Wednesday, December 26, 2007

Peter MacKay: Global Village Idiot

Estranged from both honesty and honour, Peter MacKay chooses Christmas to deliver his master's message. Of course, the terminally stupid will clamour to his side because their bottomless hatred of the moslem middle east will not allow for an opportunity to spew to go by unspittled.

So to Peter MacKay a challenge, if his many "concerns" about "certainly Iran" hold any water, if these deeply undiplomatic and confrontational statements are something he feels he can stand behind, then he and Harper must declare war on Iran. To do otherwise colours them as either cowards or craven liars. In fact, if he is bold enough to use the holiday for this purpose, he must be intensely sure of his standing and a declaration of war should be forthcoming. There can be no other response to these accusations. By stating that a sovereign nation is supplying arms against our soldiers and abetting our enemies in open conflict, well, that describes acts of aggressive war.

When do we invade Pete? Fat fucking Steve seems to think that supporting the troops means getting more of them killed. Fat fucking Steve thinks it makes him look like a player on the international stage and his ego demands nothing less. He wants to look like a player. Well here's the big chance to get ahead of the game and lead. You popinjays want to be tough guys for the world, well put up or shut the fuck up. How about calling that big press conference, all the microphones, the drama of flash photography and the stentorian address, Canada declares war on Iran.

We can borrow fifty bucks and fuel up a couple of boats to head off and invade. All those other countries can come along if they like, I'm sure Mr. Cheney would arrange for some assistance, he's a fucking stand up guy. When he isn't snoozing through important events, he's all about the big time killing. Of course you have proof positive, right Pete? What else could explain such bold words? Never mind those doubting Omars, like Omar Samad, Afghanistan's Ambassador to Canada. What the fuck does he know about the situation that Peter MacKay wouldn't know? I mean come on, Peter fuckin' MacKay, that's the very soul of gravitas there.

Well here's what Omar has to say:

But Omar Samad, the top Afghan diplomat in Canada, told CTV Newsnet on Wednesday that there is no evidence about where the IEDs actually originated and who brought them to Afghanistan.
"Iran is a neighbor and we have good relations," he said. "The point is -- and the questions that have to be answered (and) are being looked at as far as who is involved in this. Is this a smuggling issue? Is this a policy issue by some government? Is this maybe an attempt by arms dealers to bring arms from a certain source?"

How could it be any clearer, Iran who freely provided support and intelligence to overthrow the Taliban and help install the Karzai government, obviously wants a do-over. Because, uh, because of so there and they hate our freedom over here so we have to liberate them over there. The godless bastards have the gall to not attack the Afghanis or us. How could it be any clearer? They haven't got a nuclear weapons program and they haven't attacked us and they haven't been proven to have anything to do with this arms business, jeeziz, they haven't done all of those things to make us look bad and lull us into a false sense of security. Sneaky damned not-Arabs.

The fact that Canada requested American Ambassador Wilkins accompany MacKay and Hillier on this little outing means nothing suspicious okay. Don't go there, he's just a great guy and they like him. He tells good stories on the plane. They borrowed his car for the ride to the airport or something. Ignore it, pretend he wasn't there, it means nothing. What could it possibly mean? Maybe Pete was trying to be nice to him, kiss up a little and maybe score one of sweet Condi's cell numbers. One that doesn't go to an OTB in the Bronx.

Peter MacKay had best be stepping up with something better than "concerns" if he's going to go shooting his fool mouth off. It is unbecoming of a Canadian Minister of the Queen's Government to be casting unfounded accusations about on that world stage. If Peter MacKay is a decent man, a statesman, and if the government he represents was one that cared a fig for honour, he will either produce compelling evidence or he will apologize to the people of Iran and resign from a post that is clearly beyond his ability. If our government is determined that Iran be our enemy, then let it be for something that Iran has actually done and something that we can prove. This sort of petty brinksmanship is un-Canadian and it just won't do.


Raphael Alexander said...

Ok, ok, you've overstated your point now. By the way, I wonder how well you can dress up that Islamic Republic in sheep's clothing. The Bush-Cheney administration may have been an impressive show in "what not to do" during the past 8 years, but the Iranians have hardly been a role model on the world stage either. If you weren't so busy burying Mr.MacKay you would pay a decent homage to the Islamic Republic as well. After all, they make social conservatives in Canada look like Church Street "queers in chaps" by comparison.

Ti-Guy said...

but the Iranians have hardly been a role model on the world stage either.

This is so typically "conservative." Believing something without any actual evidence.

I have major problems with Iran. It's a totalitarian theocracy and enables all kind of human rights abuses. But I won't, for one minute, believe it's the biggest fucking threat we face, and I'm surely not going to let a cretinous, moral degenerate like Peter MacKay make a case for war with precious little evidence.

Smarten up or shut the fuck up, Raphael.

Raphael Alexander said...

ti-guy, tone it down and read what I wrote to PSA earlier:

"Well, IF you were correct in that those were his motives, I would be in agreement. I don't want to go to war with Iran, and I wouldn't support the Conservative government to do so."

It would be nice if you could hurl some of those pejoratives at Iran for a while, too. I mean... "It's a totalitarian theocracy and enables all kind of human rights abuses" right?

Ti-Guy said...

It would be nice if you could hurl some of those pejoratives at Iran for a while, too. I mean...

What material use would there be for me to start hurling invective? You CON nut-jobs are doing fine job of that all by yourselves, so you don't need my help.

Read up on the history of Iran. That country has been subjected to so much subterfuge from the West that I think the worst idea would be to rattle its cage with trumped up charges and lies to promote a casus belli. We already went through this with Iraq, and there's no bloody way I'm going to support a second act to this stupid drama.

Objectively, Iran means very little to us; we do very little trade with the country and cultural ties aren't that strong. In this matter, Canada should just butt out. Let the Americans, the Israelis and the British shit that bed if they want to, but don't ask me, as a Canadian, to go along with this folly.

Raphael Alexander said...

Let the Americans, the Israelis and the British shit that bed if they want to, but don't ask me, as a Canadian, to go along with this folly.

Who's asking you? Oh. Right. Peter MacKay.

By the way, I don't think I've earned the rank of CON nut-job yet. I'm still a lowly private nut-job.

Ti-Guy said...

By the way, I don't think I've earned the rank of CON nut-job yet. I'm still a lowly private nut-job.

Keep reading CanWest and Sun newspapers. You'll get there eventually.

Lindsay Stewart said...

golly raphael, isn't the case i'm overstating the one desired by our esteemed friends to the ever so right. that is the purpose of this charade, to wave one's arms about and make expressions that lead to the desired end, in this case further conflict with the devilish brown enemy du jour.

i think i'd be pretty upset if i were afghani. to think that after more than half a decade of creeping failure, the mission has no end. how rude to begin this dance in the scorning parlour of the unglamorous sister. but i haven't cast the appropriate aspersions upon the persians, can't have that. the iranian regime is a backwards, nasty collection of fundamentalist theocrats who take their bitter pleasures in repression and spite. they are nasty old men whose eyes are cast upon the imagined bounties of allah's rewards. like pat robertson or mike huckabee in a robe.

they are also consummate politicians. and as villainous and wicked as they are, they are not fools. the enemy of my enemy is my friend? they are far wiser than that. when your enemy is killing your enemy and suffering losses of life and treasure for the trouble, you hope that it lasts forever.

by that logic, if the taliban are the enemy and the americans (representing the west) are the enemy, then what stops iran from allying with america against the taliban? after all, the taliban is right next door and present a long term proximate threat. eventually america will either come to tis senses or suffer some internal crisis that will necessitate a draw down of forces.

i suppose the only thing stopping such an effort at co-operation would be the lack of faith on the american side. we have noted that iran acted against the taliban, offered assistance to their being deposed. their reward, dick cheney and the hate squad, threats of nuclear bunker busters and the rhetoric of attack.

we know that iran has a young population and we know that many of them want the political culture liberalized. how do we support those nascent impulses toward modernity? we demonize and threaten and fib. well fucking done.

and oh yes, the nasty old mullahs and ayatollahs are indeed nasty and old. and by isolating them we help keep them entrenched in power. so what is your point raphael? i can't be too mean to mackay when he pulls this kind of bullshit stunt unless i remind everyone that the iranians are monsters that deserve everything cheney thinks they have coming. sorry but i don't have any more respect for our stupid old war mongering bastards than i have for theirs.

if our leaders want to go after yet another middle eastern nation, they should achieve their objectives in at least one of their other wars first.

Antonia Z said...

Correct me if I am wrong but doesn't IED mean improvised explosive device? Isn't that fancy talk for homemade bomb? Doesn't using IED really obscure the fact that the mighty armoured US troops -- and innocent Iraqis -- are being blown to bits by by bombs any teenagers can put together pretty much with stuff from under the kitchen sink? Is Iran exporting AA batteries and alarm clocks into Iraq? Or am I missing something?