Skip navigation

 Login or Register | Member Centre

Taliban to target Canadian civilians

GLORIA GALLOWAY

Globe and Mail Update

Latest comment posted at 4:20 AM EST 18/08/08

Group says slaying of aid workers was act of 'revenge'; open letter threatens more bloodshed if troops don't pull out of Afghanistan ...Read the full article

This conversation is closed

  1. siren call from Canada writes: 'This letter is a disgusting attempt to justify the deliberate killings of innocent civilians. There is no justification for these killings by the Taliban,' Mr. MacKay said in an e-mail sent via his press spokesman.'

    Is there some way to justify the killings of a wedding party -- not the first in Afghanistan-- by NATO forces?

    'Canada is in Afghanistan at the request of the democratically elected government of that country.

    We were with the Americans in the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan. Karzai was 'elected' in 2004 -- so how exactly does MacKay's logic make sense?
  2. no BS from Canada writes: Siren call. A month ago I suggested you take your meds and go away and I actually thought you took the advice. Appears your meds wore off. Time for another boost.
  3. warron yu from Canada writes:
    Well congradulations Canada we set up one of the most corrupt Gov'ts in the world.

    We gave drug lords positions in Government over there. CBC has reported that 60% of heroin comes from Afghanistan. The Taliban had virtually erradicated it before we got there.

    The girls in Afghanistan now can go to school. When they graduate at about 12 or 13yrs old, they now have the freedom to pour oil on themselves and light thier face on fire. They do this so they don't have a life of slavery in the hopes thier arranged husband won't want them.

    We were told we were going to give them freedom, now it comes out that one critical article will land your butt in a torture cell.

    The USarmy ADMITS that they flew out 600 Taliban leaders out of the country and then said it was a mistake. Sure it was.
  4. siren call from Canada writes:
    no BS -- any observations on the actual topic?
  5. Tim Kennedy from Toronto, Canada writes: We are the people that fought the Dutch in the Boer war - defeated the US in their attempts to invade us and stood against German tyranny in two wars . The threats leveled against us here will only make the soldiers and the peoples of this nation fight harder.

    What is or at least should be at question here is the motives of the Americans and our apparent alliance to them. The heroin crop has quadrupled the allegations of torture should haunt this pro American government and our troops have died - but for what an American campaign ? To what ends are we serving the Yankee ambitions and is our service to them here only a reminder of the Mulrooney betrayal ? So we have a government in this nation or do we have a branch manager to the American President ?

    I do not question our troops - I question the loyalty of our Prime Minister ....is it to Canada or to America ?
  6. iPhone from Canada writes:
    :-- no BS...

    Your comments about 'Siren Call' make no sense at all. 'Siren call' made two (2) accurate comments about quoted items from the article and all you can think of is some Grade 4 response. How very silly and immature you are.

    Thanks Siren Call, I did not realize that Karzi was 'elected' in 2004. If you have other 'qualifying information' about the article I would be interested in hearing more.
    ~
  7. SL S from Saskatchewan, Canada writes: Mr. Taliban, is that supposed to be some kind of threat? Didn't achieve your desired effect. I don't respond well to threats and those who issue them usually pay dearly and painfully if they act on them. I would suggest you climb back into the cave you cowards live in and not take this one any further. Just ask anyone who has come up against us what we're like, China, Germany, North Korea, they'll all explain nicely how they went out of their way to avoid us after initial meetings. We don't back down, we don't quit and we don't respond well to threats. I suggest you read up on Canadian military history so that you'll know what your up against. Little has changed in the way we fight over the years so you'll get an idea of how bad an idea it was to attack innocent, non combatant, women. If you seriously expect me to believe that wedding parties are getting shot up every week, as you claim, then you've seriously underestimated our intelligence as well. Please put an effort that is believeable into your propaganda in the future, your current stories are just way too stupid and you keep using the same ones over and over again. Just stay in your cave, it's safer for you and it's the cowardly way to handle the situation. You guys are really good at being cowards so you should just stay on that path. Don't worry, we'll find you soon enough and introduce you to a whole new world.
  8. Jim Terrets from Vancouver, writes: Very good point siren call. Peter MacKay easily justifies the killing of civilians so long as NATO is doing the killing. When Canadian soldiers killed two children a couple of weeks ago, Peter MacKay said that a 'horrible decision had to be taken.' In other words, MacKay thinks that we had to kill those two children. It was horrible, but those children had to die.

    We don't even know the names of those two children, their pictures weren't published anywhere, they're not even news anymore, just two more Afghans dead as 'collateral damage', their deaths reduced to 'something that had to be done.' And Harper calls Canada the 'greatest country in the world.' I don't believe any country that goes into another country and kills children can call itself 'great', but that's just my opinion.

    I don't condone the killing of aid workers by the Taliban, but I can understand that the Taliban want revenge. This is the logical conclusion of the war we are fighting: NATO kills Afghan civilians as it pleases, so why can't the Taliban start killing NATO civilians as it pleases?

    There's an old saying: as you sow, so shall you reap. NATO has sown a lot of civilian death in Afghanistan and now we are reaping the results of our dreadful crop.
  9. iPhone from Canada writes:
    :-- SLS

    While you sit comfortably is your rocking-chair looking out over a storied landscape of Canadian military history... you should remember that Canadians that thought in previous wars were not supporting globalist interests in US energy and oil.

    The landscape then had more substance and honour than is currently projected from Washington. Bush et al, are pursuing profits and hegemony.

    This is not for Canadians. Canada needs to chart its own course and cut the Americans loose. Canada is being dis-honoured by our involvement in American wars.

    Vote Mr. Harper out of office.
    ~
  10. siren call from Canada writes: Thanks to the posters who have taken my contribution as just that.

    I was for going into Afghanistan initially. I really thought we were helping. Since the move to Kandahar, I'm no longer convinced our motives are honourable.

    We owe Afghanistan; the USSR was broken on the bodies of their people. But are we helping? I think Tim Kennedy, Jim Terrets, warron yu and iphone are correct -- our deployment in Afghanistan needs to be seriously questioned.

    And as much as it pains me -- the Taliban spokesperson seems correct in pointing out that we really don't treat the deaths of their people as important as we treat the deaths of our people. Clearly, the deaths of Afghans are simply, 'collateral damage'.

    That's not Canada's role, in my opinion.

    'The attack on the aid workers was carried out, he said, “to take revenge on the coalition forces and foreign people and to show the world that our people are just as important as yours.”
  11. SL S from Saskatchewan, Canada writes: iPhone from Canada, that would be YOUR opinion which I respect but do not share. Afghanistan provided aid, financial backing and training to terrorist groups. These groups attacked killing thousands. I'd call that a global interest. You can put your cutsie US oil spin on it if you like. In my opinion that's a pile of BS. The Taliban had to be removed and they were. Then they chose to fight so now they must be eliminated before they kill more innocent people aound the world by backing terrorist groups financially and by giving them aid. You can put all the little anti US spins on it that you like but none of them explain why the US left Afghanistan after the removal of the Taliban and turned their attention to Iraq. I would agree with your theory 100% had you been refering to Iraq, oil is the only reason the US is there. I don't buy that for one second with regards to Afghanistan. The Taliban are a dangerous and hurtful group that has attacked or supported attacks all over the world. These cowardly acts had to be stopped. That's my opinion and the way I see it. I'm retired military. I still have many friends in the forces and several in Afghanistan. They know why they are there and they won't take to kindly to the killing of innocent aid workers. I truely feel sorry for the Taliban.
  12. SL S from Saskatchewan, Canada writes: Siren, in my opinion the mission doesn't need to be questioned at all. Those that are there know why they are there and what they are doing. It's us at home that have been fed so much propaganda and BS that we've lost sight of the serious consequences that the survival of the Taliban will hold. Just because we lost sight of the real reason doesn't mean the mission needs to be questioned.
  13. Emma Hawthorne from Canada writes: Maybe this notion of simply branding the enemy as evil, refusing to talk to them or find out what their perception of NATO and the relief efforts is, and then continuing to fight them with WWII methods is less than ideal. I would like to hear Mr. Cretien's take on this nonsense and the death and destruction it brings.
  14. David Gibson from Hamilton, Canada writes: The West should either be in there in the tens and hundreds of thousands of troops, or get the heck out. The current approach will result in a slow steady stream of body bags returning to Canada, and most of the Taliban will die of old age. We can't affect the place enough to bring the required change unless we exponentially increase the size of the military mission, so as to nullify the Taliban.
  15. SL S from Saskatchewan, Canada writes: David Gibson from Hamilton, I agree with your post. If anything needs to be questioned it's how this war is being approached and fought. End it now, don't keep dragging it out. Let Afghanistan have it's life and freedom back. They've waited long enough and they've earned it.
  16. SL S from Saskatchewan, Canada writes: I'm off to bed. Thanks for sharing your opinions, views and thoughts. I may not share them but I'll always listen to them and respect them.
  17. Jay Crawford from Miami, FL, United States writes: Well spoken, S LS! More than anyone I've read recently in the G&M, your words of defiance (toward the medieval-minded mysoginistic child-rapists of the Taliban salafists) ring out as the century-old spirit of the Canadian armed forces. The Taliban ALREADY target civilians because their tactics and their fighting men cannot beat the CF (or the Dutch, Poles, Britons, and Americans). All the Taliban have left is terror attacks against civilians (overwhelmingly Afghan) in an attempt to make the people suffer enough to eventually give support to the Taliban. If the Allies hold fast, such Taliban terrorism will cause the Afghan population to only solidify in opposition to the reactionary-xenophobia-masquerading-as-Islam which the Taliban represent. The psuedo-moralistic bravado and constant repetions of the same old accusations are transparent to anyone who follows the facts of the daily fight for Afghanistan.
  18. iPhone from Canada writes:
    I like what 'Siren Call' may be implying, when s/he says that we in Canada do not know the names of the people killed in Afghanistan... and maybe we should.

    It strikes me as the decent thing to do publically, is to record publically, say on the Internet at a Government of Canada website, the NAMES of all who die either as a result of our bullets/bombs or on our side from their bullets/bombs. While this would not affect those killed, it would bring attention in this country... to the numbers, the faces and the communties which they were killed.

    It is outrageous to claim that everyone who runs away from bullets and bombs is the enemy. As our dear, Mr. Rumsfield would say there is a fog that decends on war. I believe this. Canadians do not know who they are killing.

    How many 'enemy' were created from bombing a wedding ceremony... I bet a big number.

    If Canadians are fighting the good fight, then let us record who are killed by our people. Then in time, we will better know the truth of these matter.
    ~
  19. iPhone from Canada writes:
    :-- Jay Crawford

    Yes, of course, everybody is a terrorist when the empire is threatened.

    Canadians should be putting the 'Atlantic' back into NATO, and returning our family members (military) to their own country and not propping up the moral failings of the good ol' US of A.

    By the way, where are those evangelists' when you need them... why aren't they over serving the lord, in Afghanistan??
    ~
  20. Trudeau's Apricot poodle from Canada writes: As we are in the fight, we better fight and win, once you start to run, it's hard to stop.
  21. Ricky for a Centrist Canada from Canada writes:
    iPhone, your comments are interesting - but you oversimplify the motives behind previous involvements in war and conflict.

    World War One in particular had little to do with honour and valour, except for that displayed in the trenches. Beyond the soldiers' level, that war was about much of the same things you spoke of in your last post.

    Whatever the case, it is clear that a simple 'get out now' is just not realistic. But whatever's being done now also isn't working, no matter what the conservative propagandists try to push. What is infuriating to me is that more options are not being explored - or are dismissed with 'Taliban Jack' 'with us or against us' style rhetoric.
  22. W M from Canada writes: siren call from Canada writes: 'Is there some way to justify the killings of a wedding party -- not the first in Afghanistan-- by NATO forces?'

    ============================================================
    There is no way to say that they weren't a tragedy for both the families and the mission, but that is not at all the same as saying that they are equivalent to targetting aid workers as a deliberate strategy of intimidation (or as revenge). Somehow, I suspect you might get that difference, if our side was threatening to deliberately target their 'women and children', if they refused to do as we demand.
  23. W M from Canada writes: siren call from Canada writes: 'We were with the Americans in the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan. Karzai was 'elected' in 2004 -- so how exactly does MacKay's logic [that we are there at the request of the democratically elected government] make sense?

    ================================================================
    Well, that would be because that government was elected in 2004 and asked us both to stay and then for NATO to expand its mission, which we eventually did in 2006. As for putting 'elected' in brackets, nice try. The election was monitored and deemed valid by UN monitors and the turnout was high, despite threats from the Taliban. It goes without saying that it wasn't to the same standard as an election in Canada, but applying standards that couldn't possibly be met, would seem more like a rationale for copping out than an attempt to be fair.
  24. iPhone from Canada writes:
    :-- Trudeau's Apricot poodle

    Ahh yes, Mr. Poodle, once the RCMP has been issued those 'tasers' and they have been trained how to use the non-lehal weapon, you are advocating 'staying the course', 'finishing the job', 'fishing and not cutting bait', 'not cutting and running'... oh, I love to hear our fearless leaders (Mr. Harper and Mr. Hillier) offer up sound bytes and then exiting stage left while the grunts do the work.

    Hence, with your logic the police can just 'taser on':

    - tasering old people in hospital beds --> dead;

    - tasering youths in allies --> dead;

    - tasering citizens that don't pay bus fare --> dead;

    - and yes... tasering Polish visitors to Canada --> dead;

    Dead... all dead... each just in the wrong place at the wrong time.

    Ahh yes, the true marvels of human stupidity, technological profit, and just doing my job... force! Certainly, don't want to ask questions when things are going so well.

    Taser On.. Bro
    ~
  25. W M from Canada writes: Ricky for a Centrist , I agree with you to a large extent, but think a large part of the reason Jack Layton gets dismissed is because he has completely blown in the wind on this. During the last election he fully endorsed the mission, then at the first sign of trouble, completely lost his nerve. That means that he was inexcusably naive about what the Taliban reaction would be, or he was advocating a military mission he didn't believe in (to get a few extra votes) or he is now advocating a pull out that the doesn't believe to pander to his base. If, when the shooting started, his first reaction had at least been to look for strategies for success, rather than excuses for abandoning to the Taliban, the people we had just finished asking to take the risk of standing up with us, then I would be a lot more sympathetic. As it is, there is a tendancy to dismiss anything he says as half-baked twaddle and / or grandstanding, because that is so frequently what it is.
  26. iPhone from Canada writes:
    Ricky...

    Yes, I agree it is not a simple as closing up shop and checking out.

    But the reality is, is that this country is soverign; these countries are older culturally than we are; they have established families and values; they have a right to THEIR future and not the future that we impose on them.

    Humans are a species... if these Afghan folks want to kill themselves off in their own little niche called Afghanistan, that is their right as a species.

    The real issue is the good ol' US of A is here for the oil... it is not more complicated than that. The rocket scientists in the US has absolutely wasted most everything and Canada is being sucked into their downward spiralling vortex. The US can fix their problem, and there a very great many really decent people down tere... but they have to rid their military state. It is going to kill them... and great many others.

    Canada/NATO without the US should be pulling the both sides of the Afghanistan into the solution... Northern Alliance and Taliban. Canada/NATO should be GIVING them large, very large portions of the revenues from shared development projects. Cut the US out. The US has no right being there in the first place. How one, motivates the Northern Alliance and Taliban folks to work together to achieve a shared future for THEIR country should now be the objective. Running around shooting at things that move is un-worthy of Canadians.

    The Afghan folks need to be caused to 'step up to plate' and collectively deal with this problem and NATO needs to exit. There is no honour being there and there is no honour in having a family member die there. Our politicans are supposed to be leading. Mr. Harper and crew do not have the intellectual prowess to handle this, as it is outside their singular 'tax cut mantra' scope.

    This is not Canada's problem... but we do need plan an exit strategy.
    ~
  27. dan vanman from Canada writes: Folks...the Taliban are a bunch of cowards. They continue to run from the canadian and American armies in Afghanistan. They shield themselves with civilians, like the 12 or so that weere killed last week. The Taliban have no authoirity in their home country.

    Don't get caught up in minutae about political parties and the 'mission'.

    The Canadian soldiers are doing the right thing. They are doing it bravely.

    BTW...siren...are you nuts? The USSR breakup had more to do with economics than anything else. Please don't romantisize idiots like Bin Laden, who was a guerrilla against the Russians. By your comments, its sounds like you actually think they are just warriors. Theya re cowards that hide behind children to avoid being killed. Period.

    Thank you, Canadian soldiers.
  28. Jay Crawford from Miami, FL, United States writes: Oh, Mr Terrets, what a wonderful implication is in the (selectively ignorant) idea you have! You said '...I can understand that the Taliban want revenge. This is the logical conclusion of the war we are fighting: NATO kills Afghan civilians as it pleases, so why can't the Taliban start killing NATO civilians as it pleases?' The Taliban DO try to kill NATO civilians already; they just fail...a lot. But they succeed overwhelmingly in killing lots of Afghan civilians for doing things their reactionary ideology finds 'un-Islamic'. They also support the poppy farmers and heroin trade so as to extract protection-money; it's the same methodology as used by FARC 'revolutionaries' (gangsters) in Colombia. They even rationalize away the obvious hypocrisy in the murders of their own people by calling the innocent dead 'unwilling martyrs'; gee, I wonder where they got that phrase? (Oh yeah! That's what al Qaeda calls their Muslim victims.) However, NATO doesn't throw around the phrase 'collateral damage' as easily as the fanatical Talibs; rather, recognizing the propaganda potential of a civilian shooting or mistaken bombing, NATO militaries investigate such tragedies. Now maybe such investigations don't yield the results some people (maybe you?) would like: 'Corporal X wantonly killed two children he couldn't see in the car that was quickly moving toward his men like a Taliban suicide-bomber.' But then, such a verdict would not make factual sense even in a non-combatant civilian court...and it would be patently ludicrous to anyone who has seen the Taliban and their desperately tactics. YOUR IDEA of Taliban revenge for deliberate civilian deaths is still splendid, because if the Taliban will merely seek revenge for such deaths, they will logically end up executing themselves. Problem solved! BUT, IF they can't get together the courage to do that, then let them bring themselves (and drug-money paid 'mujahids', i.e., poor Pashtuns) across the border...and NATO will do it for them
  29. Jay Crawford from Miami, FL, United States writes: Off to work. Good day, folks.
  30. Misery No one from Angus, Canada writes:
    What do u expect. We go there shoot up the place and cry foul when they retaliate. 70% of Canadians appose it. What is it the government of Canada does not understand???

    We are gradually becoming a warring nation governed by the US. And while were at it why not name another bridge/road/airport to weep for all those poor souls who r dying for no reason at all.

    How many more monuments do we build. How many more days are going to be dedicated to those who fell on this imagined war on terror?

    If I fail to get my point across. And my facts r wrong. In this democratic society, lets have a referendum.
  31. Rob L from Vancouver, Canada writes: Well, thanks to Stevie, Canadians all over the world are in danger. Apologies to our American cousins, they can no longer claim to be Canadian in order to get a warm reception when travelling abroad.
  32. wayne ouellette from Canada writes: For all you bleeding hearts. Are you going to hug them when they visit your neighbourhood? In case you have not figured it out these are very bad people. War & death are never popular. Fortunately most of the world, and our government, realize what needs to be done. Like it or not!
  33. dan vanman from Canada writes: Jim Terrets...please stay in the Style or Literature sections from now on, as you are hopelessly ill equiped to comment on the political ones.

    Do you actually believe Canadian soldiers wake up and say...'hmm...lets kill a couple kids today, that'll piss those Taliban off'?

    Canadian and NATO soldiers take every precaution to AVOID civilian casualties. The Taliban are the ones that are forcing the number of civilians killed ever higher.

    Every time they are chased, in a battle, or being overrun by the NATO military, their strategy is to enter a town, and hide in the houses, not allowing the civilians there to leave. Using them as human shields.

    The karma that will come back on YOU for propogating the lies that the Taliban and their allies want you to believe (that its NATO going around killing indiscriminately is infinitely more than what will come back on brave Canadians that are putting their lives on the line for you. Yes, for you...
  34. R. Carriere from Maritimes, Canada writes:

    ' In an interview with The Globe and Mail conducted several hours before the letter was made public, Taliban spokesman Zabiullah Mujahid..........'

    Is it just me, or why is the G&M 'interviewing' a Taliban enemy spokeman, and allowing him a media forum to pass messages and/or propaganda?

    Look, I don't like this war one iota, but the fact of the matter is that we are there and Canadian Forces, and now ordinary aid workers, are getting killed.

    I truly believe it is almost irresponsible for the G&M to allow themselves to be used in this manner. How do the families and friends of the killed, and fellow military folk feel about the Taliban having a propaganda platform?

    I wonder how Canadians would have taken news in 1942 that,.. 'In an interview with Nazi spokesperson Goebbells...'

    Print the letter and leave it at that.....Or is there some other 'goal' in 'interviewing' an enemy Taliban spokesman besides media chest-thumping?
    .
  35. C Oslie from Canada writes: In that part of the world, everything is allegedly revenge for something else. It's ridiculous really, they'd have done this either way. Calling it retaliation is just silly. Same goes for threats. It's stuff they were going to do anyways. We already knew you'd do these things whenever given the chance, so take your threats and shove them Mr. Taleban.

    Citing the accidental bombing of a wedding party is utter hogwash. The Taliban didn't care for the Afghan people when they ruled, they don't care about them when they set off bombs in the middle of crowded streets. Their indifference to and contempt for human life is legendary. As is their hatred for parties.
  36. Kim Huynh from Montreal, Canada writes: The Taliban open letter has targeted the Canadian at home in the old-fashion propaganda and if we wavered, we loose. In wars, there are always tragic incidents like the wedding bombing and the likes, but you take it with a partisan view, your judgment will be targeted in this kind of psychological warfare. The US lost the last war in Viet Nam, not in term of military might in the battle field but to the public opinion front at home. So we must be careful not to help the enemies while our troops are deployed in that country. We are not there to 'invade' like the Taliban and many folks at home believe. We are there for a mission and we must do whatever we can to accomplish it.
  37. R. Carriere from Maritimes, Canada writes:

    Ricky for a Centrist

    Following up your WW1 scenario, WWII was also about money. Incredibly, some American people, Prescott Bush being one, (George W. grandfather and GHWBush's father) were found to been involved with the Nazi war machine through his company Brown Brothers Harriman (BBH), how Prescott Bush was co-founder and director of UBC and its ties to German industrial giant Thyssen and how the American company had its assets seized 1942 under the Trading with the Enemy Act.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/sep/25/usa.secondworldwar

    Then the Iraq/Iran war where the 'Tilt' philosophy was unveiled. The US provided much equipment to Saddam ( chemicals also)-then when he was winning to quickly, tilted towards Iran and also provided them information and aid.

    Zbigniew Brzezinski ( Carter's Sec. of State and NOW the Obama senior foreign policy advisor) once commented he couldn't care less how long the war went on-It was good for business and if they killed each other there was no loss. This war went on for 8 years. This was also on Reagan's watch with GHWBush as VP and James Baker as Sec. of State-same Baker who advocated for GWBush in the 2000 election...
    .
  38. Geoffrey May from Canada writes: Medicine Sans Frontiers left Afghanistan siting US/Nato politicization of aid as reason for departure. MsF had been there through the Soviet invasion and Taliban government.Aid agencies must maintian neutrality to do their work .The question we need to ask is , can the military do more for Afghanistan than aid agencies ?In the current environment , thats the choice.
  39. Political Junkie from Canada writes: Google: 'Being in Afghanistan is dangerous, not being in Afghanistan is more dangerous' and click on the top item from globeandmail.com to read the very interesting views of Ban Ki-moon.

    Most Canadian media 'buried' the strong opinions of the Secretary General of the United Nations earlier this year. The Globe didn't see fit to publish this exclusive article in their print edition!
  40. Ryan Ginger from Canada writes: David Gibson writes: 'The West should either be in there in the tens and hundreds of thousands of troops, or get the heck out.'

    Agreed. Too bad the US decided to invade Iraq, which diverted their much-needed war resources to another theater instead of keeping the security and peace in Afghanistan.
  41. iPhone from Canada writes:
    :-- Political Junkie

    OK, I did Google it... in part here it is.

    BAN KI-MOON

    Special to Globe and Mail Update

    Afghanistan is a potent symbol of the costs inherent in abandoning nations to the lawless forces of anarchy. That alone justifies international efforts to help rebuild the country. Lest there be any doubt, remember Sept. 11, 2001, and its worldwide reverberations. We learned then how a country, shorn of its civic institutions, becomes a vacuum to be filled by criminals and opportunists.

    Oh my heavens, Mr. BAN KI-MOON does not realize that the 9/11 terrorists are OUR terrorists.

    90% of Americans think 9/11 should be re-investigated and greater than 50% think 9/11 was an inside job. Where has Mr. Ki-Moon been spenting his time?
    ~
  42. Chris Lalonde from Singapore writes: Right! When exactly did the Taliban NOT target civilians???
  43. 4Cryin Outloud from Canada writes: When I think back to the people that hyped this war and now have disapeared off the scene it is very difficult to not become incensed everytime more people die on either side of this deplorable mistake euphemistically called our 'mission'. Like some religious need to go and save people through death. Stop trying to justify something that is so fundametally wrong. There is NO justification for wars. We who go to kill are no different than those that would kill us. WE ARE NOT MORE RIGHT, MORE JUSTIFIED, BETTER. War is deplorable and so are those that support it. War is ALWAYS about power and money no matter how many people try and make it a 'mission'.

    And to all those that actually beleive we will be killed by the Taleban terrorists in our homes if we don't kill them first - I can't even comment because you are just so disturbing to me. I can't help but believe you have no capacity to think for yourselves and yet are likely walking around our streets possibly armed with a weapon because you live in fear of boogeymen.
  44. iPhone from Canada writes: .
    :-- R. R. Carriere from Maritimes

    Oh, you are right... the Guardian DID publish this. I thought this was just conspiracy wackos gone wild!! So the Internet IS influencing Main Stream Media.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/sep/25/usa.secondworldwar

    Except:

    George Bush's grandfather, the late US senator Prescott Bush, was a director and shareholder of companies that profited from their involvement with the financial backers of Nazi Germany.
    The Guardian has obtained confirmation from newly discovered files in the US National Archives that a firm of which Prescott Bush was a director was involved with the financial architects of Nazism.

    His business dealings, which continued until his company's assets were seized in 1942 under the Trading with the Enemy Act, has led more than 60 years later to a civil action for damages being brought in Germany against the Bush family by two former slave labourers at Auschwitz and to a hum of pre-election controversy.

    ...
  45. UCant Haveitall from Canada writes: Nothing new in the Taliban letter. Really we knew all along that targeting civilians was part of their master plan...Thanks for putting it in writing, no change, still need to kill them all.
  46. Earl Anthony from Sudbury, Canada writes: I had the first post in which I attacked the Taliban threats. THis was apparently yanked in favour of a pro-Taliban justification.

    The journalist who wrote the article is nothing more than a mouthpiece for the Taliban and the Globe and Mail in posting the article and in removing my post is clearly picking sides.
  47. Political Junkie from Canada writes: iPhone is apparently better informed and a more authoritative source than the Secretary General of the United Nations. Who'd have thunk it!
  48. Leigh Broderick from Canada writes: iPhone from Canada writes: 90% of Americans think 9/11 should be re-investigated and greater than 50% think 9/11 was an inside job.
    _______________________________________________________And with that comment you officially lose the right to be taken seriously in any forum. Why so much denial among people about 9/11? Why is it so hard to comprehend that a bunch of terrorists flew planes into targets because they wanted to kill innocent people and become martyrs?
  49. Gardiner Westbound from Canada writes:
    A U.S. oil pipeline is not worth dying for.
  50. John Ishmael from Brampton ON, Canada writes: Targeting civilians 'accidentally': --- Today's Guardian: ''In order to protect themselves (the British soldiers) launched three rockets all of which hit the target. Unbeknown to the patrol, the civilians were inside the compound at the time,' it said in a statement. - [Sure: the killer occupation dis not know that the compound housed people.]

    Aid NGO's could negotiate with resistance groups in Muslim Afghanistan and avoid the ISAF-NATO-CF. Consider: if the Taleban sent aid groups to help the poor and disadvantaged in Canada what would happen to them? The Taleban or other Resistance to Occupation groups do not have the infrastructure to arrest and jail people they see as agents for their Occupation. The result is that they murder these humanitarian workers who are viewed as extensions of the 'pacification' of Muslim Afghanistan.

    Sure, the loud and brave armchairs of this site will yell about making aid arrangements with the Taleban or Resistance - they prefer to see the workers inserted into a combat zone [all of Muslim Afghanistan] and are surprised when they meet the same fate as Afghan civilians at the hands of Canada-US-UK-NATO.

    Harper-Mckay-Day do assure the aid workers Not to worry mon, just propaganda. Meanwhile, after 10 years of ravaging Muslim Afghanistan and supporting the heroin peddling government, Afghan women are jailed by that government for the crime of being raped, mostly by its US trained security services.

    Those who support Canada's continuing support for this American initiated Occupation of Muslims raise their hands. OK, join the CF because lots more Hillier Heroes may be down the road as we get sucked into an accelerated US invasion of Pakistan.

    In US INVASION OF CANADA AND ITS ABSORPTION, Canadians resist the US occupation with all tools but are sold out by their legislators who are bribed by the US.

    'Where ever the US goes, death, destruction and corruption follow.'

  51. S Boatright from Canada writes: No news here. The Taliban have always targetted innocent civilians - and they will continue to do so.

    They also seem to have an interesting habit of attempting to blame everyone else for the murders they commit too. In this country when someone does that, we still send them to trial and subsequent jail.

    The Taliban are now a weak and pathetic organization, desperately trying to win a losing battle. The evidence is the fact that they now resort to sending letters out to the 'Canadian public'.

    They certainly think that we are a gullible country. Unfortunately some of our citizens are.

    Thankfully, they are a small minority.
  52. Blaine Walker from Ft. Erie, Canada writes: To all you right wing nut jobs that post here, are you people part of the neocon propaganda campaign that has infiltrated the north american news media or are you people just plain gullible.
  53. Old Sam Dark and Dirty from Republic of Newfoundland, Canada writes: Emma Hawthorne from Canada writes: Maybe this notion of simply branding the enemy as evil, refusing to talk to them or find out what their perception of NATO and the relief efforts is, and then continuing to fight them with WWII methods is less than ideal. I would like to hear Mr. Cretien's take on this nonsense and the death and destruction it brings-----------

    Emma to be perfectly honest with you I don't want to hear from Cretien. He is the man that decimated our military then HE sent our troops to Afghanistan with basically no equipment. The troops didn't even have the right color clothing. Cretien is an embarresment to this country as far as the military is concerned and his comments if he made any would not be welcomed.
  54. The Bubble from Canada writes: It's all very strange, strange that the Taliban are talking directly to Canada, Peter MacKay's strange response, 'disgusting' seems inappropriate. The posters trying to describe the situation for us all, to try and give us their perception about what Afghanistan is like or what the Taliban is all about. It seems some posters are at a point they are saying the same things to themselves because they're not sure what to believe and the truth is not something they want and being wrong is not an option. Strange behavior by a confused population.
  55. Tom Robinson from You're a disgrace!!!!!!, Canada writes: The CTV, Globe. CBC and all the other left wing media should be proud of themselves for giving the Taliban terrorists a propaganda tool.

    Now, we can read comments like those before me. Left wing Canadians only care about themselves. Not the military, the Aghan's or anyone else who does not agree with their 'pacifist' ideology.

    You people who print this propaganda should be really proud of yourselves. Never do you print anything good the military is doing, no embedded jouranlists, no nightly 'good news', just Taliban propaganda.

    With all due respect you commies, if this was during WW1 or WW2 or even up to the Korean War, you traitors would have been killed.

    Killed?, you might say. And I say, yup. Slaughtered , like the pathetic pieces of flesh you people are.

    Calling our soldiers 'child killers'? You people , including the media, need some serious head shaking.

    You people are nothing but pieces of garbage for rallying around taliban propaganda.
  56. Canada First from Canada writes: And some Liberals & NDPs want to or think they can negotiate with these uncivilized, barbaric murderers - unbelievable.
  57. Leigh Broderick from Canada writes: John Ishmael, hahahahaha lolololololol. You really hate the non believers, don't ya. You people who hate America and what is stands for are a joke. Canada is America with different money and a different name for measuring amounts. We look the same, talk the same, eat the same, drive the same cars, trade the same goods, watch the same tv, listen to the same music, are associated as being the same, live in North AMERICA, etc etc etc. The only diference is that they have a national identity. We have multi culturalism, yay, look at where thats taking us! The taliban have used a typically Canadian way to get our attention...the strongly worded letter!!! To be followed by an even stronger worded letter!!! Look at us tremble. We are lucky they didn't use the term 'political correctiveness' in that letter, or we would be done for.
  58. Green Konstantin from Canada writes: Send Jack and Celine over there.
  59. Shawn Bull from Canada writes: The Taliban are fighting against a UN mission to stabalize the country. They are not fighting for any noble cause. They want life the way it was before the invasion. They want radical Islam in place.

    Hold your ground UN. This is a just and necessary mission. I am proud of your efforts and have never lost confidence that you will be successful in stabalizing this country and in doing so help stabalize the world. I know you will not run from these murderous Taliban.
  60. Is there anybody out there? from Salt Spring Island, Canada writes: Harper has sucked us into Bush's unending war.
  61. slapdash dapoint from trawna, Canada writes: 'Group says slaying of aid workers was act of 'revenge''

    ---

    revenge for aid. it's amazing these people can follow a thought process required for fanatical adherence to religion. this is what you get when cowards takeover.

    pull our people out to the perimeter of the country and just make sure none of these blood thirsty wastes get out.

    :|
  62. UCant Haveitall from Canada writes: The taliban have nothing to offer the people of A-stan. Best to give them a honorable death.
  63. Brendan Caron from vancouver, Canada writes: Tom Robinson... I take umbrage with the description of pacifist as being the purview of the left. You debase the word. They are poseafists as in posers. Sorry for blowing it.
  64. Bob Macdonald from Liverpool, United Kingdom writes: I support John McCain's idea for a proper troop surge in Afghanistan and a unified command structure (the current NATO/Canadian approach is pure weakness and dithering). Afghanistan needs to be locked down and that is going to require a significant surge in troops to do it. Why? Because under international law that place needs to be stabilised for the sake of the Afghanis and the rest of the world. Just as in Iraq, the only way to do this is to go thick on the ground and hold all territory, not the Canadian approach of fight and flee.
  65. Is there anybody out there? from Salt Spring Island, Canada writes: WAR IS KILLING. KILLING IS WRONG. WHY, MR. HARPER ARE WE FIGHTING?
  66. Green Konstantin from Canada writes: Is there anybody out there? from Salt Spring Island, Canada writes: Harper has sucked us into Bush's unending war.

    ____________
    The Liberals sent us to A-Stan.

    Why don't you just walk to your nearest Arab-owned convenience store and surrender by yourself.
  67. jeff franklin from Canada writes: Thank you Mr. Chretien for keeping C.F.'s out of the illegal Iraq war that was based on @950 Lies as told by a cabal of USA Cut and Runners/ PNAC'ers.

    Just how many C.F. body bags coming out of Iraq would have been satisfactory to Yo Harper! and his puritanical USA Rapturist Handlers?

    Yo Harper! Nice Rug.
  68. Shawn Bull from Canada writes: Is there anybody out there? from Salt Spring Island, Canada writes: WAR IS KILLING. KILLING IS WRONG. WHY, MR. HARPER ARE WE FIGHTING?
    --------------
    Because as you stated, killing is wrong. The Taliban government in Afghanistan supported terroist elements in their country. Terrorists that KILLED in North Africa, Europe and 9/11. We went there to stop this.
  69. Jan Burton from Toronto, Canada writes: Well there you have it, folks. The Taliban making it clear - in writting - that they intend to target innocent civilians AS A MATTER OF POLICY.

    And what's the reaction from the Loony Left to this OBVIOUS violation of the Geneva Conventions? To draw a moral equivelance between that and NATO accidentally killing civilians.

    As if one should have expected anything less.....
  70. c rob from Canada writes: Shawn Bull
    What do you mean 'hold your ground UN'? This is a UN mission in name only. NATO owns it for the most part but the US owns it in the South through Operation Enduring Freedom, which I believe has not been endorsed by the UN.
    I do not want my troops or aid workers dying so construction of a pipeline can eventually occur.
  71. Ted Andrews from Canada writes:
    END THE OCCUPATION!
    TROOPS OUT NOW!
  72. Jan Burton from Toronto, Canada writes: iPhone from Canada writes: '90% of Americans think 9/11 should be re-investigated and greater than 50% think 9/11 was an inside job.'

    -------------------

    Which is why about 20 people show up for the weekly 'Truth movement' rallies at Groud Zero in NYC and why SEVEN people showed up for their Toronto get-together yesterday at Dundas Square (double their usual attendance figure of 3-4).

    In the real world, '9/11 was an inside job' has as much public support as 'Elvis is still alive,' 'the moon landing was fake,' or 'the Holocaust didn't happen.'
  73. Bill Thompson from Calgary, Canada writes: And just how are the Taliban going to tell the difference between an American, Brit, French, German or Canadian aid worker? Simple…They cannot. This is all a very crude form of propaganda on their part. Scumbags.
  74. M Samra from Toronto, ON, Canada writes: When did the mission in Afghanistan go from 'Catch bin Laden' to 'Build a nation'?

    And why are people fine with this shift in ideology?
  75. Shawn Bull from Canada writes: c rob from Canada writes: Shawn Bull What do you mean 'hold your ground UN'? This is a UN mission in name only. NATO owns it for the most part but the US owns it in the South through Operation Enduring Freedom, which I believe has not been endorsed by the UN. I do not want my troops or aid workers dying so construction of a pipeline can eventually occur.
    -------------------------
    I don't agree with that view. I have never believed the pipeline/US war accusation proposed by certain posters. It is an accusation made by those that are blinded by their hate of US/Bush. We are in the south because this is where the Taliban enter Afghanistan via Pakistan. We need more soldiers there and a surge like the one in Iraq.
  76. John Ishmael from BRAMPTON ON, Canada writes:

    More astute commentary from another Empire lovers.

    Green Konstantin from Canada writes: Is there anybody out there? from Salt Spring Island, .... Why don't you just walk to your nearest Arab-owned convenience store and surrender by yourself

    'You should get a wooden medal for that. ....build a boat back home. Or a raft.' Recall your other advise?
  77. Green Konstantin from Canada writes: John Ishmael from BRAMPTON ON, Canada writes:
    'You should get a wooden medal for that. ....build a boat back home. Or a raft.' Recall your other advise?

    ______________
    You obviously do. Hey, you can print this out and put it on your Green Konstantin mantle which must be right next to your Green Jerry shrine and Green Milos shrine. If you don't, it's the terrorists who win.
  78. Shawn Bull from Canada writes: M Samra from Toronto, ON, Canada writes: When did the mission in Afghanistan go from 'Catch bin Laden' to 'Build a nation'? And why are people fine with this shift in ideology?
    ---------------------
    The ideology never shifted. It has always been capture Bin Laden, remove the Taliban and stabalize Afghanistan. The fact that we have turned away from capturing Bin Laden (and his Satanic little side kick) has always been a dissapointment to me. God will punish Bin Laden but I was hoping that we the people would also be able to get our pound of flesh from this insane man.
  79. C R from Canada writes: Wow, has it really been so long since Canada was really involved in the world that so many on here are willing to be bullied and told what to do by a group of people such as the Taliban. Since when do Canadians let fear dictate our actions...so what is next...we remove ourselves from AG, and then the Taliban says remove yourselves from NATO or we will hurt your people and so on and so on.

    This is not a government issue...Libs sent us in...and for a good reason. Harper's name is now attached b/c he is the PM...so what?

    Canadians must be willing to stand up for themselves or we will live forever as a country who is told what to do by everyone else...case in point- the Arctic terratory that is going to be hotly debated in years to come.
  80. Shawn Bull from Canada writes: John Ishmael from BRAMPTON ON: I'm not really interested in playing the name calling game John. If you want to debate our differing views that is fine but your post is condesending and meant to antagonize only.
  81. Green Konstantin from Canada writes: Ishmael from BRAMPTON ON, Canada writes:
    Recall your other advice to new Canadians? >

    _______________
    Hmmmm, is 'learn how to drive' one of them? Because that would be useful.

    Scram Coward from Brampton. Go to your nearest convenience store and surrender. Or taxicab. Either way.
  82. slapdash dapoint from trawna, Canada writes: John Ishmael from BRAMPTON ON:

    you're a 'one step forward, organic jog back' kind of ndp'er, aren't you?

    :|
  83. c rob from Canada writes: Shawn Bull
    Shawn the pipeline was referenced by McKay and his comments cannot be dismissed. One side of his mouth stated that we are not there because of any pipeline. The other side of his mouth stated that Canada would defend 'strategic interests'. Now Shawn, you know and I know that constuction of a pipeline would indeed be a strategic interest and unfortunately outweighs a school. As for Bin Laden, am I the only one who believes he has been dead for quite some time? If Aghanistan was about Bin Laden and his gang of scum, we would have invaded Saudi Arabia.
  84. Hey, that's my armadillo, get your own. from Canada writes: Same old drivel from the same old gang.

    First poster quotes Mackay saying that there is no way to justify these latest killings and asks the question, 'Is there some way to justify the killings of a wedding party -- not the first in Afghanistan-- by NATO forces?'

    The answer, of course, is no. What is the poster's point?

    Others talk about how wonderful the Taliban were at running at Afghanistan. Gosh, and the Nazis were great at running Germany. We should have left them alone too.
  85. K Ottawski from Ottawa, Canada writes: Where can I get a sticker for my car that reads: 'GET OUR TROOPS OUT OF AFGANISTAN NOW'

    From what I read and listen 80-90 % of the canadian population is against this senseless mission
  86. Shawn Bull from Canada writes: c rob: That was a good post. I actually never believed there was a pipeline originally but that has been proven to be wrong on my behalf. I think history has shown that countries that have instability get addressed by the world much quicker when they have oil. I don't argue that point at all.

    My reference to not believing the pipeline argument in the above post is, I believe we are in the south because that is where the Taliban enter and not for gaurding the pipeline.

    The Audia Arabia vs Afghanistan argument is a whol;e different issue. Yes, Saudia Arabia funds radical Islam schools throughout the ME and Asia and this needs to addressed. How I don;t know. Afghanistan housed terrorism and it needed to addressed also as it was. The problem is we did not go in strong enough to sttabalize the country and not give ther Taliban the opprotunity to fight back.

    When Obama or McCain get into office in November you will see a troop surge in Afghanistan.
  87. Compos Mentis from Toronto, Canada writes: This quote from Gandhi, 'My nonviolence does not admit of running away from danger and leaving dear ones unprotected. Between violence and cowardly flight, I can only prefer violence to cowardice. I can no more preach nonviolence to a coward than I can tempt a blind man to enjoy healthy scenes.' In the world we live in it's sometimes necessary to fight for what you believe in, for those like Mr. Ishmael, who seem to feel this isn't appropriate I say, Peace Brother, have a nice life!
  88. Shawn Bull from Canada writes: Sorry for the grammar and spelling in my last post. Typing to fast.
  89. C R from Canada writes:

    Compos Mentis:

    Good quote, good point.
  90. brent mclean from b-town, Canada writes: Killing innoceont aid workers, is this supposed to get people on their side? Who does the Taliban's public relations?
  91. Clive Gingell from Canada writes: Certainly not new, but an interesting phenomenon nonetheless, the perennial juveniles who feel inferior yet somehow superior, who most definitely feels underappreciated, (or not appreciated at all), for his self-identified, (and solely self-recognized), 'genius'.

    Such an individual always feels the necessity, regardless of the circumstances, to fawn over the enemies of those he lives amongst, ( that'll teach them not to appreciate me), while spitting on his neighbours, and reinforces his delusion of superiority by adopting an air of faux-sophistication and scoffing at everything.

    Sad, sad pathetic individuals, super-heroes in their own minds, but forever stuck in their less than adequate alter-ego personae.

    They haunt these forums.

    And they are not our friends.

  92. diana diana from Canada writes: When is there going to be a real offensive by NATO forces - read the USA? We have been over there stop gapping and Canadian lives have been lost for nothing so far. Bush said he would be in and out of Iraq in six weeks - remember 'shock and awe'. Get in there and get the job done - kill the Taliban in order to save lives and allow people to live in peace and prosperity. Move them all over to the Pakistan border and let the Pakistan army deal with them. There is no other way to fight evil.
  93. Link Hogbrow from Canada writes:
    If the Talaban had nuclear ied's, do you think they'd hesitate to use them?

    They were in what passes for control of Afganistan. Their policy was rule by theocracy and the gun. Their policy now is theocracy and the gun. They want to recover their power, and revert to the 9th century system they had in place. They are savages, pure and simple.

    The letter is classic divide and conquer propaganda that tells us nothing we do not already know. This is war, its not a game of cricket.
  94. jimmie rabbit from toronto, Canada writes: i fail to see how the war in afghanistan has increased canadian security. here is evidence that quite the opposite has occurred.
  95. jimmie rabbit from toronto, Canada writes: Link Hogbrow from Canada writes:
    If the Talaban had nuclear ied's, do you think they'd hesitate to use them?

    They were in what passes for control of Afganistan. Their policy was rule by theocracy and the gun. Their policy now is theocracy and the gun. They want to recover their power, and revert to the 9th century system they had in place. They are savages, pure and simple.

    The letter is classic divide and conquer propaganda that tells us nothing we do not already know. This is war, its not a game of cricket.

    >>neanderthals live
  96. DAVID DIVER from Comox, Canada writes: It sounds like the tough guys on this post have made their positions clear -don't mess with us we're simply the best when it comes to warfare, just ask anyone in the world, Germany, etc. What bullshit. Canadian troops are not superhumans and the Canadian military is not up there leading the rest of the world. Stop grandizing and dreaming of conquering Afghanistan - it has become the battlefield for attracting more Islamic 'warriors' than we could possibly put down - sheer numbers and determination to defend a historic Islamic country gives them the advantage when it comes to a protracted war..... We are in for the long haul and thanks to our government(s) desire to appease the Americans (Hi Jay -nice to see you back giving your perspective from the good old USA) we can expect some casualties on our own soil. But you tough guys can take it on the chin, eh? It's in the cards when one goes to war?
    Keep the rhetoric up but tie down your women - they might not be too happy if their children are targetted.....
  97. Rollie Beethoven from Canada writes: Given the futility of this war. The unfortunate response to this warning is fire must be fought with fire. Nato should double the number of troops and erradicate the Taliban from the face of the earth. There is no other way out for Nato except retreating like the Russians did earlier on leaving the mess that Nato now is dealing with.
  98. Loki Peterson from Toronto, Canada writes: This is Canada's prize for our complicity in American crimes. Thanks, John Manley. You have served your masters well!
  99. Richard Soley from writes: R. Carriere rightly points out that it is strange for our media to be fostering propaganda from such as the Taliban, where are the real stories about our men and women, the work our medical people are doing, the engineers building clinics, roads, bridges? Possible effort here to make political pressure? On another note as far as the Taliban are concerned this commentary is just another example of a sad misguided zealotry at work. In a so-called enemy that uses civilians as cover, hostages, and retreats into the civilian population there can be no credibility put in whatever they say. Certain posters here decry the loss of civilian childern but when civilians are in a combat zone there are rules to follow, break these rules at your own peril. For the John Ishmeal's of the world your lack of information and desire to cause harm by loose and ill formed remarks is helping to harden the position we have taken against these Terrorists, if they were here we would have petty and small minded individuals like Ishmeal seeking to work with these people and taking their hate and fear out on the weak and the innocent. I support the work our Soldiers do, they work in incredabily difficult conditions and help people where only brutetality existed before, Nato must stay the course, the world has no place for 'Taliban, Al-Queda, or the cowards who support them!
  100. Scott H from United States writes: I agree with R. Carriere. Why is the Globe interviewing and giving an outlet to the spokesman for the enemy?

    I await the slew of usual suspects to criticize my use of the word 'enemy'. But that is exactly what the Taliban is. Their coddling by Canadian meda is inappropriate.
  101. M M from canada, Canada writes: I am really annoyed at the way the main stream media has choosen to become the promotion/proproganda arm of the Taliban. MSM should report something like this, but they don't have to go on and on and on about it and speculate about what this will mean for our defence strategy etc. etc. etc. let alone give a voice to all the dissenters in Canada. I wouldloe to see a few media outlets charged with aiding and abetting the enemy, because that is what they are doing!!!
  102. John Ishmael from BRAMPTON ON, Canada writes: Compos: - If the Empire next door were to invade Canada, most of us pacificists would be fighting them - with every taleban commando method we could muster. Most Canadians do not want us to involved in killing Muslims, occupying their country and protecting a USI TAPI.

    Many of our politicians would be making deals for a place within the Occupation. These are the guys who: 1] love NAFTA; 2] sent our lads and lasses to be chewed up in Muslim Afghanistan to prove to our trade masters that we don't deserve a soft-wood or beef bullying; 3] have agreed to defend the TAPI route with Canadian lives: 4] Agreed to permit the Marines or US 'security forces' to operate in Canada at will in the event of their believing that they have a 'security' issue in Canada; 5] Gazetted our capitulation to American 'security' agents carrying weapons in and out of Canada without checking them in.... 6] have not objected to NATO declaring its intent to 'pre-emptive' use of nukes on non-nuke countires or 'groups' [Taleban] and thus being a part of this blood thirsty Crusade for Empire. - complete this list

    >>>Compos Mentis from Toronto, Canada writ