Quote:
Originally Posted by Ace_O_Spades
It disgusts me that Harper is bringing North Korea in as a "Threat to Canada". I don't want to herald this as the confirmation of Harper's Bush-isms, but if it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck...
How is North Korea a viable threat to Canada? Why are these men fear mongering us into thinking all of a sudden North Korea is coming over the bering straight and fucking shit up.
Anyway, softwood lumber... I'm firmy in the British Columbia camp on this one, with two family members in the forest industry, and more than a few in my extended family. I felt the deal was rushed and not in the best interests of Canada. Besides giving them a billion dollars of our money, the deal is a lame duck with dubious chances long-term.
|
Walks like a duck eh,......would that be like,.."Walks like a Liberal, sounds like a Fiberal. Were is AntiKarma when you need him?
So Harper's tone disgusts you? Did you read this part;
However, Harper said the latest posturing from North Korea would not prompt him to reopen the issue of a North American missile defence system.
"The government of Canada is not prepared to open the missile defence issue at this time, but ... it should be obvious when we look at this kind of threat why the United States and others would want to have a modern and flexible defence system against this kind of threat. ... That's something our government at least fully understands.''
,....speaking of fear mongering,......... Is it because the Liberals are dead in the water? Thank Jean Chretien for that. So loved but in the end fucked the Canadian people straight up the ass but even worse, left the Liberal party and supporters like a pack of hienas without their princess. LOST. Fucked and betrayed even more so, the supporters. Blind faith I'd say.
Anyway, softwood lumber... I'm firmy in the British Columbia camp on this one, with two family members in the forest industry, and more than a few in my extended family. I felt the deal was rushed and not in the best interests of Canada. Besides giving them a billion dollars of our money, the deal is a lame duck with dubious chances long-term.[/
And thank the Liberals for that too.They authored most of the document. First they tried to take credit for it, and now that it is moving through the channels,..it is bad, bad, bad. Noticing a trend here? Desperation is such an undignifying quality.
But why not propose the positive instead of the negative. Here's an example. But I'm sure Liberals will attack this as well. Where would the forest be if not for the trees.
Security & Terrorism
Canada's PM urges flexibility on ID policy
WASHINGTON, July 7 (UPI) -- Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper has urged the U.S. Congress to show "flexibility" on ID policy.
In a press conference with U.S. President George W. Bush Thursday during his visit to Washington, Harper discussed a new program that would require government-approved identification for travelers from Canada to the United States. He suggested the initiative endangered trade, tourism and cross-border relations, CongressDaily reported.
"I would just urge the Congress to think carefully, that if the fight for security ends up meaning that the United States becomes more closed to its friends, then the terrorists have won," Harper said. He indicated he supported efforts under way on Capitol Hill to delay implementation of the program.
The Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative passed by Congress in 2004 requires travelers to the United States from the Americas, the Caribbean and Bermuda to have a passport or other accepted document that establishes identity. The Senate is taking steps to delay the start of the program, CongressDaily said.
The Appropriations Committee of the U.S. Senate recently approved an amendment by Sens. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., and Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, that would delay implementation until June 1, 2009. The requirements are currently set to begin Jan. 1, 2007, for all air and sea travelers and Jan. 1, 2008, for all land travelers, the report said.
Saying the matter is in the hands of Congress, Bush did not explicitly back an extension of the deadline. But he said he supported "a lot of flexibility and simplicity" in the law, and he acknowledged that "we need to get to the Canadian government as quickly as possible our definition of what a reasonable policy is."
http://www.upi.com/SecurityTerrorism...7-081831-2330r