RCMP members killed in grow-op raid

[iverglas]

This is not up to date:
http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2005/03/03/alberta-shooting050303.html

Apparently four Mounties were killed in the raid in Northern Alberta this afternoon.

As you can imagine, this is a major tragic event up here. I suspect it would be down there too, perhaps just not as unprecedented.

There was evidently a shoot-out, after which the RCMP members stopped responding to their radios.

Yup, even decent firearms control laws won't keep all firearms out of the hands of everybody who is willing to use them to kill cops, or anybody else. Unfortunately, given the remote location and the tendency of grow-op operators to use people under the criminal justice radar to do the actual op-ing, the firearms might even have been legally registered rifles or shotguns in the possession of people licensed to own them. Of course, I'd doubt it. Nobody's ever thought that there weren't unregistered firearms in the hands of unlicensed owners here.

At some point down the line, I hope, we might learn something about the nature and provenance of the firearms. I'll keep my ears open.

I'd be willing to bet that the destination of at least some of the produce of the op was the US. If that market were not a target, there'd be little reason for the clandestine grow-ops up here these days, or for organized crime to be involved in the growing. And if the US government didn't keep rattling its sabres about what's grown here making its way down there, our peace officers wouldn't be spending so much time and money, and now lives, trying to prevent that happening.

End that war on drugs thing, would you please?

... ah, it's shown up:

http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2005/03/03/alberta-shooting050303.html

4 Mounties killed in raid:
unconfirmed reports

Last Updated Thu, 03 Mar 2005 18:39:14 EST
CBC News

MAYERTHORPE, ALTA. - Unconfirmed reports say four
RCMP officers were killed Thursday during a raid on a
marijuana grow operation in northwestern Alberta.

The Canadian Press and a local radio station are reporting
the deaths, based on unidentified sources.

[HEyHEY]

1. Our BN report says a "Government official" whatever that is

Is the source four the word on the Deaths.

So, for what it's worth there's some more info.

[RoeBear]

2. My most sincere condolences go to

the families of those law enforcement officers.

But should you really have jumped to the conclusion of blaming the U.S.?

[iverglas]

3. I thought we all blamed the "war on drugs"

... for the casualties. And that applies to all the casualties not just in the US, but in Colombia, and elsewhere in the world, and I don't know why not here too.

And it's the US govt waging that war.

I should note, however, that the notion of Cdn grow-ops supplying the US may not be as accurate as I implied. It is the fact that the US govt promulgates that notion ... you know: blames Canada ... that is more the problem.

I don't know that I'd accept either the US govt's propaganda on that point or the Cdn cannabis lobby's rejection of it, holus bolus. I think it is disingenuous to claim that some grow-op activity in Canada is not directed to the US market, but it is equally disingenuous to claim that Canadian product is anything but a negligible contributor to the supply in the US.

[Columbia]

6. Oh, get off it

People in Canada create a demand for firearms and the United States provides the supply, and you say it is the United States fault.

People in the United States create a demand for marijuana, and Canada provides the supply, and now you say it is also the United States fault.

Your attitude is seriously getting tiring.

[RoeBear]

7. LOL

Good observation!

[iverglas]

10. your condolences are all much appreciated

Next time some of yours are offed, I'll be sure to offer mine.

I seem to have momentarily forgotten that the US never puts its own interests above those of anyone else, and that US actions never affect anyone else in the world. Forgive me.

[goju]

11. Im confused

Exactly what does this shooting incident have to do with the US in any way shape or form? I mean, you can blame US drug consumption all you want, but Im quite sure YOUR laws are the reason the mounties had any business out there in the first place. Why dont you just legalize pot, and leave the US out of it?

War on drugs, you say? Careful, that high horse is getting wobbly.

[RoeBear]

13. You're pushing the bounds of

decency with your choice of words.

[iverglas]

14. gosh

Do you think that maybe pushing the bounds of decency was maybe the very subject my words were addressing??

Remember, now. Don't you be blaming anybody else when bad stuff happens to your own particular ox, 'k?

[RoeBear]

18. Fine...lower yourself to that

and expect a loss of respect as the outcome.

[Billy Ruffian]

4. I agree with you.

End that war on drugs thing, would you please?


I agree. Much of it is a victimless crime, and it certainly contributes to the overcrowding of our prisons.

It took us 10 yrs or so to overcome prohibition ... it will take a while to turn around the war on drugs, (if it can be done)

just think of how many drug abuse prevention programs could be funded with the money spent on law enforcement, prosecution and imprisonment.

But, if we continue on this train of thought, the thread probably belongs in a different forum.

[goju]

5. Why were the mounties raiding the grow op?

Perhaps Canadian law forbids the growing of such things? I just cant imagine why else they would be raiding a clandestine grow op, if not for some legal issues. Dont tell me Canada has its own little war on drugs, does it?

I saw this earlier and wondered how the US would be blamed for this. I guess our war on drugs is of a different breed than yours? And I guess that the grow operations are targeted exclusively because of US consumption?

After all, with a request like End that war on drugs thing, would you please?, its hard to assume you would be talking about your own govt policy, or drug use.

[HEyHEY]

16. I will say this

Meant in a productive manner... there are often media stories about the US pressuring Canada to crack down on it's pot growers.

I seriously doubt pot would be illegal in Canada where it not for the US being next door, that being said I think it's also clear this was a nutjob.

[goju]

25. And I will reply

If Canada is that malleable, they probably are subject to more troubles than the occassional shooting.

Id have to say the blame game on US policy is nothing but trumped up bullshit meant to cover a few spineless and/or paid-off politicians asses.

There is a whole business in keeping things illegal. Im reminded of prohibition.

[iverglas]

30. here's another one you could try

Id have to say the blame game on US policy is nothing but trumped up bullshit meant to cover a few spineless and/or paid-off politicians asses.

Let's hear it for the spineless and/or paid-off Iraqi politicians who are to blame for the murder and carnage and destruction that the US govt has committed over there.

Damn, I wouldn't want to blame the bloody US for it, would I? It's not their fault that their bombs and bullets are killing people. If people want to get in the way when they shoot 'em off, how is that the fault of the US??

You may have noticed (well, I'd actually doubt it) how our spineless Liberals formally refused to participate in that missile-defence circus of yours this week. Not that they might not have secretly yearned to do it (they really are rather fond of sucking up southward). It's just that the rest of us are so pretty much fed up with the whole lot of your government that there was no way our Liberals, being the minority government that they are, could have got away with it.

Hanging onto power in Canada right now, which they are doing by the skin of their teeth, means not pissing off the voters enough to make the other parties think they would benefit from bringing the govt down and precipitating an election. (Funny how in a parliamentary democracy the people's representatives can actually do that ... bring down the government and precipitate an election ...)

But it really would also piss off the voters if the Liberals did something that threw another few thousand or more of them out of work, for no really obvious benefit to the general public.

And hmm, we noticed how a US federal judge immediately -- I think it was the next day after we rejected missile defence -- bowed to the wishes of the beef producers in Montana, I believe it was, who were seeking to extend the ban on certain Canadian beef products despite the complete lack of any evidentiary basis for such a ban. Coincidence? Well who knows, it just might have been.

Keep yer eye on that softwood lumber ball, now.

Or heck, maybe you think that your insane President's loony missile-defence plan is a gooooood thing ...

[goju]

34. Well

At least you recognize it is your spineless politicians at work, on your behalf. But feel free to continue blaming the US, wont you?

Im glad your lilly-livered little politicians did stop the missle defense crap. I guess I should be watching for your economy to crash now, right? :eyes:

Beef imports...

EDMONTON - A case of mad cow disease in Alberta has prompted the U.S. Agriculture Department to impose a temporary ban on Canadian beef exports to the United States.

News of the ban came as Agriculture Minister Lyle Vanclief was holding a news conference in Alberta to announce the discovery of a case of home-grown mad cow disease, or bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), in Alberta.
http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2003/05/20/madcow_canada030520


Hmmm, Im just wondering whether your claim of a "complete lack of any evidentiary basis for such a ban" has any merit at all. I guess not, all things considered.

Or heck, maybe you dont rely on your spineless politicians even for food safety anymore. I wouldnt blame you if you dont.

[iverglas]

38. you're just so out of date so often

You did notice the date on your news report?

You might have noticed that I referred to a complete lack of evidentiary basis for this week's order continuing the ban? (and US Senate initiative to the same effect)

Aren't you liberal/progressive/Democrat types supposed to have some clue about how the big corps in your country (not to mention Republican governments) operate -- and how it isn't generally designed to be for your benefit? I mean, even when you folks don't give a shit about anybody else affected.

Promoting xenophobia, of course, is one of their favourite ways of operating ... keeps the folks happy to go along with screwing the foreigners, and unlikely to notice how they're getting screwed at the same time ...

You remember:
Class consciousness is knowing which side of the fence you're on.
Class analysis is knowing who's there with you.

One might say the same thing about borders ... and really wonder at all the eagerness hereabouts to reject criticism of the ones doing the screwing and blame the foreigners getting screwed, while ignoring the screwing one is suffering one's self.

Those MSM guys really do their job well, don't they?

[goju]

41. Silly me, I thought the disease was the issue

You might have noticed that I referred to a complete lack of evidentiary basis for this week's order continuing the ban? (and US Senate initiative to the same effect)

Oh well, oky doky then....
http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/corpaffr/newcom/2005/20050102e.shtml

Still confused?

Aren't you liberal/progressive/Democrat types supposed to have some clue about how the big corps in your country (not to mention Republican governments) operate -- and how it isn't generally designed to be for your benefit? I mean, even when you folks don't give a shit about anybody else affected.

Uh huh, and what the hell is your point?

Promoting xenophobia, of course, is one of their favourite ways of operating ... keeps the folks happy to go along with screwing the foreigners, and unlikely to notice how they're getting screwed at the same time ...

Golly, isnt that what you are doing? I mean, werent you the one who posted the story about Canadian cops getting killed by a Canadian drug dealer, and then blamed it on the US, for all our consumption, while patting yourself on the back?

One might say the same thing about borders ... and really wonder at all the eagerness hereabouts to reject criticism of the ones doing the screwing and blame the foreigners getting screwed, while ignoring the screwing one is suffering one's self

Perhaps you still dont understand, or is this just folly? Rejecting legitimate criticism of the US war on drugs wont likely be seen here. Rejecting absurd allegations or dissemination of blame for failures abroad, well, that will probably (hopefully) be ever present. Ya see, we might not like some of the policies, but Id say most here will take responsibility when, and only when, we are at fault. Thats opposed to the visceral reaction of some to blame the US for anyone who happens to have the sniffles. Clear?

Those MSM guys really do their job well, don't they?

Not nearly as well as medicalpot.ca and 3rdlargestTVnetwork in canada, I guess.

[HEyHEY]

39. Spineless? We've told you government off on two major issues

Also, on the beef thing.... you guys should know, beef coming to the US from Hawaii goes through Vancouver.... or will for about another week... now there's talk of not allowing that.

[goju]

42. Well dont stop there

Do that with legalizing pot. Believe me, youd make alot of people happy, and might save lives.

[HEyHEY]

45. It'll be legal soon enough

[Redneck Socialist]

8. On this we can agree

End that war on drugs thing, would you please?

We're trying. At least I'm trying. The 'War on Drugs' TM has cause far more problems than it has solved.

[alwynsw]

9. This takes the cake.

First and foremost: I feel genuine sadness that four officers were killed in the performance of their duties.

That being said, do you want to blame us for your ungodly weather that forces Canadian youngsters to chase a disk around ice with a stick or sweep ice ahead of a big rock thrown by other freezong folks for sport rather than engaging in games that make sense, are fun, and can be enjoyed year round without special facilities?

I snowed today. Blame the U.S.

I got a handnail. Blame the U.S.

Learn a new tune.

[iverglas]

12. for the eternally confused

I posted this story here for two reasons (apart from the fact that I just thought it might be of interest, since I do proceed from the notion that other people are like me, and are interested in a variety of things).

1. A rather horrendous crime was committed in Canada by someone using a firearm (which you'll all be happy to hear is being described in the media as "a high-powered rifle", that being all I know so far; the Mounties were armed with handguns). This is something that does happen -- deaths, injuries and crimes are caused and committed in Canada by people using firearms. Sometimes even by people who are licensed to own firearms, and who use registered firearms (which I doubt was the case here, but might be).

Obviously (and no one ever having said otherwise), Canada's various firearms control measures do not prevent all such events from occurring. In the interests of full disclosure, and particularly because I kind of doubt that most here are likely to hear about such incidents any other way, and because such incidents do present possibilities for discussion of issues, I offered it up.

2. The crime in question, like so many, was plainly a direct result of drug policies. Most here advocate an end to the US govt's "war on drugs" for reasons like this. The incident is an illustration of the arguable wisdom of taking an approach other than criminalization and enforcement to the drug problem.

The fact is that were it not for external pressure, marijuana use would not be criminal in Canada; what approach might be taken to large-scale production is not quite so clear, as Cdn society appears to be ready not to criminalize the user, but not sure what to do about the producer.

The Cdn govt and law enforcement agencies are under heavy pressure from the US govt to enforce existing Cdn laws, and not to formally amend them to decriminalize marijuana possession. This is a fact, whether anyone here chooses to recognize it or not. Retaliatory measures, such as increased "security" measures at the US border allegedly necessitated by such a lax approach to drugs, would cost the Cdn economy huge amounts, in shipping delays alone, just to start with. More formal retaliation might be foreseen as well.

Were it not for the "war on drugs" in the US, and were marijuana use simply decriminalized in Canada as it would then certainly be, it is more than predictable that there would be at least a lot less organized crime involvement in marijuana production and marketing, either here or in the US.

The involvement of organized crime in marijuana production in Canada and the transfer of that product into the US (to the extent that this actually occurs, which is probably less than the US govt claims but more than the cannabis lobby claims) -- the Hell's Angels are our major corporate crime organization, and they engage in very unpleasant activities to protect their interests -- is also a fact. In this instance, it may have been hometown boy with rifle doing the producing, but he was unlikely the one taking the product to market, I'd say.

But gosh, why doesn't Canada just decriminalize marijuana possession? On a very quick google ...

http://www.medicalmarihuana.ca/meddling.html

U.S. Government Threatens Canada with Trade Sanctions
Canadian Marijuana Reform Concern to U.S.

Monday, May 13, 2002
Global National Story

... Sources close to the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency say it will soon issue a report claiming there are 15 to 20,000 marijuana growing operations in British Columbia alone and 95 per cent of the output is headed south.

"A dramatic increase in the gross quantity of marijuana of high potency coming across the border," says Colonel Robert Maginnis, a U.S. government adviser on drug policy. He says the Bush administration is alarmed by a recent Senate study that says Canada's marijuana laws are ineffective.

The U.S. fears the next step could be looser regulations leading to more drugs crossing the border and its ready to play hardball with trade to make sure that doesn't happen.

"To antagonize government leaders and grass roots leader because you insist on having a radical drug policy that we will not ignore in the long term, then its going to have adverse consequences and I hope we would be able to rectify it before it comes to blows," explains Maginnis.

Such charming and diplomatically veiled threats.

And damned if I didn't think that people at DU who oppose the Bush administration, and in particular its war on the poor under the cloak of the war on drugs and its bully-boy tactics on the international stage in just about any matter where it regards its interests as supreme, might think that threats like these were just not really a good thing. And might grasp the very real consequences that such policies have for real people outside their borders (don't forget those peasant farmers in Colombia ...), and possibly give a damn about the ones who end up dead.

[alwynsw]

15. Your post is boorish at best.

I think I can safely speak for most of the population of DU in offering condolences to the mounties families and Canadian as a whole for this tragic event.

I think can also safely speak for a large portion of DU when I mention that your conclusion is flawed. Everything bad that happens outside U.S. borders is not nesessarily the fault of the U.S., it's administration, or its citizens.

A number of us also are against the "War on Drugs" in its current form. Many of us believe the best approach is education and treatment as opposed to the current approach.

You're way off the mark in implying that we don't care what happens elsewhere.

Come down out of the clouds, thaw out, and join the rest of us in working for change rather than critiquing us from the safety of your computer desk.

[iverglas]

17. and yours is just sad

I think can also safely speak for a large portion of DU when I mention that your conclusion is flawed. Everything bad that happens outside U.S. borders is not nesessarily the fault of the U.S., it's administration, or its citizens.

And if only ... anyone had said that it was.

It's just damned amazing how some of you folks will sit around nattering about how yer gonna need some big firepower when the bad boys come to get you ... and not give a shit about what the bad boys are doing to anybody else. It's just damned amazing, and sad.

You're way off the mark in implying that we don't care what happens elsewhere.

Then how 'bout you step up to that mark and, on behalf of your country, accept some fucking responsibility for it when some of the responsibility so obviously lies there?

You're familiar with ambassadors, and what their job is? How the US Ambassador in Canada represents his government here? And maybe you're familiar with the piece of shit that your government sent here a while back to do the job: Paul Cellucci.

These are not stories made up by the cannabis lobby.

http://www.canadawebpages.com/pc-editorial.asp?Key=416&editorPrimeKeyword=USA&editorType=site

Boston Globe interview - Cellucci warns Canada on marijuana
02/06/2003

Says law change would force US to hike security
- By Associated Press, 6/2/2003
- WORCESTER -- US Ambassador to Canada Paul Cellucci says he has told Canadian leaders that their proposal to decriminalize marijuana for personal use would result in much tighter security along its 5,500-mile border with the United States.

More vehicles would be stopped and searched at crossing checkpoints that already have high security, the former Massachusetts governor told The Telegram and Gazette of Worcester.

"If the perception is that it's easier to get marijuana in, then some border officials' antennas will be up," Cellucci said. "We don't think it's a good thing, and there will probably be more inspections."

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1052063016196_122/?hub=Canada

Last week <April 2003> Prime Minister Chretien announced possessing small quantities of marijuana would soon be decriminalized.

Under the proposal, marijuana use would not be legal but would result in fines rather than criminal penalties. The U.S. ambassador to Canada has warned decriminalization of pot could lead to slowdowns at the border.

... Justice Minister Martin Cauchon will discuss the proposed law with U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft next week when they meet at the annual G8 meeting of justice ministers.

Ashcroft seems to have prevailed; nothing's happened.

It is impossible for any reasonable person not to recognize the might of the US in such situations.

It is also impossible for any decent person to blame the victims of the exercise of that might for their compliance with the stated wishes of the party that is wielding it, and that is making threats that it is reasonable to expect it would carry out and that would have intolerable adverse consequences for the victims.

And it is impossible for me to understand how any reasonable, decent people could fail to condemn the party engaging in those bully-boy tactics, particularly when such people claim to condemn the goal it is pursuing and bemoan the consequences of its actions in pursuing that goal.

And when that happens, I cannot help but see people who either don't give a shit about other people or refuse to accept responsibility for, or even condemn, what their government does to harm those other people.

Come down out of the clouds, thaw out, and join the rest of us in working for change rather than critiquing us from the safety of your computer desk.

And I'd respond, but I'm afraid you'd find my response boorish both in its blunt substance and in its mocking tone. "Join the rest of you" indeed. You footsoldier you, eh?

[goju]

19. Goodness gracious....

Threaten to "slow down" border traffic and pretty soon, Canada is nothing but a puppet.

What exactly is the concern, again? That increased border security, by the US, will somehow crash the Canadian economy???? Surely you have better things to do than post this drivel.

You might get more support if you were focused on the failings of your own gov't rather than incessantly blaming US for your problems.

[iverglas]

23. can I blame this one on the sorry US education system?

What exactly is the concern, again? That increased border security, by the US, will somehow crash the Canadian economy???? Surely you have better things to do than post this drivel.

If you have a few moments to spare this weekend, ask google to tell you something about trade between the US and Canada, and in particular north-south economic integration. It all goes back a couple of centuries.

For a few examples to help you understand, inquire about softwood lumber, and the effect of the US's illegal import tariffs, and repeated refusal to comply with decisions that its actions are illegal, on the local economies in certain parts of Canada.

Canada looks big on a map, but in reality has only a smallish bit of territory that reasonably habitable and passable, and suitable for economic activity. The population, as many are so fond of reminding us, is smaller than California's. You could try considering what would happen to California's economy if a border were erected around it and intensive security measures applied to its exports. Hollywood might just find itself with a few more unemployed actors.

If you act fast, you might be able to figure it all out in time to delete your woefully and embarassingly ignorant post.

Try starting with a labour source (a little outdated):
http://iwa2171.bc.ca/softwood.html

SOFTWOOD LUMBER UPDATE

The impacts of the softwood lumber dispute are starting to be felt more severely across the country. This can be shown by the fact that the volume of softwood exports to key US markets fell by more than 25 percent between May 22nd (the day the tariffs took effect) and June 28th.

Regionally, the declines are as follows:

BC shipments dropped to 83.3% of 2001 volumes,
Quebec shipments dropped to 51% of 2001 volumes, and
Ontario shipments dropped to 55.1% of 2001 volumes.

The impacts are also starting to hit workers and communities more severely. Since May 22nd we have seen the Coast suffering significant layoffs (approximately 4,600 members) at:

5 Doman mills, 2 Skeena mills, Terminal, West Coast Cellufibre, and Boston Bar,
Roughly 2,500 loggers are laid-off, and
1,005 jobs lost due to permanent closures since last summer.

Current estimates are that, in BC, approximately 20,000 (one in five) forest sector jobs will be lost over the next two years (10,5000 Coast and 9,500 Interior).

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/softwood_lumber/
http://www.parl.gc.ca/37/1/parlbus/chambus/house/debates/110_2001-11-06/han110_2210-E.htm

... 345 people have lost their jobs in my riding. In British Columbia 1,600 people have lost their jobs. A total of 30,000 Canadians have lost their jobs due to the softwood lumber crisis.

30,000 is 1 in every 1,000 Canadians.

The US is in the wrong, has repeatedly been held by the tribunals of competent jurisdiction to be in the wrong, US consumers are suffering the higher prices caused by the US's wrongful policy ... and still US politicians are trying to violate their country's agreement, and put Canadians out of work.

You might get more support if you were focused on the failings of your own gov't rather than incessantly blaming US for your problems.

Damn, it's so hard to be modest when you're perfect, eh?

But cereally now. You might consider venturing outside the dung ungeon occasionally. Visit the Canada forum, maybe. You'll find that I seldom have a good word to say about my own Liberals. But I really do find it hard to blame even them for a lack of political will in the face of the bully-boy of the universe and its jackboots. I'm not especially eager to doom any more Canadian workers to unemployment just so's I can have a toke from time to time.

Mind you, if I thought it might put the Hell's Angels out of business and thus go a ways to enhancing public safety here, I might think it was worthwhile to stand up and roar. But since the illicit market would still exist in the US for the products they trade in, and Big Tobacco wouldn't likely be taking over exporting the products to the US market (not that that wouldn't be bad enough, given the smuggling activities Big Tobacco has already engaged in up here), I wouldn't foresee that happening. I'd foresee continuing organized crime involvement in production activities here, in order to supply the US market, which only organized crime would be in a position to do.

Now c'mon, surely you have better things to do than embarrass yourself by posting such sadly uninformed yapping.

[goju]

29. Im sure you will

Im quite sure you will find a way to blame everything canadian on this, that, or the other, as long as its the US. Nonetheless, it makes about as much sense that whole green cheese mining operation you clamor about. Makin any money on that, by the way?

Yet again you failed to answer the most glaring of questions. If the Canadians are suffering so, at the hands of US politicians, what does that say about your legislature? Is canada unable to find markets more "friendly"? How long WILL canada continue to be a puppet? And, if canada's economy is entirely dependant on the US, do you think diversifying would be wise at some point?

Please continue to post, Im learning sooo much.

[iverglas]

31. there's only so much I can do for you

Please continue to post, Im learning sooo much.

Judging from that post, you'll be needing the remedial course first, so you'll have to enrol at a level lower than the one I currently offer.

Unfortunately, I'm quite certain it isn't offered where you're at.

[goju]

35. Oh my, aint you witty

Judging from that post, you'll be needing the remedial course first, so you'll have to enrol at a level lower than the one I currently offer.

Unfortunately, I'm quite certain it isn't offered where you're at.

Holy smokes, Im in awe. Such witticisms make me all flustered.

Running a bit thin today, are we?

[alwynsw]

28. Step right up

It's just damned amazing how some of you folks will sit around nattering about how yer gonna need some big firepower when the bad boys come to get you ... and not give a shit about what the bad boys are doing to anybody else. It's just damned amazing, and sad.

G'head. Show an instance wherein I've taken that position, actually either of those positions.

And now, on to the rest of your ramblings:

Then how 'bout you step up to that mark and, on behalf of your country, accept some fucking responsibility for it when some of the responsibility so obviously lies there?

Fucking responsibility? Condoms? Abstinence? Self abuse? Rhythm method? Child rearing/support in the event it takes? Now that I've finished with your response style; once again, show me where I've dodged said responsibility in any way. You'll not find an instance that I'm aware of. Actually, if you review my past posts with your little gold star function, you'll find that I have often advocated personal and national responsibility for actions taken.

You're familiar with ambassadors, and what their job is? How the US Ambassador in Canada represents his government here? And maybe you're familiar with the piece of shit that your government sent here a while back to do the job: Paul Cellucci.

Came now. You can do better than that. We're agreed both the ambassador and our current administration of which he is an appointed part are just maybe one step above whale dung.

If you're so tired of U.S. interference in canada, ask GM to leave. While you're at it, force all U.S. corporations out and block the movie industry from the U.S., then get back to us on your economy.

It is also impossible for any decent person to blame the victims of the exercise of that might for their compliance with the stated wishes of the party that is wielding it, and that is making threats that it is reasonable to expect it would carry out and that would have intolerable adverse consequences for the victims.

And it is impossible for me to understand how any reasonable, decent people could fail to condemn the party engaging in those bully-boy tactics, particularly when such people claim to condemn the goal it is pursuing and bemoan the consequences of its actions in pursuing that goal.


Boorish again, nee still. remember that the next time you cast a ballot or make/withold purchases or contributions. It's all a matter of weight. We so what we can with what we have, whether for good or ill. Unfortunately our current administration is using that weight for ill. Be patient. Politics and policy, like the weather, will change. The burning question is how will you greet that change?

And when that happens, I cannot help but see people who either don't give a shit about other people or refuse to accept responsibility for, or even condemn, what their government does to harm those other people.


Well now, let me see. I knew a number of folks who paid the ultimate price for being a responsible citizen of this nation. I know far more who placed themselves at the risk of paying that price by being responsible citizens of this country. I've met, chatted with, consoled, prayed with, etc. any number of people who were maimed for life while being responsible citizens of this nation. I wore a uniform, too. Luckily for me, I never had to face combat, terrorists, or disease as a result of volunteering to do my bit.

I'm even a responsible citizen today. I campaigh. I vote. I pay my taxes. I contribute time and money to charities - Christian Children's Fund is a favorite because they use my money so well. I've made the visits and seen the work in progress. I write letters. I organize. I work for those things I believe in and against those things I don't.

I've founded a business that has provided a livelyhood for several hundred people. (In doing so, I provided equal benefits for unmarried hetero- and homosexual couples, leave and money for those choosing to adopt - you get the idea (I hope).

So tell me: what hve you done latley that requires more than keyboard strokes toward being a responsible citizen of the world?

[goju]

22. Well I'll be damned

Its amazing the excuses some will resort to in order to avoid embarrassment, aint it?

I have to first applaud you on the use of that source, medicalmarihuana.ca. I cant imagine anything more credible or unbiased.

But really, what you are trying to do is pass off responsibility for YOUR laws, however ineffective your methods. I can appreciate how bullied you must feel up there and how comforted you are in a ready target to the south. Unfortunately, we dont have control over your laws any more than you have control over our borders. If your concern is border delays and increased security, wouldnt that be a small price to pay for saving some lives? If your concern is politicians with a weak spine, might I suggest you vote them out? Really, are you happy with the way things are run up there?

I just dont know what else to tell you. There's really only 2 ways to deal with a bully, stand up for yourself, or run away. Clearly canada has chosen the latter, and you blame that on the US as well. Shameful.

[Columbia]

24. The US ain't got nothin' on Canadian Nationalism

Canada can do no wrong.

[alwynsw]

36. True - until retirement

Every time we visit the sis-in-law in Yuma, we have to wade through the Canadian retirees, eh.

More Canadian Q-Tips per square foot in Arizona than any place in Canada, I'll wager.

Must be something about weather and available quality healthcare. Our healthcare ain't perfect by a long shot, but to hear the Canadian retirees tell it, the docs up north are working with bone knives, drums, and fire.

[Columbia]

40. Hey, don't knock it

It's called homeopathic medicine. You American pig!!

[alwynsw]

43. Homeopathic this!

They just come down for the chicks.

[Columbia]

44. Is it free range though?

American bruts.

[alwynsw]

46. Can't possibly be

It's not wearing tiny little Reeboks.

[HEyHEY]

52. And they'll need medical attention after being shot once a day

[iverglas]

26. and let me be the first

I have to first applaud you on the use of that source, medicalmarihuana.ca. I cant imagine anything more credible or unbiased.

... to congratulate you on yet more sorry ignorance.

The medicalmarijuana.ca link was a secondary source for a story clearly identified (I went to all the trouble of cutting and pasting that bit) as a "Global National" report. It's reproduced a few other places on the web, including here:
http://www.reconsider.org/tidbits/2002-05-30_Trade%20sanctions%20against%20Canada_.htm

That site makes it plainer, for the uninformed foreigner, that the report is from "Global National Television News". Global is the third-largest television network in Canada.

Duh de duh duh duh. Still time to delete.

I guess I've already responded to the rest of your offensively pointless ... what was that word? ... drivel.

[RoeBear]

27. YOu already won the award for

'offensively pointless' & 'drivel'.

(two separate categories)

[goju]

32. Oh no

Dont confuse my hysterical laughter at that site, or the link, with ignorance of the source of information. Its just comically absurd that you would rely on such a source for political commentary, of US policy. Not unexpected, but still funny.

And by the way, the accolade of being 3rd largest tv network in canada is comparable to being 2nd best in a boxing match. Sorry to burst your myopic bubble though.

[iverglas]

33. keep shoving

You may yet get both legs down your throat ... where they will undoubtedly meet your head coming from the other direction.

Dont confuse my hysterical laughter at that site, or the link, with ignorance of the source of information. Its just comically absurd that you would rely on such a source for political commentary, of US policy.

Since you reiterate your false and moronic allegation that I used that site as a source of political commentary, it's pretty hard for me not to "confuse" your horse laughing with ignorance. Really.

But gosh ... now that you mention it ... what exactly is there about an organization dedicated to making marijuana available to individuals who suffer chronic pain, or the debilitating side effects of the treatments for cancer, that is so hilarious?

As the site says, "Medical Marijuana is Legal in Canada".

But damn, wouldn't ya know it ... it's Canada, so it's legal only for licensed users: http://www.medicalmarihuana.ca/exemptee.html

http://www.medicalmarihuana.ca/aboutus.html

Wendy Little and Eric Nash built and maintain this resource website medicalmarihuana.ca. They own Island Harvest, a Canadian federally and provincially licenced certified organic marijuana production facility. They also co-founded the Cannabis Trade Association.

Medicalmarihuana.ca has been noted as a national reference resource for medical cannabis by the Canadian AIDS Society, the Multiple Sclerosis Society of Canada, doctors, hospice workers, health professionals and patients from across Canada and around the world.

But hey, they're all Canadians and other assorted foreigners, so I guess they just don't get the joke.

[goju]

37. I just cant, youre hogging all the fun

Ok, one more time since youve missed it twice already. But this is the last time Im going to do this for you, ok?. Youre on your own from now on, agreed?

Since you reiterate your false and moronic allegation that I used that site as a source of political commentary, it's pretty hard for me not to "confuse" your horse laughing with ignorance. Really.

Global National Story article aside, as respected a source for US policy as you might think it is, the fact that you resorted to referencing medicalpot.canada (whatever) for that snip is laughable. Whats next, citing rollingstone on VPC quotes?

But gosh ... now that you mention it ... what exactly is there about an organization dedicated to making marijuana available to individuals who suffer chronic pain, or the debilitating side effects of the treatments for cancer, that is so hilarious?

Nothing at all. Next time you see an NRA reference, just smile and move on. Mmmk?

But hey, they're all Canadians and other assorted foreigners, so I guess they just don't get the joke.

No, I think WE do get the joke. I so wish you will continue sourcing from such sites, really.

[iverglas]

20. any guesses?

http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2005/03/04/roszko050304.html

ROCHFORT BRIDGE, ALTA - James Roszko, the 46-year-old suspect in the killing of four Alberta Mounties, is being described as a dangerous man, with a long history of run-ins with police and a lifelong fascination with guns and weapons.

... Roszko was in possession of a rapid-fire auto carbine assault-style rifle.

... After a dispute in 1993 with a local school trustee, Roszko was charged with a number of offences, including unlawful confinement, assault with a weapon, pointing a firearm and impersonating an officer.

... In 1999, he was charged with firing on two trespassers with a 12-gauge shotgun, but those charges were dismissed, Sun Media reported.

... When Roszko was a teenager, he and a friend robbed a gun shop, according to his brother, George Roszko.

The suspect's brother and father also said Roszko started using drugs early on in life and made money on the side by making moonshine before moving on to other substances.

Northern Alberta ... the Ozarks ... we all got 'em.

So who wants to be the first to wail about how there's no such thing as a "rapid-fire auto carbine assault-style rifle"? Haha, just kidding. I hope. Any guesses as to what it was?

Strikes me it would be something covered by a prohibition here, in any event:
http://www.canlii.org/ca/regu/sor98-462/

And I'd be mighty surprised if he had a licence to possess any firearms at all. It will be interesting to hear what might come out about this one, and how he came to possess it.

Aha, here's the answer to what it was, although not how he acquired it:
http://www.halifaxlive.com/artman/publish/wicked_040305_991120.shtml

Mr. Roszko went on to say that his son who had a previous criminal record was a loner who hated the police and was feared by the local population. The suspect's criminal past involved the use of illegal firearms and sexual assault.

The Edmonton Sun reports that the killer was armed with a Heckler & Koch .308 semi-automatic assault rifle which is specifically made for combat situations. The four slain constables were only armed with hand guns, no match for a semi-automatic assault rifle.

http://www.canlii.org/ca/regu/sor98-462/whole.html

There are references to Heckler & Kochs there, and to 308s, but not to HK 308s. Anyone want to read the lists and tell me whether the firearm in question was prohibited in Canada?

The thing is, if it is prohibited, it could only have been obtained through theft from someone specially licensed to possess it ... or through illegal importation ...

[davepc]

21. Probably a G3 or civilian derivative (HK41) (HK91)

http://world.guns.ru/assault/as12-e.htm

Right caliber and make. Wouldn't call it a carbine though, but there are dozens of variations.

specifically made for combat situations. ooooh, scary. lets ban them! Oh wait, they already are in Canada.

75. The firearm of the design commonly known as the G3 rifle, and any variant or modified version of it, including the Heckler and Koch

(a) HK 91;

(b) HK 91A2;

(c) HK 91A3;

(d) HK G3 A3;

(e) HK G3 A3 ZF;

(f) HK G3 A4;

(g) HK G3 SG/1; and

(h) HK PSG1.

The Canadian ambassador to Germany should file a formal complaint.

[alwynsw]

47. Blame the U.S. for everything, then get even

[Retired AF Dem]

48. Must be a slow night in KY

:) But I like it.

[alwynsw]

49. Yup. Columbia just left.

He was here for the weekend. Went to a gunshop with a few thousand pieces for sale. Got to ogle a Barrett 50 BMG and lots of evil black rifles. Fed him barbecue and venison. Did the Gold Vault view and Patton Museum. Shot lots of stuff out back. Shoved mass quantities of a chocolate chip cookie on steroids my wife made dwon his throat.

Now he's gone. Things are normal. Time to piddle on the puter.

[Columbia]

50. Mmm... venison tenderloin

Eating the leftovers now. Yummy...

[alwynsw]

51. Glad you got back safely.

Got 6 of 'em cleaned.