Sept. 10, 2006: Military, Afghanistan, Russia, Left

The link is for the second article only.

Note: if you have not already, note this post detailing the punishment for a reporter's supporting Canada's military in Afghanistan. She works for the French language arm of the taxpayer-funded CBC: Radio Canada.

Sept. 10, 2006: Reporter suspended ... Christine St-Pierre, a veteran Ottawa correspondent for French-language public broadcaster Radio-Canada wrote a letter in support of the troops. She was suspended by Radio Canada.

newsmax.com/scripts/printer_friendly.pl?page=
http://newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/9/8/165555.shtml?s=ic

Is this not shocking?



The next two are must read articles.

The Afghanistan debate , Army.ca Forum, Ruxted Editor
forums.army.ca/forums/index.php?topic=49909.0

Prime Minister Harper is being pressed to debate Canadian Foreign Policy; the Ruxted Group believes this would be worthwhile, if only to force MPs to go on the 'record' - one way or the other; such a debate can, indeed it should serve as an education tool for the Canadian voting public which is clearly distressed and confused about the cost of doing something which they, like too many politicians, do not understand.

Here is what the Ruxted Group suggests Mr. Harper, as Head of Government should say:

Mr. Speaker, I rise today because Canadians are confused and distressed by our military operations in Afghanistan. We, this parliament, sent our soldiers there with what we thought was a clear mission. Here is what we say to Canadians on our Foreign Affairs web site:

Canada is in Afghanistan today to –

* help Afghanistan rebuild;

* defend our national interests; and

* ensure Canadian leadership in world affairs.

That is what we have been saying since we started in Afghanistan nearly five years ago. Clearly some Members of Parliament and some Canadians do not understand or do not agree.

It has been suggested that our soldiers are winning on the battlefield while the government is losing the war in the nation’s cable television system. We will try, today, to explain to Members of Parliament and to the people of Canada why we are in Afghanistan and why we need to stay the course.

First, Canadians ask: Are we fighting a war or trying to help the Afghan people to rebuild their country?

We answer: Both. Reconstruction is inadequate as long as there is an insurrection that will destroy our work as quickly as we produce it. Part of the rebuilding is capacity building. We are building the capacity of the Afghan government to fight its own battles & maintain its own security. However, until that capacity is built we need to carry a heavy load in the fight.

Second, Canadians ask: Is this mission winnable? [....]

The first duty of this government is to protect Canada. There are people in this world who want to hurt Canada and Canadians. They want to do that in order to force us to bow to their will. We need to prevent those attacks and the best way to do that is to make it harder and harder for radical, barbaric, terrorist movements to find a secure base from which they can mount attacks on us. That is what a Taliban government in Afghanistan provided for al Qaeda: a secure base. That is what a Taliban government will do again – if we allow them to regain power. Helping the legitimate, elected Government of Afghanistan defeat the Taliban insurgency is the key. It is in our national interests to have a stable, free Afghanistan which can, at its own pace, work its way into the modern, connected world. [....]

You would be wise to read this one ...


If you don't know why you should heed what Pacepa says, note his background in Romania. Read more on the National Review website.

Russian Footprints -- What does Moscow have to do with the recent war in Lebanon? -- "The codename of this operation was “SIG” (Sionistskiye Gosudarstva, or “Zionist Governments”), and was within my Romanian service’s “sphere of influence,” for it embraced Libya, Lebanon, and Syria. SIG was a large party/state operation.", By Ion Mihai Pacepa, August 24, 2006, 6:55 a.m.

article.nationalreview.com/print/?q=NjUzMGU4NT
MyOTdkOTdmNTA1MWJlYjYyZDliODZkOGM=

In 1972, the Kremlin decided to turn the whole Islamic world against Israel and the U.S. As KGB chairman Yury Andropov told me, a billion adversaries could inflict far greater damage on America than could a few millions. We needed to instill a Nazi-style hatred for the Jews throughout the Islamic world, and to turn this weapon of the emotions into a terrorist bloodbath against Israel and its main supporter, the United States. No one within the American/Zionist sphere of influence should any longer feel safe.

According to Andropov, the Islamic world was a waiting petri dish in which we could nurture a virulent strain of America-hatred, grown from the bacterium of Marxist-Leninist thought. Islamic anti-Semitism ran deep. The Muslims had a taste for nationalism, jingoism, and victimology. Their illiterate, oppressed mobs could be whipped up to a fever pitch.

Terrorism and violence against Israel and her master, American Zionism, would flow naturally from the Muslims’ religious fervor, Andropov sermonized. [....]

Worth reading further. Someone, please send the url and/or a copy to Jack Layton and the NDP--those left after this weekend, for a few big names have left the NDP over its move to the far left, CBC, Sacha Trudeau and his network, the No One Is Illegal network and their supporters and associates, assorted leftists in the MSM, and anyone else who could benefit.



Military: Out of the West -- Patriotic in Calgary -- and from the French language CBC -- Radio Canada: Canadian broadcaster suspended from her job for supporting Canadian troops in Afghanistan, Sept. 8, 2006 4:51 p.m. EDT, Reuters

newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/9/8/165555.shtml

I didn't hear that reported by the CBC here in Canada. Did you? ... I didn't think so. Despicable ... and significant.

Why are we in Afghanistan? , Rex Murphy, Sept. 7, 2006
www.cbc.ca/national/rex/rex_060907.html

If Mr. Layton wants Canadian troops out of Afghanistan, he should say just that.

He should say that it doesn't serve Canadian interests to be there, that the deaths of Canadian soldiers, therefore, serve no point and that the battlefield of Afghanistan, which will decide who rules in that country, Karzai or Taliban, democracy or rabid fundamentalism, has no meaning or significance for us Canadians.

He should be clear that when his party says it supports the troops, it means that cancelling the mission those troops are engaged upon is the only honest way that party sees of supporting them. [....]

Islamic Terror's Endless 'Root Causes' , By Froma Harrop, September 07, 2006

[....] That Islamic terrorists hate the United States is an all-purpose explanation. Dig deeper into the reasons for that hatred, though, and the confident answers of "expert opinion" don't quite satisfy.

Since that gruesome blue-sky day, Islamic radicals have staged more attacks and have been foiled in others. But try to find a connecting theme, other than psychosis. There's only a pile of shifting motives. [....]

Perhaps terrorists see countries that make sensitive analyses of their complaints as easy marks. If so, then the eagerness to prettify mass murder with "root causes" could itself be a root cause.

Would that last sentence apply to Canada?




I found this on the way to reading something else: 15 Tips to Be a Good Leftist, By: Jamie Glazov, FrontPageMag.com

[....] I think I have the credentials to do the job. With experience at several politically correct universities, I have spent most of my life surrounded by true believing leftists. Just recently, I completed a seven-year graduate studies program in history, during which I was able to observe the species at close range. I know what a good leftist is and can provide excellent lessons on how to be one. [....]

It is important to keep in mind that the average leftist is far more offended by benign views on the right than extreme views on the left. For instance, a typical leftist will be necessarily outraged at a positive statement about Ronald Reagan, but wouldn`t think of showing mild indignation at an 'intellectual exercise' in which the crimes of Stalin are put 'into context,' and made more palatable. So don`t be afraid to incorporate some of my more extreme suggestions. Trust me; you can do it. You can be a good leftist. [....]

I like his style.