Join 3,433 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


You simply can't trust French speakers!
May 5, 2003 9:26 AM   Subscribe

The new rogue nations: those that care too much about liberties. e.g. Canada
posted by magullo (54 comments total)

 
Maybe not quite a double post, but linked here.
posted by George_Spiggott at 9:38 AM on May 5, 2003


The State Department report on global terrorism for 2002 suggests that while Canada has been helpful in the fight against terrorism, it doesn't spend enough on policing and places too much emphasis on civil liberties.

Given Canada's emphasis on civil liberties and maintenance of its principles in avoiding goose-lock-stepping into Iraq with a certain cowardly invader, it is apparent that the "land of the free, home of the brave" moniker really belongs with our northern neighbor....and not with the United, Terrorized, Reactionary States of America.
posted by fold_and_mutilate at 9:40 AM on May 5, 2003


Haha, f&m, good show!
posted by xmutex at 9:42 AM on May 5, 2003


their purple plains are more majestic, too.
posted by quonsar at 9:46 AM on May 5, 2003


Here we fuckin' go again. What is the point of this post? You find ONE phrase in an entire article of the Ottawa Citizen and make a post about it... opening the doors for a sure-to-be America bash fest. Fuckin' ridiculous. america sucks, Canada sucks, France sucks, Bush sucks, the moon sucks, "Yer cool", you suck. Do you people ever tire of this horseshit?
posted by Witty at 9:47 AM on May 5, 2003


Well, 'Home of the Brave' might be stretching it, F&M - and Canada doesn't have our free speech absolutism. Still, short of Scandinavia or the fairly xenophobic (in a nice way, really) Switzerland - where else are you going to go?

My objective for the next five years of my life is to leave the United States and ditch my citizenship, with Canada being my first choice (I speak German reasonably well so Switzerland wouldn't be too large of a problem, but it's one of the hardest countries in the world to become a citizen of, whereas Canada is extremely easy for US citizens) of destination.
posted by Ryvar at 9:49 AM on May 5, 2003


The danger of indulging trolls is that they shall everafter come to your door to sup.
posted by UncleFes at 9:53 AM on May 5, 2003


I say we nuke the hosers. Oh wait, I'm canadian. Nevermind.
posted by blue_beetle at 9:59 AM on May 5, 2003


I'd never thought I'd see a police state that was en vogue, the United States.

By the way, Witty, you're an idiot.
posted by The Jesse Helms at 9:59 AM on May 5, 2003


Ok Jesse... tell me what aspect of this article, we as a collective, are supposed to explore? I'll be the idiot and you try to teach me. Tell me what makes this a worth-while post.
posted by Witty at 10:06 AM on May 5, 2003


Which nation has, since the end of WWII, been involved in the most extra-territorial wars?

Which nation has, since the end of WWII, built the largest arsenal of weapons of mass destruction?

Which nation has, since the end of WWII, been most involved in supporting military revolutions against democratic governments?

Which nation has, since the end of WWII, been most involved in supporting dictatorships?

Which nation has demonstrated that it is the most dangerous rogue nation in the world?
posted by five fresh fish at 10:09 AM on May 5, 2003


And your point is?
posted by Witty at 10:13 AM on May 5, 2003


Witty: Personally, I find the balance between personal freedoms and group protection interesting. It seems in recent events the U.S. has thrown away personal liberties in the name of fighting terrorism. In the end, defeating the very freedoms they fight for. Its a scarry thing really, and I'm hoping my home,Canuckistan doesn't follow suit...
posted by Pink Fuzzy Bunny at 10:17 AM on May 5, 2003


I only came back to the states for a girl. I came back right after Bush won, and I have watched "my country" get ripped off its moorings. Do they have girls in Canada?
posted by Ignatius J. Reilly at 10:17 AM on May 5, 2003


IGR: There's a law against ugly girls in Montreal...
posted by Space Coyote at 10:25 AM on May 5, 2003


IJR: There's a law against ugly girls in Montreal...
posted by Space Coyote at 10:26 AM on May 5, 2003


"Ma'am I'm afraid you're too ugly to have civil liberties 'round here."

Wow, Canada really -is- a paradise.
posted by Ryvar at 10:31 AM on May 5, 2003


Personally, I find the balance between personal freedoms and group protection interesting.

That's great. But is this post really what you're looking for? Isn't this just a link to an article? It's not even that interesting of a read... it's just a vague summary. There's nothing that's even new.
posted by Witty at 10:32 AM on May 5, 2003


All these fabulous derails aside, I think the point here is that America is supposed to be the country that values liberty above all things, including (perhaps even especially) personal safety. So for a US official to publicly criticise another country for actually being what we claim to be is... oh, pick your adjective: sad? ironic? hilarious? pitiful? a sign that the terrorists won? They'll all do.
posted by George_Spiggott at 10:37 AM on May 5, 2003


Ryvar, think the Netherlands - they are extremely sympathetic to the USA and its people while enjoying a completely different outlook on life. Real smart fellows, but the weather does kind of suck.

Witty, the USA denouncing excessive liberties in another country is a new low even in the current climate. Clear proof that the situation is really getting worse by the minute - how's that for unexplored territory? Or perhaps you would like to defend the government's position on this attack on liberties? Bashing is what you're doing, BTW - flogging the post without offering any alternative. What is it that you want to explore and cannot explore due to my post?
posted by magullo at 10:37 AM on May 5, 2003


Do you people ever tire of this horseshit?

The short answer is no.

Bashing conservatives, President Bush, southerners, the US, republicans, suv owners, conservative jews (nasty neocons), Christians, and anyone or anything that is even remotely non liberal is metafilter's number one hobby.

The number two hobby is insulting anyone they don't agree with, such as TJH calling you an idiot.
posted by Beholder at 10:44 AM on May 5, 2003


Eh, Canada's not so free as it sounds from down south. Canada Customs has a long and continuing history of discriminating against homosexuals; "freedom of speech" is a suggestion, not an absolute right; there hasn't been a federal election where the outcome was in question for a decade; our Prime Minister has the sort of powers that all you folks down there are worried about Bush _trying_ to get; and most of the much-vaunted social services which draw left-wing types up here are in actual practice utter shit (I say as a regular Ontarian who had to wait three hours for triage back under the Bob Rae NDP). Nothing's particularly rosy here, though perhaps it's a little less bleak than the States under Bush.
posted by Pseudoephedrine at 10:45 AM on May 5, 2003


If you actually read it, the "civil liberties" line is by the Ottawa reporter, not State. What state actually said was:

"Some US law-enforcement officers have expressed concern that Canadian privacy laws, as well as funding levels for law enforcement, inhibit a fuller and more timely exchange of information and response to requests for assistance. Also, Canadian laws and regulations intended to protect Canadian citizens and landed immigrants from Government intrusion sometimes limit the depth of investigations."

It's plain in a context of terrorism that what they're talking about is Canadian borders being excessively porous and Canada not providing as much information as State would like about who's entering or passing through. Given the couple of near-misses from terrs entering through Canada, it doesn't seem crazy even if it's easy enough to disagree with it. Also note that the original report is far more diplomatic than the news story -- the report does not directly criticize, it merely reports the criticism of others (which I'm led to believe is a noticeable difference).
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 10:53 AM on May 5, 2003


metafilter's number one hobby

Bashing metafilter is metafilter's number two hobby. Particularly trying to derail out of uncomfortable topics with squawks about mefi's supposed liberal slant. If mefi has such a liberal slant, how come every thread includes this kind of diversionary liberal-bashing? Seems like the anti-liberals are pretty well represented; in fact it's hard to imagine what they'd do if they didn't have lots of liberal boogeymen to bash! Certainly not discuss the topics themselves: that's what they're trying to prevent.
posted by George_Spiggott at 10:57 AM on May 5, 2003


magullo: I don't need to offer an alternative front page post. The post was your responsibility. Number one, I don't think it qualifies as a decent FPP based on the guidlines. Number two, because of the lack of effort in crafting a reasonable FPP around this topic (that Pink Fuzzy Bunny finds so interesting), you've simply left a very vague phrase [...places too much emphasis on civil liberties.] to do "all the talkin'".

George_Spiggott: You go ahead and spin it what ever way makes you feel better.
posted by Witty at 11:04 AM on May 5, 2003


George, it's not that they're well-represented. They've just got the biggest mouths.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 11:05 AM on May 5, 2003


Witty - Number one, you can safely leave the enforcement of the guidelines to Matt. Number two, the idea behind the post is to be short, blunt and vulgar, thus mimicking a certain style that's smashing barriers these days. If it annoyed you, all I can say is: welcome to the club.
posted by magullo at 11:27 AM on May 5, 2003


Magullo: re: The Netherlands

Sounds good, I'll read up on it. I moved to Seattle from New York because I prefer the weather here, so I think I'd handle the Netherlands OK.
posted by Ryvar at 11:29 AM on May 5, 2003


Oh, Witty. Here we fuckin' go again. What is the point of your comments? You find ONE FPP in an entire day on MetaFilter and make five empty comments about it... opening the doors for a sure-to-be trollish derail attempt. Fuckin' ridiculous. This post sucks, liberals suck, people maing fun of Bush suck, you suck. Do you ever tire of this horseshit?
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 11:32 AM on May 5, 2003


george_spiggott: Seems like the anti-liberals are pretty well represented; in fact it's hard to imagine what they'd do if they didn't have lots of liberal boogeymen to bash! Certainly not discuss the topics themselves: that's what they're trying to prevent.

Don't be dim, george - witty's point was that the link and indeed the thread are just as the Oakland of Gertrude's childhood - there's no there there... There's nothing to discuss, there's only the tedium another "America sux!" "America's great!" whine-in.

(On preview: XQUZYPHYP: Bashing Witty again? Do you ever tire of this horeshit?)
posted by JollyWanker at 11:33 AM on May 5, 2003


IJR: There's a law against ugly girls in Montreal...

[off-topic] THANK YOU LORD for someone else noticing this unparalleled phenomenon. [/off-topic]

On preview: JollyWanker, it helps if you read the entire thread, m'kay?
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 11:43 AM on May 5, 2003


I can understand why guys like Witty would be so grouchy. I'd be pissed too if I found out my favoured leaders were trying to stab me in the back.
posted by Space Coyote at 11:43 AM on May 5, 2003


The Netherlands are a lot like Seattle/Portland, weather-wise. Only you can fight the depression with narcotics....
posted by ph00dz at 11:54 AM on May 5, 2003


Maybe the US has a point about the Policing (if not the liberties thing). I saw Bowling for Columbine, those Canadians are too lazy to even lock their front doors....(j/k)
posted by stifford at 12:16 PM on May 5, 2003


It's not like it's just one aberrrant little nugget of "weird news." The thing is, it's a freaking trend, yo! This FPP is just another stone on the cairn that commemorates the apogee of freedom in this country.

Witty, have you ever considered changing your name? You could at least flame away without all the false advertising.
posted by DenOfSizer at 12:33 PM on May 5, 2003


Wow.

An article containing a complaint that another country's excessive freedom complicates US law-enforcement officials' efforts is something I would have expected to see only in the Onion.

The last straw -- or the final warning, I guess -- will be if potential immigrants all start blowing off the US in favor of Canada instead.
posted by alumshubby at 12:36 PM on May 5, 2003


It's not like it's just one aberrrant little nugget of "weird news." The thing is, it's a freaking trend, yo! This FPP is just another stone on the cairn that commemorates the apogee of freedom in this country.

That's the point. If it WERE an "aberrrant little nugget of weird news.", then it might be more worthy of an FPP. But it's not... it's nothing new. It doesn't even have anything to bite into. There are plenty of other threads on this topic that this "freaking trend", this "stone on the cairn" could have been added to. It's just a cheap ass excuse to start another "America sux!" "America's great!" whine-in.

The post itself is just as much of a troll as ANYthing I've said in this thread (although I don't agree that I have done anything of the sort). If there were any substance to this thread, then I might guilty of derailing. But...
posted by Witty at 12:49 PM on May 5, 2003


Setting the record straight, I think I speak for most:

America: doesn't suck
Current American Administration: could suck the chrome off a trailer hitch.
posted by Space Coyote at 12:55 PM on May 5, 2003


You're all a bunch of Nazis.

There, I said it.

Will the last person out of the thread please shut off the lights? thanks
posted by shadow45 at 1:08 PM on May 5, 2003


Pseudoephedrine, which part of this is just a suggestion?

From the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms:

2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:

(a) freedom of conscience and religion;
(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;
(c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and
(d) freedom of association.

posted by mzanatta at 1:20 PM on May 5, 2003


The USA's religious right has never forgiven Canada for banning jack chick's hate tracts.
posted by Iax at 1:28 PM on May 5, 2003


Jack Chick's tracts are banned in Canada? Since when?
posted by monkeymike at 1:33 PM on May 5, 2003


. . . and do they need copies delivered?
posted by hackly_fracture at 1:40 PM on May 5, 2003


Mzanatta> The opening clause for one, which says: "The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society."

Also section 33, which says: "33. (1) Parliament or the legislature of a province may expressly declare in an Act of Parliament or of the legislature, as the case may be, that the Act or a provision thereof shall operate notwithstanding a provision included in section 2 or sections 7 to 15 of this Charter."

You just quoted the very section 2 that can be countermanded by the "notwithstanding" clause. The "notwithstanding" clause is used as the basis for a whole host of social engineering schemes. Everything from the Ontario Human Rights Commission to child pornography to obscene materials (esp. homosexual and lesbian pornography) to the Indian Act to inciting genocide to the Quebec "language police" is covered under regulations made under the auspices of section 33.

Sections 7-15 cover your basic rights to be free from arbitrary detainment and search. They're of course, famously undermined by the War Powers Act, itself grandfathered into law under section 33. You have no absolute rights in Canada, and no one pretends you do.
posted by Pseudoephedrine at 1:44 PM on May 5, 2003


Metafilter: Do you ever tire of this horeshit?
posted by grum@work at 2:29 PM on May 5, 2003


In fairness, I wouldn't say that relentlessly trying to shut down discussions one doesn't like is an especially right-wing trait. Most of us are probably aware of what happens when a pro-lifer or an anti-affirmative-action representative tries to hold a talk on a university campus. Free speech suddenly has few defenders among those who would normally claim to defend it with their lives.

But whether you're on the right or on the left, pretending that you're not doing it even as you do it is laughable. Certainly six or seven posts to the effect that the topic is "not worth discussing" is completely transparent. If it truly were not worth discussing, it wouldn't be worth busting your ass trying to get people to stop discussing it, would it.
posted by George_Spiggott at 3:31 PM on May 5, 2003


"Busting your ass" is a matter of opinion. I would hardly call it that. You pretending that there's really anything to "discuss" is equally as laughable. You'll notice that there isn't even a wiff of an attempt at one. Is that all my fault? Please. The only decent material that came out this was a quick chat between Pseudoephedrine and mzanatta... and even slightly on topic. The only thing I tried to shutdown (to use your words) was what I referred to in my first post.

Feel free to discuss George... no one is stopping you.
posted by Witty at 3:50 PM on May 5, 2003


I thought the purpose of the post was to discuss Witty?

[/confused]
posted by hank_14 at 4:09 PM on May 5, 2003


The only decent material that came out this was a quick chat between Pseudoephedrine and mzanatta

All of which was info taken out of every sort of context, so there was no real value in it, and anyone who doesn't know any better walks away badly informed.

It's weird when people get all pit bull over a thread they don't think has a right to exist. All you're doing is extending it's life, racking up the comment count which then that draws more people to it. If it's such a bad example of a FPP then it makes more sense to ignore it, no?
posted by zarah at 5:09 PM on May 5, 2003


In fairness, I wouldn't say that relentlessly trying to shut down discussions one doesn't like is an especially right-wing trait.

Yeah, that's why all those right-wingers stole the copies of the student paper with the David Horowitz ad... the left has its own ways of stifling discourse, and some of them are more subtle than the right's, but they exist nonetheless.

Attempting to shut up people who disagree with you is a universal human impulse. Everyone needs to be on guard against it, right and left.
posted by kindall at 5:25 PM on May 5, 2003


This was on slashdot today, check it out, over 1300 comments (most articles average around 300 to 400). Looks like this article really touched a nerve over there, mostly positive for Canada.
posted by bobo123 at 6:37 PM on May 5, 2003


You know, come to think of it, the moon does suck!
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 10:12 PM on May 5, 2003


The one on slashdot was *really* bad. People there seemed to think that State's objections, such as they were, had something to do with pot, which it plainly doesn't in context.

Again, in real life, the context of the statement makes it fairly clear that what State is objecting to* is the porosity of the Canadian border and the laws that make it hard for Canada to tell us when probable-terrs have arrived there and are moving south.

*or, more accurately, reporting others' objections to
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 10:13 PM on May 5, 2003


What's a terr? Are they so common that we need to abbreviate the name to make it sound catchy?
posted by Space Coyote at 4:31 PM on May 6, 2003


« Older McCarthy Hearings Published....  |  Executive Pay-Day... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments