Poll: over 40% of Canadian teens think America is "evil"

From my reckoning, 60 percent of Canadian teenagers think America is not evil.

noitsme

… and lately I'd say that's probably a damn sight better than a survey of A2Kers would reveal.
Plus, it's wayyyyyyyyy better than the only 59% of American teenagers that think there are some straight Canadians, eh!

I don't recall giving you the o.k. to use the eh, eh.

Does this guy have the authority to do so?

And why are you very mad?

ehBeth isn't very mad, it's her out of control emoticon. Keep that thing on a leash there, eh?

The cat with the golf balls was fairly interesting too..

Bill, nah, I knew his name, though I guess I messed up the Habibi for Habibe. See, I have this friend named Hashibe...

Be careful Osso... I got stuck on the P earlier today... and barely escaped with my life!

Damnit Cav: Beth said eh!, you said eh? So, is it eh! or eh?, eh? And don't you dare say éh! or éh?, eh?

Uh, oh, whatsa P? (hands over ears..)

Just the Letter P as in Paul and lots and lots of other words... I'm goin nuts but you'll be ok :wink:

Ah, you mean you still have computer clampup?

No, maybe you don't mean that.

P... p... pffft.

It's not worth linking Osso, but I don't want to leave you hanging either. Here.

OB,

I laughed my ass off when I read that thread earlier today...

Speaking of threads, this sure was a fun and lively one today, eh?

Yup, now you with the, eh? Instead of, eh! ? I gather either is fine, eh? (Shakes head slowly while thinking "hosers").

The first time I was telling you something.

The second time I was asking you something.

You know what I'm saying, eh?

nimh, it is very difficult for me to believe that the German foreign minister believed Saddam did not have WMD when Germany sold Saddam so much of the stuff and provided him with almost all of the technology to make them.

Following is a number of related links. Pay particular attention to the first three. There is also one somewhere in the mix related to Canada's belief in Saddam's WMD.

This is only a tiny sampling of the information out there on this subject.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EB05Ak02.html

http://medienkritik.typepad.com/blog/

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/richlowry/rl20030603.shtml

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110004612

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=%2Fnews%2F2004%2F01%2F21%2Fuhutton.xml&sSheet=%2Fportal%2F2004%2F01%2F21%2Fixportaltop.html

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,105086,00.html

http://www.captaincynic.com/thread.php3/thrdid=23949-u-frmid=23

http://www.oregonlive.com/news/oregonian/david_reinhard/index.ssf?/base/editorial/108384467099110.xml

http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0%2C5478%2C10022839%255E663%2C00.html

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/world/iraq/20040210-1447-us-iraq-military.html

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/01/09/1073437458359.html?oneclick=true

http://www.insightmag.com/news/2004/05/11/World/Investigative.Reportsaddams.Wmd.Have.Been.Found-670120.shtml

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/09/iraqdecade.pdf

http://www.glennbeck.com/news/01302004.shtml

http://www.cdi.org/terrorism/bush-un.cfm

http://www.pixunlimited.co.uk/sys-files/Politics/documents/2002/09/24/dossier.pdf

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110003053

LOL

No offence, but how difficult is this, Foxfyre?

I already wrote: "Its not that they necessarly thought Iraq didn't have WMD".

Its that they were not convinced that we knew Iraq did still have WMD.

Thats what Fischer's quote was about: "I am not convinced". You can easily google it up if you want <shrugs>.

Its about saying, "we dont know". Dont know enough, dont know for sure. That's what's between claiming Saddam had 'em - and claiming he didn't have 'em.

(But I've been confronted so often here with the insistence that if I say its not white, I must mean its black (or vice versa), that I'm starting to think it must be some cultural thing.)

As for Germany having "sold Saddam much of the stuff", thats neither here nor there. We know he used to have WMD - that part's not contested. At issue was whether he still had them. We know that most of what he had was destroyed during the inspection process in the 90s. Again, it was the US admin's assertion that we knew he still possessed some - possessed enough to pose an acute danger to global security, in fact. Thats the part most of the other UN countries were not buying. Both the assertion that we knew he still had them (that inspections were not necessary to corroborate it); and that we had evidence that he might well soon use them to (help others) attack America or other third countries.

One word: inspections. France, Germany etc wanted the inspections to go on. They wouldn't need them to go on if they believed Saddam DIDNT have WMD; they wouldnt need them to go on if they were for sure Saddam DID still have WMD. The bottom line was, we didnt know for sure. And if we didnt know for sure, we shouldnt go to war about it. The inspections were ongoing. The inspectors were doing their work. They were asking for more time.

Bush, Powell and Rumsfeld swore that there was no reason to worry: their intel told them that we knew for sure - hell, we even knew exactly under which tree and everything. Fischer c.s. indicated that the suggested proof they put forward was unconvincing. The American admin retorted that it had more evidence, but couldn't share it because of security considerations - we just had to believe them that they knew.

Turned out they were wrong. And we had good reason not to be convinced.

(On an aside, skimming through your links, I can't help thinking you would do better to rely less on editorials and opinion pieces to get your facts ... I mean, its not all opinion pieces you've linked in, I know, but it seems to be the lion's share ... and those are by definition more about interpretations and assertions than facts and data.)

That was exactly my though, Habibi . . . i started down through that list, and quickly got weary with the partisan slant--the allegations and accusations as opposed to quotes and citations . . . this is what Fox means when she tells us how well-informed she is . . . she reads all the latest right-wing screeds, and then can't understand why anyone disagrees with her "well-informed" point of view . . .

Well that's what he said: he didn't believe it ... and what still is on the German Department of Foreign Affairs' website (at least in German).