Fox News Insults Canada

I think the correct response to this kind of thing is for our government to pay our Afghan vets way for a trip to what ever rock this studio is located under.

Idiots. They're all actors, they don;t even know anything.

Wow. That was some sad, sad shit. It's no wonder that the US is a country in decline.

Take Fox off of cable and satellite feeds in Canada immediately.

Replace them with Al Jazeera.

 I wouldn't  respond to this by getting the CRTC to ban Faux News.  However, the pack of lies above should be used to illustrate the outrageous double standard the CRTC upholds,in context of the rules that effectively ban
Al Jezeera from our airwaves.

No.  I think this kind of thing begs for a simple plain punch in the nose.

Best idea I've heard today!

That clip was amazing.  Does one have to flunk a test to become a Fox News talking head?

  That Crowley woman just makes my skin crawl.  Almost as revolting as Barbara Amiel

Hey, if that's the way Fox feels,

then how would they like it if we pulled our troops out of Afghanistan now? How about if all the other countries pulled out of Afghanistan now? Let the damn Yanquis fight their own fuckin' war. We'll see how long America lasts on its own. 

Works for me!

me too!

On CTV's QP today it was suggested that is exactly what the Americans want, so they can run the war their way.

So much agreement can't be good for babble.

Watching faux is like walking into one of those honky tonk places where everyone is related, and the decor hasn't changed much since the days when straight razor crew cuts were in fashion.  I find it's better to be drunk before you arrive.

This made the CBC-TV news tonight. Some outraged comment.

I've been saying that about Hollywood for years!

_______________________________________

Eleutherophobics of the World...Unite!!!

Don't we want the troops out of Afghanistan ?

Per the initial quote in the piece linked to in the OP: "The spectacularly stupid and offensive Fox News show Red Eye with host Greg Gufeld (above) sunk to new depths this week by belittling a neighbor and ally in the so-called war on terrorism."

Well, Canada is definitely a neighbor.

But, since most progressives in Canada want nothing to do with the United States (militarily or otherwise), why would they be offended for, in effect, not being called much of an ally by some info-tainment talking heads?

_______________________________________

Eleutherophobics of the World...Unite!!!

No, we're a neighbour.

No, we're a neighbour.

I say everything twice!

Except that!

_______________________________________

Eleutherophobics of the World...Unite!!!

Now the harper Gov't is demanding an apology:

The youtube video is up to almost 7,000 comments now ... correction ... over 7,100 now. 200 comments posted just while I was writing this!!

For once I don't mind if the gung ho right wing puppies unleash their invective on the target!

 Faux News indeed!

Here's the correct youtube link

That is just Har-postering The guy comes out with the anti american rhetoric whenever he gets the chance to show he is a concerned canadian but OUR media never calls him a hypocrite or critiques him for it the way they do the left. I would not be surprised if Harper called and paid for them to do this so his idiot group could get on the Air and pretend outrage against the people the are selling the whole country to. If they really hated american policy they would do something about it, like the damn border and passports BS.

Yeah, don't forget, that's why they call it "the Red Zone".  They're just bitter because the rest of the country cleaned the floor with them in the last election.

 Fox Officially Sort of Apologizes

It's mildly interesting to see the type of cheap baubles that the marketplace of ideas produces in that country.

That's not an apology. That's a poor excuse for an apology.

 Holy shite!

There's over 11,000 comments on the youtube video now!

None of them flattering to faux news.

 Here's an email address for those of us outside the US to tell them why we watch (or don't watch) Fox network. Have I got a word for them! (hint ... 7 letters ... starts with 'A')

Not being a viewer of much on TV myself, it sounds like Red Eye is more info-tainment program with (allegedly) witty talking heads/actors/entertainers on the show.

They sure struck a sore spot with Canadians, that much I can say.

_______________________________________

Eleutherophobics of the World...Unite!!!

The comments on youtube are priceless!  Please, oh please good Canadian friends, you must believe that we are not all like this.
Reply We believe you. Thanks for commenting. We have boxes and boxes of used hockey helmets if you want to mark the dumb ones for us  LMAO

At least they were right about the Mounty uniforms. I usually see those from miles away while I'm stealing maple sap.

Cowards. Can't even stand by their statements.

Kinda creepy that the fox news guys hit so close to home. Maybe that's why the red t-shirt crowd is so upset.

speaking of creepy ...

Yeah, it's all our fault.

Remind everyone why they hate you again?

so be it.

they can deal with their own shit.

I read on the youtube comments:

#1 cause of death of Canadian soldiers - IEDs

#2 American soldiers

ya check the chavez thread for ONE clue, sven.

alQ, once again I am  happy there is someone else here as ascerbic as me.

Don't take it personally, sven.

maybe you're a democrat like some of my favourite relatives, who I'm sure are cringing tonight.

But, boy those republipukes at faux news are inhuman!!

FOX News scrapes bottom

Jonathan Kay, National Post  Published: Tuesday, March 24, 2009

It's only when your own tribe gets targeted that you realize how low the media has sunk.

 And he would know ...

Following that come tired jokes about Mounties, cold weather, horses, and soldiers getting pedicures. Then the participants get bored and start making fun of Mexicans ("They like the siestas").

For as long as I can remember, armchair critics have assured me that the problem with the mainstream media is its left-wing bias. But as this example from a right-wing source helps demonstrate, the larger problem is sheer stupidity.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcJn5XlbSFk [40]

13,130 comments and counting ...

Well, it's not like it was the White House making an official policy pronouncement about Canada, or even a news show with talking heads discussing Canada seriously.  Instead, you've got some clowns on a late-late-night entertainment show being (shock of shocks) cynical and cutting...and some people go ape about it.

I think the original program comments and the over-the-top negative reactions are both kinda dumb.

_______________________________________

Eleutherophobics of the World...Unite!!!

I remember reading about an article written in the right-wing National Review called "Bomb Canada".  I never read the article but I do remember there was a commotion north of the border and one commentator wrote: Canadians responded as Canadians always will when faced with overt aggression. They wrote inordinate numbers of letters of concern, exercising what Canadian writer Douglas Coupland calls their "almost universal editorial-page need to make disapproving clucks."  I don't even know who Coupland is but that pretty much captures what's happening now with "13,130 [Youtube] comments and counting..."!!

The whole thing is a bit silly, no?

_______________________________________

Eleutherophobics of the World...Unite!!!

No Sven, it would only be "silly" if a vast majority of your countrymen and woman did not watch Fox and did not believe the shit Fox says. What's "kind of silly" is you telling us how we should react to the hatemongers in your dumbed down country (courtesy in part, of Fox news). Sadly, a large majority of your country IS ignornant of anything outside your borders (not to mention inside your borders).

I kind of agree with Sven here.  I mean, big deal, some late night shock jocks make stupid jokes and remarks about Canada.  So what?  Ever heard of "Talking to Americans"?  They don't even pretend to be a news show.

There is nothing that is on par, in Canada, with that hell hole of a "news" channel, Fox News. Satire is satire. The crap from Redeye was not satire.

Fox is not news.  None of it's programming is.  Far worse has been said of us by better organizations.  We needn't become aligned with the right through indignation over what a panel of bozos have said on an obscure late night hillbilly act.  Leave it to the Canadian 'support the troops' crowd to express their outrage for being slighted by one of their sources of authoritative news.  Our concerns lay elsewhere.

Yes they have insulted our jingoism.

If Canada had a principled armed forces that obeyed international consensus and didn't engage in colonialist occupations as a lapdog sidekick for a bullying fading superpower, we could stick to our convictions and rightly dismiss these Fox News hacks as so much detritus from a fading regime.

Instead, Canada has found that when they join a game they cannot play, a game that is obnoxious, odious and criminal, they are roughly treated by a gang of obnoxious and odious criminals. And so we respond cravenly, slavishly, shocked that these thugs do not lavish us with purple praise for appropriately heeding America's call. Why else would we care what this bunch of jokers think? Because it is the respect and acknowledgement of precisely these jokers and their lot that we crave. Instead, they call us like we are: a warmonger with no army, a conqueror with no horse. This mocking is righteous and deserved. It is the weed our governments, who desperately covet a place on the world stage, have sown, and now it has gone to seed.

Yes, the sought after pat on the head has turned into a backhanded swat, and the lapdogs are now whining in the corner, wishing that the master would realize how worthy they are.

I am not now, nor have will I ever be, a member of the "support your tropps" crowd.I don't want anyone dead, but I am no flag waving nationalist. 

My point was that while Sven thinks this is satire, I see it as hatemongering -  not just towards Canada, but towards Fox's numerous targets of hatred. I hope I've made myself clear. 

It's Fox news people! It ran at 3:00am. If not for all screaming, virtually nobody would have seen this crap or been influenced by it. What has now been accomplished is that everyone has seen and heard it.

Some things are best left alone and this certainly was not desreving of any response.

Well said.

I find it endlessly amusing the the "Heroes", those "sacrificing for freedom", those "Brave boys", fighting evildoers, kickin' ass, etc, go apeshit when their feelings are hurt.

Boo.

Hoo.

"Red Eye" is a satirical program. It was insulting, insensitive and stupid towards Canada..but it's satire (very bad satire at that)! Jon Stewart has insulted and mocked Canada many a time.

 If Canadians could re-direct 1/1,000 of the outrage they have over a comedy program that airs at 3 am towards the Afghanistan war, maybe those four men would not have died last week. I can understand the insult and anger, but we insult and mock Americans - they do the same. Why can't we use this outrage over getting our troops the hell out of there? Let the Obomba fight it. They don't even know that we're there - good enough maybe they won't even notice when we leave.

Where was this non-stop outrage and coverage of outrage when our own PM admitted Canadians are dying in a war we cannot win? (I am not talking specially about babble, but about all Canadian re: this "international incident".  The continued calls for Canada to leave Afghanistian is one of the reasons I keep coming back here).

Well I wasn't offended. More bemused. But I think it's a good thing that a stink is being made. There are a lot of fox-news watchers in Canada too, and I think this will be one little monkey wrench in the machinery of their self-delusions. It's not going to make them wake up, but every little bit helps.

I personally have an old friend in TO who's a rabid right-wing idiot, and I know for a fact he'll be outraged by this ('cause practically everything outrages him). Maybe it will help him realise the stupidity of faux news.

I don't care. They didn't insult anything I believe in. A pox (or fox) on both their houses. 

In the immortal words of Leslie Neilson(As Frank Drebin) BINGO!

"I didn't even know they were there"

Don't worry, most Afghans don't even know we are there either.

To them, we are just a bunch of white guys with guns who are maiming and murdering them and destroying their homes and country.

That is what war is: killing, injuring and destroying.

The U.S. and NATO knew since day 1, that we could never win the Afghan war. It was never their intention to win it.

I support the troops.

My idea of supporting the troops is to get them out of harm's way. Get them out of a war we cannot win. Just ask war criminal Stephen Harper.

Support the Troops./Support Peace./Bring our Troops HOME NOW!

What was their intention, then?  Do you think they intended to get stuck in a quagmire?  Now, I think it's fair to critique the U.S. and NATO by saying, "I said at the beginning that this was a mistake and that it would result in no good" or "This is an utter mess and we should withdraw immediately".

But, it seems more than a bit silly to assert that the U.S. and NATO consciously embarked on this undertaking with the intent and purpose of failing.  Even someone who is stupid or evil will avoid purposely failing.

_______________________________________

Eleutherophobics of the World...Unite!!!

NATO and the U.S. realized that the number of troops they deployed to Afghanistan were not enough to fend off an insurgency. They also knew that the European members of NATO would never be able to muster up enough troops to fend off an insurgency - which is the problem today (always has been).

After Tora Bora, the battle that ended the U.S. proxy war in Afghanistan, the U.S. realized that it was now in the business of economic and political reform, nation building, reconstruction and development. People like Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld weren't into that. They were into war instead. So while they planned and executed the Iraq war, they left us European, Australian, New Zealand and Canadian suckers to hold the bag in Afghanistan.

ISAF troops first hit the ground in Afghanistan on December 20, 2001. The Pentagon appointed Hamid Karzai puppet regime arrived on December 25, 2001 (Chritmas Day). The original mission was to be the bodyguard of Karzai and his ministers by making sure Kabul was secure. Under U.S. pressure, the war escalated by expanding the mission to:

1. Provide security for Northern Afghan cities.

2. Provide security for Northern Afghanistan.

3. Provide security for Southern Afghan cities.

4. Provide security for Southern (all of) Afghanistan.

Aside from adding additional political goals to the war, which by now have all been pared back down the the original reasonable security with making sure that Afghansitan (hopefully) doesn't become a safe haven for terrorism.

At NO POINT has either the U.S. or NATO ever said "We are going to win the war" or promulgated a clear victory strategy.

The reason why they want stability in Afghanistan is so a Trans Afghan Pipeline (TAP) can be constructed. So long as they can achieve that, good enough, as far as they are concerned. Winning the war is not essential. If the war continues perpetually, so be it. It will help with unemployment and stimulate the arms industries.

How much of a genius does the U.S., NATO and Europe need to be to realize that we could never win the war in Afghanistan?

It's not like the British didn't have any experience in Afghanistan. See the year 1839. I mean, it's not like there wasn't a Soviet Afghan War. It's not like there wasn't the Vietnam War. It's not like there weren't neo colonial wars of independence that occurred throughout the 1950s, '60s and '70s. 

It's like Hans Christian Anderson's "The Emperor's New Clothes". All the leaders of the countries involved in the Afghan war see all the nakedness and ugliness of what is going on. None have the courage and virtue of the child in the story to admit that we are wrong and to end the war and bring our troops home now!

http://icasualties.org/OEF/DeathsByYear.aspx [61]

Well, I hope this works because it took some work!

These are the casualty rates (from above)
expressed in proportion to the populations of these countries
http://www.prb.org/pdf08/08WPDS_Eng.pdf [62]

Deaths of soldiers per 5 million people


SKorea.... Portugal.....Finland..... Hungary
0.2............1.0............1.0.............1.0

Sweden.... Italy......... Poland...... Czech....... Lithuania
1.2.............1.2..........1.2............1.5...........1.5

Germany.. Romania... France...... Latvia....... Australia
1.8.............2.2...........2.2...........2.2.............2.3

Spain....... Norway..... Netherlands.......US........Estonia
2.8.............3.2...............4.7..............11.2.......11.2
.......................................................(671)
UK........Canada........Denmark
12.5.......17.7...............19.2
............(116)

-edit- there!

Now this is interesting data that you can actually draw some conclusions from.

Of course the US has lost the most soldiers numerically, by a long shot,
and proportionately they are still among 5 with the most losses.

But the US population is roughly 10 times that of Canada, and we've lost proportionately more soldiers than the US.

I think sometimes even our American friends forget the size of the population of the US compared to most of the rest of the world's countries, Canada in particular.

It's not at all suprising this statistic. Canada had more casualties per capita in both world wars, partly of course because Canada was in at the start of both of them. I don't know about Korea.

Something to think about for those who like to pride themselves on Canada's non-militarist reputation. Consider for example that we sent the NWMP to Vladivostock during the Russian Civil War in the 1920's.

It's not surprising to us, but to some to our south it is.

NOBODY ever said Canada's military is not good!

Our soldiers are known to 'punch above their weight' by using their brains for more than battering rams.

-edit

Apologies, and no offense intended to US troops, but we think they use you badly.

Like the Mohawks of Grand River (1812-14, +), the Highlanders also  scared the shite out of enemies (first) with their ungodly yells ... and then  'follow through'.

I think it is more accurate to say we do not have a tradition of military aggression.

I know that's why I am so uncomfortable with Afghanistan. I feel it's the first time we have sent our soldiers to an unjust war, and that's our responsibility, not the soldiers. In my opinion, it's against Canadian values.

Our soldiers care about the Afghans, the kids going to school, the crops surviving so families can have a livelihood and are not forced to join the Taliban.

I don't get that same sense from the US COMMAND. They are there to 'secure' the area ... ie, control it 'for business purposes', and they'll install whatever puppet will answer to them, regardless of what's good for the people.

And the US'll bomb the crops just to make sure they don't fall into Taliban hands, regardless of the fact that it deprives families of their livelihoods and puts them at the mercy of the Taliban.

I suspect the American COMMAND answer to that would be

"Who cares! Bomb them here or bomb them there! Just bomb them!"

(Am I being too unfair?)

Personally, I think we have a proud and valued and honourable military tradition.

 -some edits to clarify criticism is of COMMAND,

NEVER soldiers.

God bless em all.

And of the 116, let's not forget that four of them were killed by an American pilot.

 Casualty rates could be due to a lot of factors.  Training, equipment, competence of officers-- the list could go on,  I'm sure.  I think frequency of troop rotation has an effect, also. It seems to me the deaths spike when a fresh and inexperienced regiment is rotated in.  Could be due to inexperience, and/or the enemy testing the new troops. 

In this case,  I'd guess it has a lot to do with deployment.  Canada's contingency is in one of the toughest, if not the toughest area to be in.  And much of that is due to the fact some of our allies have restrictions concerning where thier troops can be deployed, and what they can do.

Leaving us with a disproportionate burden.

I doubt that very much. Sounds like a conceit. Sounds like sport team fan talk.

I doubt that very, very much. If they cared for the people of Afghanistan, they wouldn't be occupying their country and killing them on orders from the Pentagon. I think the soldiers (they're certainly not "ours". We have no ownership of the Canadian Forces. We pay for their indulgences, but we have no say in their use) care more about their institution and their place in it. Afghanistan is a prop.

You don't buy all that crap about "Canada the Peacekeeper", do you? Our national rhetoric may say one thing, but our realpolitik involvments in many imperialist causes goes ignored. Haiti, Iraq, Somalia, for example. Or the Boer war.

Good for what? Sandbagging the Red River?

Our "allies" (co-conspirators) are obviously smarter than our simpering scumbag government. 

Who's "us"? I'm not occupying Afghanistan. And I think that describing the criminal occupation as a "burden" reinforces colonialist attitudes towards the occupied, and shifts the narrative where we portray ourselves as the victims of those ungrateful natives. Like the Americans think they were the victims of the Vietnamese.

Canada has a history of joining in military ventures of its imperial master, whomever that happens to be at the time. And Canada has a bad habit of being eager cannon fodder for futile operations the masters themselves wouldn't go anywhere near. So Canada romps off stupidly to South Africa, to Flanders, to Dieppe, to Afghanistan, all hoping to please the King, who doesn't really give a shit what "sacrifice" one of its' two-bit provincial vassal thinks it made.

That 'punch above their weight' line is used quite often in military circles as pep talk for rallying the troops to take on yet another foreign entanglement.

Yes, but I don't know why they had to go all the way to far eastern Russa in 1919 on a post WW1 sight seeing tour when we had the same sort of scenery here.

All the wholesome care that teleprompt television and official script can provide to them.

Prouder, valued, and honourable for whom?

<>The way I see it, the difference between the way most Americans view the war and they way most Canadians do is the "spin" our governments have put on it: Although the "spin" as told may sound more vulgar to Canadian ears, the U.S. government is at least honest with its public

<>In Canada, the politicians and the media can't even wrap their tongue around the word "war". They keep using that kinder and gentler f-ing word "mission".

The first time Harper described what is going on over there as a war was on the second last day of the recent federal election. He was tired and my guess is it was a freudian slip. Here's what he said, "...Our invasion of Afghanistan." He probably meant to say, "...Our mission in Afghanistan." The second and, to my knowledge, only other time to date that he described Afghanistan as a war was in his March 1 2009 CNN interview: "My own judgement... quite frankly is we are not going to ever defeat the insurgency."

If we can agree that there is a war going on in Afghanistan and Canadian soldiers are fighting in it, then we need to come up with a definition of what war is to define what we are doing in Afghanistan.

War is killing, injuring and destroying.

What are we doing in Afghanistan?

Are we fighting a war?

Are we "helping" Afghans?

To find the answer to this question, all we have to do is 'follow the money'.

Here is the money trail:

Of the money we are spending on Afghanistan:

90% goes to prosecuting the war.

10% goes to reconstruction, development, humanitarian aid.

Clearly, our priority is prosecuting the war in Afghanistan.

Shooting, shelling and dropping bombs on Afghans - in other words - maiming, murdering and burning villages, homes, women and kids, is not 'helping' Afghans.

As I said, telling the truth may sound vulgar, but at least the American government (unlike the Canadian government) is more honest with its public in this respect.