Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [smygo] Bride of RNC Protest Stories

Expand Messages
  • ta
    ... From: dave williams To: smygo@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, August 30, 2004 9:47 AM Subject: Re: [smygo] Bride of RNC Protest Stories ... As someone that
    Message 1 of 4 , Aug 31 7:44 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: dave williams
      To: smygo@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Monday, August 30, 2004 9:47 AM
      Subject: Re: [smygo] Bride of RNC Protest Stories



      --- ta <ta33@...> wrote:

      > Dan Clore wrote:
      > > News & Views for Anarchists & Activists:
      > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/smygo
      > >
      > > *****
      > >
      > > Canucks protest Republican convention
      > > by Dennis Bueckert
      > > Canadian Press
      > > Saturday, August 28, 2004
      > >
      > > OTTAWA (CP) -- Scores of Canadian activists set
      > out Saturday
      > > to join anti-war demonstrations at the Republican
      > National
      > > Convention in New York, saying the conflict in
      > Iraq concerns
      > > them even if they aren't U.S. voters.
      >
      > <snip>
      >
      > Perhaps the Canadians should be more concerned with
      > their own complicity in
      > the war/imperialism business before crossing the
      > border to complain about
      > America's. From Vietnam to Iraq to Haiti, the
      > Canadians have walked
      > hand-in-hand with the US, although usually under the
      > covers, while they
      > publicly talk about peace in effort to continue to
      > promote the "Canada the
      > Peacemaker" myth.
      >

      As someone that just so happened to be born on
      Canadian soil I almost completely agree with this.
      Canada is bo no means a "nation of peace". Let's not
      forget the aiding that Canada gave during the genocide
      of the east timorese as well. Or the present support
      that Martin (canadian pm) is planning on giving the US
      for their space missile defense program.
      However keep in mind that during the Vietnam war that
      you speak of it was Canada that allowed war refugees
      into their country.

      ** TA: And it was Canada who was engaged in espionage with the CIA and
      cooperated with American forces in supplying arms and logistical support to
      South Vietnam, all the while a member of two international truce commissions
      on the Vietnam War as a supposedly neutral party. In addition, Canada
      supplied humanitarian aid to only the South Vietnamese, and in some cases,
      stopped critical medical supplies from being delivered to North Vietnam for
      treating injured and dying civilians. And like in Iraq, Canadian "defense"
      companies sold billions of dollars worth of military products, such as
      ammunition, napalm, and other explosives. They provided another 10 billion
      dollars worth of food and supplies to US troops. Naturally, Canada's economy
      reaped tremendous benefits from supplying the US with the continued means to
      wage its vile and unjust war against the Vietnamese people. Canada was also
      actively allowed the US to test its brutal chemical weapons on their soil,
      including agent orange, and used Canadian property for testing the massive
      carpet bombing campaigns the US carried out against the VC. And finally,
      they supplied 10,000 Canadian troops who fought with the US armed forces in
      the war.


      I will also disagree with you on Canada walking hand
      in hand with the US "under cover". The GOVERNMENT
      normally walks hand in hand with the US pretty openly.
      This is the first time that I can think of that the US
      asked for Canada to be part of a military coalition
      and it was refused. Afghanistan and the 1st Iraq war
      were certainly NOT "undercover" military co-operation
      on Canada's part. It was disgustingly open support
      given by them to the US.

      ** TA: Canada consistently tries to walk the line between peacemaker and
      American lapdog. They don't want to like US policy, but they do like the
      fringe benefits.

      > While Canada would not officially be recognized as
      > part of the "coalition of
      > the willing", they supplied the US with critical air
      > bases for refueling,
      > they supplied tactical support during the war, their
      > soldiers manned AWACS
      > planes for directing missile hits, and their billion
      > dollar "defense"
      > industry was supplying the American government with
      > weapons to kill the
      > Iraqis. How a nation can both aid the aggressor and
      > protest him is beyond
      > me.
      >
      Are you not American? Are you not against this war?
      How a person can be the leading agressor and still
      protest the war is beyond me. Do you see how
      ridiculous that sounds?

      ** TA: What's ridiculous is that many Canadians feel compelled, due to this
      false sense of moral superiority, to protest American policy while ignoring
      (either willfully or subconsciously) their own government's complicity in
      that very policy. I'm not likely to take any advice on gardening from my
      neighbor whose yard is filled with weeds.

      > In addition, Canadian Pension Plan beneficiaries are
      > pouring their
      > retirement dollars into American "defense" companies
      > like Raytheon and
      > Lockheed Martin, those primarily responsible for
      > building the weapons
      > America uses to carry out it's global terror.
      >
      > Canada is up to their eyes in American imperialism;
      > obviously they have
      > chosen to cozy up the bully on the block, rather
      > confront him, but you can't
      > be for "peace" on the one hand, and fuel the bully
      > on the other (all the
      > while reaping the benefits of sucking up to the
      > bully).
      >
      > Those Canadian protesters would be better served
      > spending their energy
      > addressing their own government's hypocritical
      > stances before protesting
      > American policy.
      >
      You obviously don't believe in the idea of world
      community and think that we're better off just
      sticking within our borders and isolating ourselves. I
      guess you would be opposed to the idea of
      international solidarity. I guess that even the idea
      of world wide workers solidarity would be in
      opposition to your views wouldn't it?

      **TA: You obviously have jumped to many conclusions which are not logically
      reached from what I wrote.

      Sorry I
      completely disagree. You almost sound nationalistic.
      I would be very open to the idea of Americans
      crossing the border (that I don't respect much anyway)
      onto Canadian soil to protest Canadian policy. I had
      no problem whe the American Noam Chomsky came to
      Vancouver not to long ago.

      **TA: Protest all you like, but one has to wonder why one is driving
      hundreds of miles to protest things when there is protesting to do right in
      your own back yard. Of course they have the *right* to do whatever, but
      that's not the point.

      But I guess you think he
      just should've stayed south of the border.

      **TA: You guess wrong.

      I think
      that we all need to work together globally on the
      injustices that are going on in OUR world.

      **TA: I think we need to "think globally, act locally" myself. I think we
      need to clean up our own messes before focusing on someone else's.

      Would you have also been in opposition to Emma
      Goldman coming to your country and doing what she did
      because there was enough tyranny going on in her
      homeland? I'm sure you would've definatly opposed that
      "damn foreigner" aiding Americans in draft resistance
      during WW1 wouldn't you? Probably you would've
      supported her deportation as well, seeing as you think
      that people from other nations should have no right to
      protest against another nations wrongs as long as they
      have problems in their own country. You wouldn't of
      liked Sacco and Vanzetti (Italians) or alot of other
      immigrant radicals during that time I don't think
      either. They had no business coming here to try to
      make the world fairer in a place that was not their
      nation of birth. Is that what you'd think?

      **TA: I'm not sure how you arrived at such conclusions based on what I
      wrote. You sound defensive, perhaps indicating your own nationalistic
      tendencies?

      I guess that the world community shouldn't protest
      the Israeli occupation either should they? They should
      all just isolate themselves within their borders and
      only protest what their own gov't does. Let the
      Palestinians and the Israelites handle that. Is that
      what you think?
      I doubt that you'd be apart of this list if you
      actually thought all of that. So why are you so pissed
      off over this incident?

      **TA: what makes you think I'm pissed? I thought it was a worthwhile point
      philosophically, and I see alot of hypocritical moral posturing from
      misguided Canadians who are awfully concerned about American policy, and yet
      seemingly misinformed or silent in regards to their own government's
      actions. That's not to say these protesters didn't come from Ottawa
      protesting the Liberal party's policies before hopping on the bus to NY, so
      who knows.

      -Dave W
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.