Canadian political crushes GWB doll, gets the boot from PM Paul Martin

If Bush is going to be in Canada at the end of this month, does this mean he can technically be held for war crimes there?

Not that Paul "Looking Like the Canadian Tony Blair" Martin would allow such a step... or even Chretien. But still, wow...

If you ask our opposition leader, Stephen Harper, why action was taken he will tell you it was because she's also said nasty things about Mr.Martin and his cronies (saying stuff like "they can rot in hell") not because of her "anti-American" comments. But accusing the Libs of being anti-American is how he earns his bread and butter so why should he stop now (even though it's quite obvious Martin can't wait to sniff Bush's butt in person).

She called the countries contributing to U.S. efforts in Iraq a "coalition of the idiots"
It should also be noted that the Globe has it's facts wrong here. The "coalition of the idiots" refers to the proponents of the missile defense plan - which includes Canadians as well. She was right to say that one.

If our country remains split on the issue, it's probably a given that parliament will end up supporting. In which case it will lead to millions of dollars in new scientific and engineering grants. And from that money, 95% will be used to advance Canadian science and will likely never be used in any weapons system (I hope).

Bill Siksay, from Burnaby Douglas, and whom I really like, is apparently the only member of the NDP caucus who has not pledged to refrain from heckling when Bush adressses Parliament. Burnaby Douglas is the former riding of Svend Robinson(who I love), who heckled Reagan when the latter visited in '86 or whenever.

knida off topic, but remember Sheila Copps singing 'the star spangled banner' out loud in parliament as the PC caucus stood up to vote yes, one by one, for NAFTA?

We're not on board yet
I would argue that we pretty much are (see Bill Graham, Pierre Pettigrew, etc).

(not that I'm sure their lack of Y chromosomes have anything to do with it other than that it places them outside Martin's He-Man Woman-Haters Club/Yes-Man (and Anne McLellan) Brigade)

(Can't he? please? Huk, I'll send a check.. you just have to "hug" Bush for me!)

xpost

The idea that this would progress science though - I'm sorry - is laughable
Many major scientific and engineering discoveries happened (or were significantly advanced) because of military spending. Like the entire laser and semiconductor/transistor industry. The DoD in the US spends money like the record companies in the 50's and early 60's used to -- they record dozens of songs with loads of artists, in the hope of having one single hit. One big hit would then make up for all of the misses.

That's how military technology spending works -- they float hundreds of contracts out there, very few of them ever get used by the military, but most of them are picked up and end up advancing their fields in marked ways. Many times I've called companies to inquire about certain technologies (light detectors in particular) and had to answer a series of detailed questions concerning what exact function these technologies would play in the lab. Translation (sometimes): our company is funded by the military and therefore we need to know exactly what business you have with this equipment. But without such technologies, our group and hundreds of similar researchers couldn't do our experiments.

The technology for these defense systems is still not complete. Somebody has to figure this stuff out -- and Canadian scientists could (I have no idea how likely this will be, it is certainly something to consider) have a significant role in fulfilling military contracts that will leads to the death and pain of nobody but have tremendous benefit for Canadian research institutions.

All this is really my roundabout way of saying that the Canadian govt should increase scientific spending. I'd prefer, of course, that we refrain from piggybacking on any US projects. But, if we are involved in the right projects (that's the key, we need to know precisely what we would have to do and who would have to do it) then it could be beneficial.

He can't de-elect her, so she'll float around as an independent until the next election, at which point her political career is likely over. The left doesn't like her because she was a prick, and the right doesn't like her because they disapprove of her comments about Americans. So, no party wants anything to do with her so she'll be done unless she can get re-elected as an independent.

Women in Martin's cabinet:
http://www.liberal.parl.gc.ca/images/mp_pics/guarnieri_albina.jpg http://www.liberal.parl.gc.ca/images/mp_pics/carroll_aileen.jpg

http://nb.cbc.ca/gfx/Nb/photos/claudette_bradshaw.jpg http://www.world-cup-cycling.org/coupe-du-monde/images/liza-frulla.jpg

http://www.cbc.ca/gfx/photos/sgro_judy040316.jpg http://www.cbc.ca/gfx/photos/mclellan_anne030423.jpg

http://www.space.gc.ca/asc/img/robillard-lucienne.jpg http://www.liberal.parl.gc.ca/images/mp_pics/bennett_carolyn.jpg

http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/english/images/media/minister/blondin.jpg

Yeah, I miss Sheila. Jane Stewart, too. I sure don't miss Art Eggleton.

I figured that Missile defense was a done deal, as the Cons + Cabinet + regressive Liberals > NDP + Bloc + progressive Liberals, but I was told today that a number of Con MP's are wavering in the face of public pressure to oppose the plan, so it may yet die. A no vote in parliament means nothing technically, as cabinet is able to enter into int'l agreements of this sort w/o a vote. The pressure of a NO vote would, however, make it impossible for cabinet to do so without coming off as total dicks. If Martin has any self-preservation instincts(which is a valid question at this stage), he'll declare the issue dead after a NO.

The technology for these defense systems is still not complete. Somebody has to figure this stuff out -- and Canadian scientists could (I have no idea how likely this will be, it is certainly something to consider) have a significant role in fulfilling military contracts that will leads to the death and pain of nobody but have tremendous benefit for Canadian research institutions.
Okay - the U.S. has been working on this for over 20 years now - they have not progressed in the slightest. Yes, military spending has come up with some fantastic advances in scientific fields - but I see this venture as a dead end. Also this could let to "death and pain" the way I see things. It will contribute to the global arms race like you would not believe - unchecked global proliferation can be a significant contributor to suffering the way see things. In addition, when base operations are complete, I will provide nothing more than a false sense of security. In a worst case scenario relying on this system if there were an incoming missile attack could lead to tragic loss of life.

derrick - I've not heard anything about Conservative "wavering" - but if this is true it would be fantastic! Sometimes I wonder if I over estimate Harper's control over that party.

I am an American and do not understand your foreign ways.

PS. I think this sort of thing, though highly comical, is politically stupid, just supplying the other side with an easy way to discredit your position.

PSS. I would however put aside my political reservations to see MP-Presidential doll violation in the Canadian Parliament.

Are you serious?

http://www.cbc.ca/gfx/photos/parrish_carolyn030226.jpg

that PM of yours must be some kind of homo

'nother xpost - still doesn't address my concerns.

Of course at that time we had no clue they would be invading Iraq, again.

It will contribute to the global arms race like you would not believe - unchecked global proliferation can be a significant contributor to suffering the way see things

We should note that massive military spending on science and technology has been constant for decades, but the only time it gets associated with an "arms race" is during times of conflict. In other words, the US military is bombing the crap out of Falluja using technologies that were developed during peacetime 5, 10, 20, years ago.

So ask.

Tommy Douglas would be appalled.

but the only time it gets associated with an "arms race" is during times of conflict
Does the cold war count as conflict?
Again you're talking in generals again and ignoring my specific concern about BMD - sure every dollar spent on military research is contributing to an arms race of some variety. But the Missile Defense plan will be an especially inflammatory project. China and Russia have both condemned the project (believing that it is the bases for weapons in space) and said this will force them to step up missile production and work on similar systems of their own. What if China decides it wants interceptors in space first, as a result with our barreling ahead with this idea? Even if the missile shield could actually mange to knock out an enemy projectile - this is easily rendered moot by mass deployment of rockets or decoys. This has the effect of multiplying missile production on a dangerous scale in perceived competitor nations. Even now we see Russia announcing they can build rockets that can easily get around a theoretically functioning shield. This, without a shadow of a doubt in my mind, will force the hands of not only China and Russia but Iran and South Korea to dedicate way more resources to competitive technologies. The quantity of proliferation this will lead to is unacceptable.

x-post Don't flatter yourself. Everybody's had their way with Belgium.

No, I am saying that there is considerable overlap between the two. Some of the same technologies that are being developed -- BMD or no BMD -- will merely be funneled into the BMD program.

Maybe with Fox News here more Canadians can see for themselves what some American really think of us and our beliefs/values. Specifically Canuks that blindly rush to defend the Yanks as our bestest friends ever.

Maybe Fox will tone down their remarks about Canada now that they know more Canadians will be watching? Maybe I'll be the next pope?