Sunday, January 23, 2005

George Bush Bullied Canada on Missile defense - Says Liberal Left

The left-wing media is out in full force today with a salacious story accusing George Bush of bullying Canadian Politicians over missile defense in his meeting last month. The articles from the typical worst offenders of liberal spin, including The Globe and Mail and Toronto Star, have all put out the story.

The stories revolve around an unidentified Canadian official who claims he was in the room while Mr. Bush waved off their attempts to explain how contentious the issue is for Prime Minister Paul Martin's minority government.

"[Bush] leaned across the table and said: 'I'm not taking this position, but some future president is going to say, Why are we paying to defend Canada?' " the official was quoted as saying.

"Most of our side was trying to explain the politics, how it was difficult to do," he said.

But Mr. Bush "waved his hands and remarked: 'I don't understand this. Are you saying that if you got up and said this is necessary for the defense of Canada, it wouldn't be accepted?' "

This is where Mr. Bush misses the whole point of Canadian politics and Canada's left in general. Liberals do not stand up to criticism to say what is necessary for the defense of Canada. Liberals stand up for the loudest critics and make decisions against the silent majority because their primary concern is appearing popular. If a hard decision needs to be made, like same-sex marriage, liberals get the Supreme Court to do their dirty work until they think popular opinion has swung their way. Missile defense is not something the Supreme Court can decide on the liberal's behalf. What is worse is that popular opinion will never swing their way with the vocal minority screaming out against missile defense.

The extreme left in Canada, the socialist NDP, have already screamed out at the top of voices to paint weapons in space as the ultimate desecration of all that is sacred and pure. No weapons in space is Jack Layton's biggest fetish. Even though the silent majority knows that missile defense involves only ground based intercept missiles employing hit-to-kill technology and no explosives, the radical anti-war advocates have convinced too many people it involves putting everything, up to and including nuclear warheads, in orbit.

The liberals do not have the guts to stand up to criticism and say missile defense is in Canada's interest. They do not respect the intelligence of ordinary Canadians enough to tell us the truth about what missile defense involves. Doing so would open the liberals up to possible criticism which they are afraid to do in a minority government situation. When confronted with a tough dicision like missile defense, the liberals do the only thing they know how. The liberals call in the mainstream media to give them an out...a way to save face.

The psychology of the left wing media in printing this story is obvious. If the liberals say no to missile defense, then Paul Martin comes off as a champion of Canadian sovereignty that stood up to George W. Bush the most powerful man on earth. If the liberals say yes to missile defense, it will further the already overblown anti-American hatred the liberals keep fomenting, because George Bush bullied us into it. Until then, the Prime Minister will keep his mouth shut and refuse to tell Canadians what his firm position is on missile defense.

In the meantime Canada sits like a monkey in the middle between America and the worst rogue nation in pursuit of nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles. If North Korea ever launches a nuclear barrage from Pyongyang to Washington, the people of Toronto can only pray that missile does not fall short. That missile would only need to fall short by 5% of its flight path to annihilate everyone in the GTA.

When America gains the ability to intercept incoming ballistic missiles and some future president asks, 'Why are we paying to defend Canada?', before that warhead lands on Toronto, we hope his advisor's answer is, 'because Canada took part in missile defense'.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home