Don't dictate to me, Canadian leader tells U.S.

[MIKE BURN]

Quote:

---

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4530744.stm



Thursday, 15 December 2005, 10:20 GMT



Canada's Prime Minister, Paul Martin, has warned the US that he will "not be dictated to", saying Canadians expected him to stand up for their country.

Mr Martin was responding to comments made by US Ambassador David Wilkins.



On Tuesday, the diplomat urged Canadian politicians to watch what they said about the US while campaigning for January's general election.



Although Mr Wilkins did not mention Mr Martin by name, he suggested he was irked by his criticism of the US at the climate-change conference in Montreal last week.



But the Canadian PM said he was not trying to score political points by slamming the US but had every right to speak out in favour of his country's interests.



"I am not going to be dictated to as to the subjects I should raise," he told reporters.



"I will make sure that Canada speaks with an independent voice now, tomorrow and always, and you should demand nothing less from your prime minister."



Conservative leader Stephen Harper described Wilkins's criticisms as "inappropriate" and said no foreign ambassador should be intervening in another country's election campaign.

---

[droolymutt]

Well, I'm proud of our Prime Minister for standing up.





Reflects the feelings of Canada as a whole.





The U.S. tries to bully Canada, the way they easily bully weaker nations.





The difference is? Canada is Strong. So is most of the Free World.







Stronger than profiteers like the Dubya Oil-guzzlers.





Buh-Bye, Georgie...!

[bitwhys]

*gag*



its all an act so Harper can look not-pro-american without actually commenting on US policy. they're trying to stuff the wolf into sheeps clothing.



Wilkins should just shut the hell up but no, he's going to drag it out as long as Cheney tells him to so Harper's glowing recommendations from CATO and the Council for National Policy have a chance of sliding back under the radar.



I'll venture to say that most Canadians these days don't CARE what the US thinks. shut your pie hole, cut the cheque and put the guns down.

[DreamTone7]

bitwhys - "I'll venture to say that most Canadians these days don't CARE what the US thinks."



Interestingly enough, I'd venture to say that Americans care even less what Canadians (or any other countries people) think about them, for that matter. That's the problem when all you get is whining negative input. After awhile, most people set the "incoming dial" to "ignore". Not that it's necessarily right...but it is human nature, and is to be expected.

Melody and Instruments for the soul...

[bitwhys]

it doesn't matter what we say about the US it only makes the press north of the border anyways which kind begs the question why Wilkins is even bothering at all.

[HKRockChick]

Quote:

---

Interestingly enough, I'd venture to say that Americans care even less what Canadians (or any other countries people) think about them, for that matter.

---

That's the only sensible thing I've ever read from you DT. I'm only sorry that you seem to be proud of it.

[DreamTone7]

HKRC - "I'm only sorry that you seem to be proud of it."



Only in your left mind.

[HKRockChick]

That's great then DT - your statement just seemed like a boast to me, so apologies I got it wrong.



Good to know that it's something you're ashamed of.

[DreamTone7]

In some cases, yes...but not all.

[bitwhys]

Gall durn lefties...



U.S. hectoring an obstacle to solving world problems



America should stop lecturing

Dec. 16, 2005. 01:00 AM

DAVID CRANE

Quote:

---

The United States is fond of lecturing other countries, so when the U.S. ambassador to Canada, David Wilkins, inserts himself into our federal election campaign it should come as no surprise.



Like his predecessor, Paul Celucci, he reflects a U.S. practice around the world of lecturing allies and interfering in their domestic affairs. U.S. ambassadors do not behave like ambassadors from other countries. They feel they are special and have an almost imperial mission to tell the rest of us how to behave.



Canada-U.S. relations are a legitimate issue in our election campaign, just as U.S.-China or U.S.-Middle East relations are issues in American campaigns. This is especially so when U.S. policies are so dangerous to us and others, such as its dismissive attitude toward the huge threat of climate change.



In an editorial last weekend, the Financial Times noted the increasing divide between the United States and its allies, attributing this to "a growing gap in basic values."



It pointed to the widespread criticism in Europe of the U.S. use of torture, particularly sending suspected terrorists to countries where torture is routinely practised.



But it also noted Prime Minister Paul Martin's message, at the recent Montreal summit on climate change. The message to "reticent nations, including the U.S., is that there is such a thing as a global conscience and now is the time to listen to it," Martin said.



As the Financial Times said, a lot of fingers had been wagged at the United States the previous week. This was quite a reversal, because it is the U.S. "which usually likes to do the wagging itself. It is likely to take exception to being arraigned (that) week before a grand jury of its allies."



Quite so, which helps explain Wilkins and his silly accusation this week that Martin had deliberately, as an act of political expediency, injected anti-Americanism into the election campaign. "It may be smart election-year politics to thump up your chest and constantly criticize your friend and your Number 1 trading partner, but it is a slippery slope," he said in an ominous-sounding warning.



Canadians are accustomed to U.S. distortions. After Canada refused to participate in the invasion and occupation of Iraq, Celucci delivered a toughly worded message that the United States was "disappointed". The U.S. would have come to Canada's defence if it had been threatened, he said, implying that this country had betrayed the relationship by not supporting America. The problem was that the United States was not threatened by Iraq. It was a war justified by falsehoods. The U.S. was threatened by terrorists based in Afghanistan and Canada participated alongside America in that conflict.



I recently participated in a phone-in program on Michigan Radio with a former U.S. ambassador to Canada, Jim Blanchard. Aside from the fact that, for most callers, issues like the softwood lumber dispute were news to them, the most remarkable part of the program was the harsh criticism by Blanchard, admittedly a Democrat, on what he saw as the George W. Bush administration's failure to manage the relationship with Canada.



If the United States could not get along with its closest neighbour and ally, he asked, what hope was there for the U.S. to get along with other countries?



The Bush administration has pursued an antagonistic relationship with the rest of the world, including Canada, reflected in its view that if countries are not with the United States, they are against it. But this approach is not going to work.



Over the next 45 years the world's population will increase nearly 50 per cent, with almost all of that growth in the developing world. At the same time, the developing world — especially China and India — is investing heavily in education and innovation to raise living standards for several billion people. How we manage these shifts in economic and political power and in the impacts all this growth will have on the environment and the demand for resources is the biggest challenge facing the world.



A United States that rejects the very idea that the world's problems must be addressed through multilateral co-operation and decision sharing, and insists on my way or no way, is the biggest threat to a stable and peaceful world.



U.S. ambassadors would be more useful to their country if they spent more time listening and less time lecturing. For starters, Wilkins should clam up until our federal election is over and leave it to Canadians to decide what they want to discuss in the campaign.

---

[HKRockChick]

Quote:

---

In some cases, yes...but not all.

---

So which cases are you NOT proud of then?

[droolymutt]

Actually, the verbatim quote, spoken in proper Canadian was:

Quote:

---

Fukk off, Dubya. Ya fuckin' hoser.

---

hahahaha...!

[droolymutt]

Mr Martin was responding to comments made by US Ambassador David Wilkins.



On Tuesday, the diplomat urged Canadian politicians to watch what they said about the US while campaigning for January's general election.







Oh yeah?





Well, this bears repeating....:





Go fukk yourself, Dubya.





Canadians despise your moronic, murdering @#%$.





And we stand up for that.





So fukk you.





I repeat...:





Fukk You.