The particular line "Soon I'll return to my lord" is supposed to be evidence of terrorism. But I don't get that impression from the poem. In any regard this evidence is circumstantial.
Has any of these people been convicted in a court of law?
Little is known about the one other prosecution under the Anti-Terrorism Act that was started with an arrest in March, 2004 but with no trial scheduled until January 2007, and defence lawyers have raised concerns about the adequacy of disclosure and have recently announced they will challenge the offences under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The resolution of the Toronto arrests are not likely to be known for some time. http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/forumy/2006/06/canadian-anti-terror-law-on-trial.php
I guess we won't know for a long time. So don't jump the gun.
Agreed, we are awaiting details. I never said that these men are 100% guilty right now. However, the possibility of their guilt (circumstantial evidence) is stronger than a personal belief that the U.S. is going to invade Canada. The latter belief is based on no evidence at all.
Agreed, we are awaiting details. I never said that these men are 100% guilty right now. However, the possibility of their guilt (circumstantial evidence) is stronger than a personal belief that the U.S. is going to invade Canada. The latter belief is based on no evidence at all.
True, both are grounded in just as much evidence. But I don't believe the U.S. is going to invade Canada. I simply recognize it as a possibility.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
lol, I'm not worried. I'm just looking at it analytically. I'm thinking about it.
I beg to differ. You are analytical when to comes to Muslims accused (rightly or wrongly) of plotting terrorist attacks. But when it comes to the U.S., you are going with pure emotion and distrust. You are being selectively analytical.
I beg to differ. You are analytical when to comes to Muslims accused (rightly or wrongly) of plotting terrorist attacks. But when it comes to the U.S., you are going with pure emotion and distrust. You are being selectively analytical.
Um, no.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Actually why don't I just open my mouth and you can put words in it, go ahead.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Actually why don't I just open my mouth and you can put words in it, go ahead.
I was going based off of what you wrote. You said that the amount of evidence for these two scenarios (these men being guilty of plotting terrorism vs. the U.S. invading us) is the same, and that strikes me as totally incorrect. Is it unreasonable to assume, based on earlier posts you've made, that you think the U.S. invading us is just as likely as these men being guilty? I don't think it is all that unreasonable, based on what you said.
I was going based off of what you wrote. You said that the amount of evidence for these two scenarios (these men being guilty of plotting terrorism vs. the U.S. invading us) is the same, and that strikes me as totally incorrect. Is it unreasonable to assume, based on earlier posts you've made, that you think the U.S. invading us is just as likely as these men being guilty? I don't think it is all that unreasonable, based on what you said.
Well, let's see, the "terrorists" bought ammonium nitrate, that could be a weapon.
The U.S. has thousands of nuclear bombs. No question.
The "terrorists" wrote some stuff about fighting for god.
The U.S. President Bush is fighting for god.
What's the difference?
Bush said "you are either with us, or with the terrorists", so basically if we didn't go to afghanistan, we'd be an enemy of the U.S. and considered terrorists?
What is it that the muslim extremists say? You are either muslim or your dead.
A lot of striking similarities there
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Well, let's see, the "terrorists" bought ammonium nitrate, that could be a weapon.
The U.S. has thousands of nuclear bombs. No question.
The "terrorists" wrote some stuff about fighting for god.
The U.S. President Bush is fighting for god.
What's the difference?
Bush said "you are either with us, or with the terrorists", so basically if we didn't go to afghanistan, we'd be an enemy of the U.S. and considered terrorists?
What is it that the muslim extremists say? You are either muslim or your dead.
A lot of striking similarities there
Sure, I will freely admit that the rhetoric from both sides starts to look pretty similar. But now you are speaking in generalities. Someone getting arrested for possessing oddly large amounts of fertilizer (these guys are farmers? give me a break!) and Bush sounding like an idiot are pretty different things. Besides, we are in Afghanistan and are thus "with" them, right? Logically, we aren't a very good target in the "war on terror".
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Point is, we can concede the land and the ocean to the U.S. if we don't stop them from occupying it.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Well, let's see, the "terrorists" bought ammonium nitrate, that could be a weapon.
The U.S. has thousands of nuclear bombs. No question.
The "terrorists" wrote some stuff about fighting for god.
The U.S. President Bush is fighting for god.
What's the difference?
Bush said "you are either with us, or with the terrorists", so basically if we didn't go to afghanistan, we'd be an enemy of the U.S. and considered terrorists?
What is it that the muslim extremists say? You are either muslim or your dead.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Bush said "you are either with us, or with the terrorists", so basically if we didn't go to afghanistan, we'd be an enemy of the U.S. and considered terrorists?
then why haent we invaded france and germany? they are 100% against our polices. your country only risks getting invaded if you openly attacks us or somehow let the taliban take power.
and for some reason you think some islamic extremists having alot of fertilizer (the kind typically used for bombs no less) as circumstancial evidence?
and for some reason you think some islamic extremists having alot of fertilizer (the kind typically used for bombs no less) as circumstancial evidence?
How do you know they are islamic extremists? Because of that poem?
Holy shit!
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
what poem? I only caught the end of your conversation with the other guy. I guess I mis understood. I apologize. how about my other point?
why havent we invaded france or germany? they are very very much against us
Hah, I dunno, maybe your Pres just likes to talk shit.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
great comeback. you say one thing but cant back it up with real answers.
booooo!!!! did I scare you into thinking we might invade your country?
What?
I'm stating it as a possibility, not an imminent threat. This thread was about Canada pulling out of the north and signing up on some U.S. lead military program.
Canada needs to maintain it's soveriegnty, and part of that is protecting it's self autonomosly. We need to protect the north and stop foreign subs from playing around up there.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Obviously the US is never going to invade Canada unless maybe we have the last drops of oil left on Earth or something. I agree that military funding shiould be boosted to give our troops better equipment and to defend our sovereignty in the north which will become a majore gateway to Asia in another decade. Not to increase depolyment and operations in Afganistan though.
Lying sideways atop crumpled sheets and no covers he decides to dream. Dream up a new self. For himself.
Montreal 2000
Toronto 2003
Montreal 2003
Halifax 2005
Hartford 2006
I'm stating it as a possibility, not an imminent threat. This thread was about Canada pulling out of the north and signing up on some U.S. lead military program.
Canada needs to maintain it's soveriegnty, and part of that is protecting it's self autonomosly. We need to protect the north and stop foreign subs from playing around up there.
the fact that you think its even possible is laughable. you should be thankful US military is patrolling or help patrolling any part of your coasts. America is NOT your enemy.
the fact that you think its even possible is laughable. you should be thankful US military is patrolling or help patrolling any part of your coasts. America is NOT your enemy.
Maybe "America" should ask our fucking permission then eh?
Maybe "America" should let us know it's patrolling the north instead of doing it covertly without our knowledge.
Maybe "America" should ask us to send FBI agents into our country instead of doing it covertly without our knowledge.
No, "America" says "we are your friends" as they stick a knife in our back.
I don't stand in your front fucking yard with a bazooka claiming to protect you and your family. That's bullshit man, and you know it.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
I'm getting pretty sick and tired of you guys putting words in my mouth here. You keep going back to this idea that I think Canada will be invaded by military force and I keep suggesting we are slowly losing our sovereignty. I can see the fundamental differences in those two.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
I am a Canadian and often vote for parties based on their stance on this issue. I have always thought that since it is easier to fire a missile than it is to intercept it, that arming in defense will not work. I think some nobel peace prize winner came up with the same idea.
"It's already been sung, but it can't be said enough, all you need is love."
Comments
obviously you're an american
08/02/07 - LOLLA!!!
Agreed, we are awaiting details. I never said that these men are 100% guilty right now. However, the possibility of their guilt (circumstantial evidence) is stronger than a personal belief that the U.S. is going to invade Canada. The latter belief is based on no evidence at all.
True, both are grounded in just as much evidence. But I don't believe the U.S. is going to invade Canada. I simply recognize it as a possibility.
I beg to differ. You are analytical when to comes to Muslims accused (rightly or wrongly) of plotting terrorist attacks. But when it comes to the U.S., you are going with pure emotion and distrust. You are being selectively analytical.
OK, fair enough. I recognize it as a possibility as well. Just a super remote one, because there is no evidence that suggests an invasion is imminent.
Um, no.
I was going based off of what you wrote. You said that the amount of evidence for these two scenarios (these men being guilty of plotting terrorism vs. the U.S. invading us) is the same, and that strikes me as totally incorrect. Is it unreasonable to assume, based on earlier posts you've made, that you think the U.S. invading us is just as likely as these men being guilty? I don't think it is all that unreasonable, based on what you said.
Well, let's see, the "terrorists" bought ammonium nitrate, that could be a weapon.
The U.S. has thousands of nuclear bombs. No question.
The "terrorists" wrote some stuff about fighting for god.
The U.S. President Bush is fighting for god.
What's the difference?
Bush said "you are either with us, or with the terrorists", so basically if we didn't go to afghanistan, we'd be an enemy of the U.S. and considered terrorists?
What is it that the muslim extremists say? You are either muslim or your dead.
A lot of striking similarities there
Sure, I will freely admit that the rhetoric from both sides starts to look pretty similar. But now you are speaking in generalities. Someone getting arrested for possessing oddly large amounts of fertilizer (these guys are farmers? give me a break!) and Bush sounding like an idiot are pretty different things. Besides, we are in Afghanistan and are thus "with" them, right? Logically, we aren't a very good target in the "war on terror".
It might not be for 100 years, who knows.
talk about spin
counter-spin
then why haent we invaded france and germany? they are 100% against our polices. your country only risks getting invaded if you openly attacks us or somehow let the taliban take power.
and for some reason you think some islamic extremists having alot of fertilizer (the kind typically used for bombs no less) as circumstancial evidence?
How do you know they are islamic extremists? Because of that poem?
Holy shit!
what poem? I only caught the end of your conversation with the other guy. I guess I mis understood. I apologize. how about my other point?
why havent we invaded france or germany? they are very very much against us
Hah, I dunno, maybe your Pres just likes to talk shit.
great comeback. you say one thing but cant back it up with real answers.
booooo!!!! did I scare you into thinking we might invade your country?
I thought you were getting through to him here Reborn, but then naaaa I was wrong
1998 Seattle 7-21
2000 Seattle 11-06
2003 Seattle Benaroya 10-22
2005 Gorge 9-1
2006 Gorge 7-23
What?
I'm stating it as a possibility, not an imminent threat. This thread was about Canada pulling out of the north and signing up on some U.S. lead military program.
Canada needs to maintain it's soveriegnty, and part of that is protecting it's self autonomosly. We need to protect the north and stop foreign subs from playing around up there.
Montreal 2000
Toronto 2003
Montreal 2003
Halifax 2005
Hartford 2006
the fact that you think its even possible is laughable. you should be thankful US military is patrolling or help patrolling any part of your coasts. America is NOT your enemy.
Maybe "America" should ask our fucking permission then eh?
Maybe "America" should let us know it's patrolling the north instead of doing it covertly without our knowledge.
Maybe "America" should ask us to send FBI agents into our country instead of doing it covertly without our knowledge.
No, "America" says "we are your friends" as they stick a knife in our back.
I don't stand in your front fucking yard with a bazooka claiming to protect you and your family. That's bullshit man, and you know it.
Do some fucking reading
http://canadianactionparty.ca/temp/North_American_Union/index.asp
fucking tigers. well actually I would like to see them win. im a sox fan so im just jealous.
http://forums.pearljam.com/forumdisplay.php?f=9
"It's already been sung, but it can't be said enough, all you need is love."