memory that you cannot even recall the threads (in which you've participated) where I've publically and proudly declared myself to be an Albertan? The difference between you and me is that, although I am quite proud of where I live, my feelings of pride do not depend on my casting aspersions on where other Canadians choose to reside (much less which political ideology they subscribe to). That "sickening and embarrassing" feeling you describe is called nausea. It is caused by your feeble intellect's inability to imagine a broad and diverse definition of citizenship that (grossly) exceeds what your narrow and bigoted psyche can grasp as possible.
And lets be serious here Gashie, your familiarity with "facts and reality" is as non-existent as my ability to design warp-drive propulsion systems. In my case, my lack expertise is due to the acknowledgedment of the non-existence of a fantasy world. Yours is due to a refusal to acknowledge that you dwell in a self-created fantasy world.
Yes Mags, I'm still in grade one. Which means there will pass another million or so years before someone in your family line acquires the ability to walk upright. Though, to be truthful, the thought that one as thoroughly retarded as you should be afforded the opportunity to pass down their gene puddle scares the bejeezus out of me, as nothing that Darwin theorized could explain the anti-evolutionary aberration that is your existence.
Geez GP, don't you think you were a bit harsh here? I know our resident troll has proven to be dumber than a bag of hammers... and incapable of even supporting her position with an undertandable and coherent thought... but...
Actually, nevermind.
BartSimpson @ Mon Sep 11, 2006 1:39 pm
GunPlumber GunPlumber:
So, let me pose a series of related questions:
1. What official reasons did Saddam give for the invasion of Kuwait, and in light of the post-war investigations, did his complaints have merit of being factual accounts of offences committed by the Kuwaiti government against Iraq.
1. What official reasons did Saddam give for the invasion of Kuwait, and in light of the post-war investigations, did his complaints have merit of being factual accounts of offences committed by the Kuwaiti government against Iraq.
Hussein claimed Kuwait as Iraq's 19th province and, ergo, there was no negotiating with Kuwait as the official position was that it had no right to exist. Much the same as China's relationship toTaiwan.
$1:
2. Did Hussein seek to resolve the disputes by peaceful means, and did he expend all possible diplomatic options, before seeking to resolve the disputes by miltary means?
Nope.
$1:
3. If the Kuwaitis were guilty of the offences that Hussein had accused them of, did they in any way signal that they would cease and desist from the illegal course of actions they had undertaken and did they indicate they would make reparations for the damage and theft which Hussein alleged they had perpetrated? Or did they avoid and rebuff any attempts (by the Iraqis) at finding a diplomatic solution?
Kuwait did absolutely nothing to Iraq. Nothing.
$1:
4. Did any party, (like say,...um maybe,... the U.S. Governmant) outside of the dispute, encourage either the Kuwaitis to avoid a diplomatic solution or the counsel Iraqis to pursue a military one?
What diplomatic solution can there be when the issue is one's national existence?
$1:
5. If you answered correctly to all of the above questions, congratulations!!
Now for bonus points, we pose one final question from the "morality" category.
If the disputes between Iraq and Kuwait were transposed to North America, with Canada playing the part of the poor aggrieved victim (Kuwait) and the U.S.A playing the part of the megalomaniacal villain, would you have any hesitation in justifying an invasion and conquest of the former by the latter?
Now for bonus points, we pose one final question from the "morality" category.
If the disputes between Iraq and Kuwait were transposed to North America, with Canada playing the part of the poor aggrieved victim (Kuwait) and the U.S.A playing the part of the megalomaniacal villain, would you have any hesitation in justifying an invasion and conquest of the former by the latter?
This is a multifaceted question so let me address it thusly:
A) Canada is an ally of the USA and a long-time friend and that makes the question moot on its face.
B) The situation does not compare because there has never been an argument that Canada was once US territory as it is true that Kuwait and Iraq had been conjoined in the past under several governments and empires not the least of which was the United Kingdom.
C) I would refuse orders to participate in an invasion of Canada as an openly hostile act.
D) In the event that the US was co-opted by your "megalomaniacal villain" who wanted to invade Canada as an imperial pursuit I would have to take up arms to depose that government and restore the Constitution that I have sworn allegiance to more times than I can recall.
E) If needed, I would serve alongside Canadians to defend Canada and hopefully free the USA from such tyranny.
ManifestDestiny @ Mon Sep 11, 2006 2:44 pm
The truth of the matter is why should we care what the NDP, and thier followers think. We know who our Canadian friends are and they happen to be in power cause the majority of people voted conservative.
And my god bless those who perished.
And remember to this same line of thinking then it was the Afghani people whose fault it was that the Taliban was in power then we should have carpet bombed the whole country. And taken out one third of thier population. Cuase it was thier forgien policy that dictated that. Are you not glad we dont think like you!
GunPlumber @ Mon Sep 11, 2006 4:55 pm
BartSimpson BartSimpson:
GunPlumber GunPlumber:
So, let me pose a series of related questions:
1. What official reasons did Saddam give for the invasion of Kuwait, and in light of the post-war investigations, did his complaints have merit of being factual accounts of offences committed by the Kuwaiti government against Iraq.
1. What official reasons did Saddam give for the invasion of Kuwait, and in light of the post-war investigations, did his complaints have merit of being factual accounts of offences committed by the Kuwaiti government against Iraq.
Hussein claimed Kuwait as Iraq's 19th province and, ergo, there was no negotiating with Kuwait as the official position was that it had no right to exist. Much the same as China's relationship toTaiwan.
$1:
2. Did Hussein seek to resolve the disputes by peaceful means, and did he expend all possible diplomatic options, before seeking to resolve the disputes by miltary means?
Nope.
$1:
3. If the Kuwaitis were guilty of the offences that Hussein had accused them of, did they in any way signal that they would cease and desist from the illegal course of actions they had undertaken and did they indicate they would make reparations for the damage and theft which Hussein alleged they had perpetrated? Or did they avoid and rebuff any attempts (by the Iraqis) at finding a diplomatic solution?
Kuwait did absolutely nothing to Iraq. Nothing.
$1:
4. Did any party, (like say,...um maybe,... the U.S. Governmant) outside of the dispute, encourage either the Kuwaitis to avoid a diplomatic solution or the counsel Iraqis to pursue a military one?
What diplomatic solution can there be when the issue is one's national existence?
$1:
5. If you answered correctly to all of the above questions, congratulations!!
Now for bonus points, we pose one final question from the "morality" category.
If the disputes between Iraq and Kuwait were transposed to North America, with Canada playing the part of the poor aggrieved victim (Kuwait) and the U.S.A playing the part of the megalomaniacal villain, would you have any hesitation in justifying an invasion and conquest of the former by the latter?
Now for bonus points, we pose one final question from the "morality" category.
If the disputes between Iraq and Kuwait were transposed to North America, with Canada playing the part of the poor aggrieved victim (Kuwait) and the U.S.A playing the part of the megalomaniacal villain, would you have any hesitation in justifying an invasion and conquest of the former by the latter?
This is a multifaceted question so let me address it thusly:
A) Canada is an ally of the USA and a long-time friend and that makes the question moot on its face.
B) The situation does not compare because there has never been an argument that Canada was once US territory as it is true that Kuwait and Iraq had been conjoined in the past under several governments and empires not the least of which was the United Kingdom.
C) I would refuse orders to participate in an invasion of Canada as an openly hostile act.
D) In the event that the US was co-opted by your "megalomaniacal villain" who wanted to invade Canada as an imperial pursuit I would have to take up arms to depose that government and restore the Constitution that I have sworn allegiance to more times than I can recall.
E) If needed, I would serve alongside Canadians to defend Canada and hopefully free the USA from such tyranny.
Well, that's amazing! You scored a perfect zero for five. Can't say that I'm totally surprised.
1. Hussein claimed:
- that Kuwait and Saudi Arabia had both contracted to have them protected by the Iraqis from Shia fundamentalist revolutionaries (i.e., Iranians). We know this is true because the documents have been produced to prove it. In Kuwaits case, the amount of indebtedness equalled more than $4 billion dollars,... in 1990. When the Iraqis went to collect the debt (and to resolve the second issue), the Kuwaitis would not even discuss the issue, refusing to meet even with Hussein himself. They foolishly believed that: after a brutal eight year war with Iran (i.e., protecting Kuwait from Shiite revolutionaries) that Iraq had neither the military power nor the collective will to pursue the military option.
- that the Kuwaitis were drilling diagonally along their northern border and tapping into Iraq's southern oilfields. This is why fleeing Iraqi troops set Kuwaiti oil rigs ablaze as they were exiting Kuwait. After the "Gulf War", wild-catters (like Alberta's "Red" Adair) were sent in to extinguish the fires and they found - surprise, surprise- that the Kuwaiti wells were extracting oil from Iraq's southern fields via diagonal drilling.
Hussein NEVER made the claim that the invasion of Kuwait was justified "because they were Iraq's 19th province". That is a claim which originated during Britain's occupation of Iraq, and was discarded during the early years of Baathist rule. The claim was resurfaced by the same people who brought you the "babies taken from incubators" charade, to divert your attention from the real issues that led to Kuwait's invasion. It was, and is, a red herring. And apparently some people are still taking the bait.
Wanna do some research and perhaps change your answers to questions 2 - 5?
Calgary123 @ Mon Sep 11, 2006 4:59 pm
Reprinted from NewsMax.com
Monday, Sept. 11, 2006 11:18 a.m. EDT
Poll: 20% of Canadians Believe 9/11 Conspiracy
One in five Canadians believes the attacks on the United States on Sept. 11, 2001, had nothing to do with Osama Bin Laden and were actually a plot by influential Americans, according to a poll released Monday.
The Ipsos-Reid poll found that 22 percent of Canadians, and 26 percent of young Canadians, agree with the conspiracy theory. The number was the highest, at 32 percent, in Quebec, which has shown the least support for the U.S. war on terror.
The poll asked if the events of Sept. 11, "including the thousands of American citizens who lost their lives on that day, were actually orchestrated by a group of highly influential Americans and others as part of a wider global conspiracy to profit from and gain power and who are actually protecting Osama Bin Laden from being captured."
"Conspiracy theories are popular, as we all know," said Ipsos pollster Paul Orovan.
Sixty-six percent said the actions were carried out by Bin Laden's disciples as an attack on the United States and as part of a global war of terror against Western and affluent democracies.
Twelve percent said neither or refused to answer.
The random telephone survey of 1,000 adult Canadians was conducted for CanWest News Service and Global News from Aug. 29-31. Such a sample is considered accurate to within 3.1 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.
(c) Reuters 2006. All rights reserved.
Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 14 Next