Canada Prime Minister Links Sept. 11 to 'Arrogant' West [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Canada Prime Minister Links Sept. 11 to 'Arrogant' West

Jorge
09-13-2002, 09:04 PM
Please Read this!!!! finally a leader of the "western world" is trying to give a reasonable explanation (he is not excusing the terrorists, don't get confused) on WHY the terrorist attacks could have happened, and not only is complaining about the evilness of the terrorists or looking for revenge. His name is JEAN CHRETIEN and is the Prime Minister of Canada.
Read it is extremely interesting

Canada PM Links Sept. 11 to 'Arrogant' West

By David Ljunggren

OTTAWA (Reuters) - Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien, going where few other leaders dare to tread, has linked the Sept. 11 suicide attacks to the perceived arrogance and selfishness of the United States and the West.

Chretien is the first head of a western major nation to suggest that the suicide hijackers might have been motivated by what he describes as the misguided policies of a rich and powerful West that did not understand the need for restraint.

The veteran prime minister, who has been in power for nine years, told the CBC in an interview aired late on Wednesday that there was "a lot of resentment" about the way in which powerful nations treated the increasing number of poor and dispossessed people in the world.

"You know, you cannot exercise your powers to the point of humiliation for others. That is what the Western world -- not only the Americans, the Western world -- has to realize. Because they (the have-nots) are human beings too. There are long-term consequences if you don't look hard at the reality in 10 or 20 (or) 30 years from now," he said.

Chretien continued: "And I do think the Western world is getting too rich in relation to the poor world and necessarily, you know, we're looked upon as being arrogant, self-satisfied greedy and with no limits. And Sept. 11 is an occasion for me to realize it even more."

Later in the same article he says
"And I said that day...'When you're (as) powerful (as) you are, you guys, it's the time to be nice'."

"There will be people in the United States sort of emboldened by their new source of unfettered power to -- in an (ice) hockey term -- get their elbows up," he said.

"I think the western world is a bit too selfish and that there is a lot of resentment. I felt it when I dealt with the African file for the G8 summit. You know, the poor get relatively poorer all the time and the rich are getting richer all the time," he said.

More Info Here (http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=840&ncid=721&e=10&u=/nm/20020912/wl_canada_nm/canada_attack_blame_col)

Barrie_Dude
09-13-2002, 09:24 PM
Well....... I do have to agree to some degree.......

Barrie_Dude
09-13-2002, 10:13 PM
Well, Duh! What do you think the terrorist attcks are feeding on? The anti american feelings in the rest of the world!:rolleyes:

Jorge
09-13-2002, 10:23 PM
Originally posted by Tryphon


He and his folks are total religious fanatics and that's what drive them in the first place. For instance having Americans based in South Arabia, a holy ground.
But why they attack USA and not Brasil or Namibia???
hint: Palestina, Kuwait, Lebanon, Iraq, Lybia, Afganisthan, Syria, Sudan, Somalia, etc, etc, etc all of those countries were invaded by USA at least once.
no harsh feelings??? told to them this,

is not only about fanatism, is much more complicated, Messieu Chretien is saying a BIG TRUTH.

Barrie_Dude
09-13-2002, 11:02 PM
Those are the people that Osama Bin Laden and his like recruit!

Jorge
09-13-2002, 11:04 PM
Tryphon: I haven't the answer to your question, maybe some of them really thinks in the poor people of their country while for another ones the civilians are just pawns in a "chess game".
I can't say nothing better about any army of the world (including the army of my country):sad:

Barrie_Dude
09-13-2002, 11:43 PM
There again, Osama and the like feed on the fears of the poor, uneducated and dispossed. These are the people that are most easily recruited as terrorists!

Jorge
09-13-2002, 11:52 PM
and why happens this Barrie? because they haven't nothing to lose maybe?
besides, at least the hijackers were people pretty well educated and clearly not poor.
is not as easy as: "uneducated people are easy to recruit" "educated people are smart enough to say NO".
is not as easy as this, is extremely complex. to try to summarize it in one sentence is to lose your time. Even the sociologists and anthropologists can't explain it easily, and certainly not in one sentence.
But i am agree with messieu Chretien, even when his reasoning just points to one of the many motives of the terrorism.

Barrie_Dude
09-14-2002, 12:05 AM
Not All terrorists are uneducated! But even the most educated can fall into the dispossed! There are some very smart people that are suceptible to bullshit! I suppose that what I am trying to say is that there is a psychological profile of people that can be recruited to this sort of thing. It goes along with the kind of people here that fall prey to the "Cults" here on this side of the pond. The kind of people that are lonely, disenchanted, feel as "outcasts" from socirty, et all. I rather doubt that an Osama Bin Laden has put a formal tag on it, nor has given it that kind of thought, but he knows full well what people can be recruited for his cause. And a large part of that are the feelings of ill will twards western culture. The American foriegn policy seems to play right into it. We have to realize that and take steps to minimize the effect. I think that George Bushs "Cowboy" mentality is not going to help.

Jorge
09-14-2002, 02:58 AM
Barrie, i am not sure about something that we could call a "psychological profile" for a terrorist. I guess that some Criminologist or Psychiatrist,could explain it. But i am studying psychology and in my opinion there are not a particular profile (if you mean a mental disorder) but yes the environment and the social conditions can push people from different levels of wealth, education, different religion (or without religion), race, gender, age, etc. to commit a terrorist action.
I guess is more about the environment and a cultural conditioning, than something that could be defined as a mental disorder. Of course i am not denying the existence of the Psychopaths, but them rarely commit suicides or assassinations for political or religious motives. They are in the habit of being solitary assassins.

Barrie_Dude
09-14-2002, 03:40 AM
You are thinking in terms of a "Criminal" Profile. I am stating that there is a Psychological profile or term for the kind of person that is taken in by the Osama Bin Ladens of the world! These are the type of people like I say are taken in by the cults of the world. I am not as well versed in this as I'd like, however, like I have explained previous, these are the people are the "outcasts", the onesthat don't quite feel as they fit in, et all. That is the appeal of these organizations. The Osama's make them feel wanted and needed!

Jorge
09-14-2002, 03:48 AM
Barrie what are you saying is exactly what i said, let me quote myself:
but yes the environment and the social conditions can push people from different levels of wealth, education, different religion (or without religion), race, gender, age, etc. to commit a terrorist action.
I guess is more about the environment and cultural conditioning

Chretien was thinking more or less on the same aspect when he expressed his statement. at least i think so.

This is the people that is easier to recruit by someone as Osama. ppl without hope and with a lot of harsh feelings against those that are the culprits of their poverty and misery. (at least partially)
is a mix of poverty, frustration, Stoicism, Hopelessness, hate, and even a kind of sense of the heroism.

Lucas Arg
09-14-2002, 05:25 AM
Jorge, I love U:wavey:

Chloe le Bopper
09-14-2002, 11:03 PM
Barrie - referring to your first comment, you seemed to be in shock that you agreed with something that Cretien said :eek:

Not I, I voted Liberal :cool: In which case I suppose that I voted for Peter Adams, not Jean - but meh.

I do like that he focussed on the whole western world, with the US sort of the leader of the western world in a lot of things - that he didn't just focus on the USA alone. That was really key I thought... not placing blame in one area.

Barrie_Dude
09-15-2002, 12:38 AM
Actually, I am in shock about that Becca! Much the same as Griffin would be if she agreed with George W. Bush!

Chloe le Bopper
09-19-2002, 03:18 PM
So which party do you support?

Please don't say alliance :eek:

Barrie_Dude
09-21-2002, 06:15 PM
I don't suppost any party, though I have about as much respect for Stockwell Day as anyone. Joe Clark? Clown! Chretien? Lying Thief! There is no leadership in this country! Just a bunch of rank amatures!

its.like.that
11-16-2005, 08:42 AM
Jorge is the man.

joeb_uk
11-16-2005, 03:09 PM
Jorge is the man.
Definately, its a shame he hasnt posted in a few months. I always enjoyed chatting to jorge and reading his posts. I also liked how he was brutally honest to all the assholes on the board.

As for him bad repping buddyholly everday :haha:

joske
11-16-2005, 04:15 PM
totally agree with all this..

But why they attack USA and not Brasil or Namibia??? (...)

well if you wanna hit the rich West there's only one good way to do it: hit the most powerful one out of the bunch, the one who'se ruling the world - if you can beat the big guy, the smaller guys will take you more seriously (and crap their pants basically)

well that's how i look at it at least..

Jim Jones
11-16-2005, 07:38 PM
This was Jorge's last message to me. He will be missed.

is the 1st time in a long long time that I am reading one of your PM's (I am being totaly honest). I did it because I felt that this wasn't like the others.

Let's being sincere; you know that I dislike you (as much as you dislike me) and other people, like moronholly (and some others who thru the years have let this site or have been banned). But this Willie is special. It's a big leagues Wacko.

He is almost 18 yo, at least he says that. somebody who is almost 18 yo is not anymore a kid but already a man. at 18 yo I HAD to do my military service (like many men around the world), at 18 yo I entered to the University. At 18 I lost my virginity. At 18 yo I was already a man, a young perhaps, but a man.
This Willie behaves like 12 yo kid. and perhaps he is indeed a 12 or 13 yo kid. If he is already 17 (almost 18), then this dude is a wacko.
he did try to use his friends to command them to bad-rep me, all of them. His plan was a complete failure. later he tried to manipulate the administrators in order to see my reply to his stupid comment deleted. He almost has success but the reason prevailed at the end of the day, and he failed again. But finally he got insane. He tried to manipulate the very Amanda in order to get my ban! threatening her with leaving this site if I wasn't banned. Of course he failed again and many people saw what kind of wacko is this dude. He has failed in an awful way.

let's not talk about willie the wacko anymore, let's talk about you and me.

Wel JJ I don't need to tell you again that I don't like you and that you don't like me neither. I mean I just know your ideas, I don't know who and how is really the person behind the screen, How I could know that? but if I could... Would I like to know you? It's a good question.
You don't know me either. you just now "Jorge" the "screename" of some mexican dude, who types bad english, who is fan of Guga, Nadal and Moyá and that uses to fight fiercely in the politics threads defending his ideas, perhaps sometimes "too fiercely". I've commited mistakes I've to recognize it.
That's the "Jorge" you knows, right? but that, my dear JJ, is just a diminute fragment of my entire self. As I just know a small part of your entire personality and ideas. And that seems it's enough.

said that, JJ I don't think that I'd like to interact with you anymore. Perhaps if we would know in the real life we could sit and to talk a lot while drinking a good coffee, but that won't happen. Or perhaps we would finish trying to smack down each other. But that won't happen neither.
Let's finish this interaction (of any kind) here, right now, in this very moment, ok? This is going to be the last PM between you and me, agree?

about the bad-reps... well JJ you don't have to be afraid anymore, I have heard from the "top" that the bad-rep thing will disappear totally within a few weeks. meanwhile they are gonna make a non-desireable thing to give a reputation good or bad, by the moment they are just taking Vcash from you each time you gives a reputation.
however you can earn easily vcash by posting lots of crappy posts... and that is what is going to do most posters (to post even crappier posts than before).

we are too different JJ, we are like water and oil, we have opposite ideas, beliefs, longings, principles, values... dreams... so IMO is better to say bye bye JJ.

nermo
11-16-2005, 09:08 PM
Definately, its a shame he hasnt posted in a few months. I always enjoyed chatting to jorge and reading his posts.posted by joeb-uk

agree :yeah: , Jorge is reeeally missed, but i think he left for good.. :sad:

buddyholly
11-16-2005, 09:14 PM
Phew, when I saw this thread I thought he was back. Guess he ended up on the rubbish heap of life along with Chretien. As if Al Qaeda ever gave a damn about the poor and dispossessed.

buddyholly
11-16-2005, 09:23 PM
As for him bad repping buddyholly everday :haha:

Repping is just a baby toy for the immature, like yourself.

Haute
11-17-2005, 12:41 AM
Chretien does make good points, but that's not why the attacks happened. I'm reading this book right now for my PoliSci class that's all about the role of relgion in terrorism, Terror in the Mind of God, and Mahmud Abouhalima, who was the mastermind behind the 1993 WTC bombing said that what happened in 1993 and on 9/11 were messages to the US government about 1) how it is treating its own citizens and 2) the government's own uses of terrorism in the world, through political and economic control.

Unless Chretien is actually affiliated with these groups, I don't think he can exactly speak on their behalf as to why the attack occurred. ;)

Lee
11-17-2005, 12:54 AM
Unless Chretien is actually affiliated with these groups, I don't think he can exactly speak on their behalf as to why the attack occurred. ;)

What Jorge post here didn't say Chretien saying why the attack occurred. He suggested what the cause might be. It's more he wanted to express his feeling about how the leader of the 'Western World' treat the other countries.

And actually, what Chretien said fit perfectly with the 2 reasons you quoted from the terrorist you mentioned.

buddyholly
11-17-2005, 01:38 AM
And actually, what Chretien said fit perfectly with the 2 reasons you quoted from the terrorist you mentioned.

But they were stupid reasons, that's why what Chretien said may have fit so well.
9/11 was part of a plan to bring down western civilization, paving the way for a Muslim takeover (in the minds of the terrorists, not mainstream Islam). Very funny, .....a message to the US government about how it treats its citizens, when Abouhalima is only interested in killing those same citizens, preferably in a horrendous way.

Haute
11-17-2005, 02:51 AM
Those are fundamentalists for you, they say one thing while doing something completely contradictory to what they just said (i.e., PETA and ALF extremists).

I don't think it's entirely right then, for Chretien to be suggesting that, because isn't he just expressing his own bias rather than what the real reasons are? Granted, now that I reread the comments, I do see the connections to what he said, and what Abouhalima said, but there are big differences as well.

One other thing I left out with what Abouhalima said was that it was a message about the influence of American/Western culture into the Islamic world, and how they feel that the secularization of our cultures are tainting their culture. There are two conflicting points now about why the attacks had; Chretien's comments about Western power being the source of conflict, whereas movement insiders are saying it's culture. Whose comments should you be more willing to believe in this situation?

buddyholly
11-17-2005, 12:38 PM
Those are fundamentalists for you, they say one thing while doing something completely contradictory to what they just said (i.e., PETA and ALF extremists).

There are two conflicting points now about why the attacks had; Chretien's comments about Western power being the source of conflict, whereas movement insiders are saying it's culture. Whose comments should you be more willing to believe in this situation?

Who are ''movement insiders"? The terrorists? Then you have already said they should not be believed. As for Chretien, never believe anyone who talks out of the side of his mouth!

buddyholly
11-17-2005, 12:47 PM
what I am trying to say is that there is a psychological profile of people that can be recruited to this sort of thing. It goes along with the kind of people here that fall prey to the "Cults" here on this side of the pond. The kind of people that are lonely, disenchanted, feel as "outcasts" from socirty, et all.

This is actually what I thought might be descriptive of Jorge.

Lee
11-17-2005, 06:12 PM
Chretien's comments about Western power being the source of conflict, whereas movement insiders are saying it's culture. Whose comments should you be more willing to believe in this situation?

It's the West trying to impose their cultures onto another cultures. I'm not saying the Western powers are to be blamed for the terrorism. But the Western powers can do something to ease the tension. I never believe terrorism is the answer to conflicts and I despise terrorists.

I don't have to take sides on which comments are more reliable or more truth. They are both looking at a situation from their point-of-views and both are true to themselves.

btw, I can't believe I sort of defending Jean Chretien :rolleyes:

nermo
11-17-2005, 09:52 PM
I don't have to take sides on which comments are more reliable or more truth. They are both looking at a situation from their point-of-views and both are true to themselves. posted by LEE
one good voice of reason, both sides beside others are to blamed for the mess going around allover, and unless, ppl. try to open up their ears and eyes to see the other complementary side of the picture , it won't stop.Though,i guess, lots of ppl. are totally convinced that violence 'll disappear by spending some more millions , lives from both sides and by just attacking more and more lands for.." protection against terror"

Guess he ended up on the rubbish heap of life along with Chretien.posted by buddyholly
Originally Posted by Barrie_Dude
what I am trying to say is that there is a psychological profile of people that can be recruited to this sort of thing. It goes along with the kind of people here that fall prey to the "Cults" here on this side of the pond. The kind of people that are lonely, disenchanted, feel as "outcasts" from socirty, et all.
This is actually what I thought might be descriptive of Jorge posted by buddyholly
well, least thing to say; it's not very decent to speak about a guy who's not here to reply.
9/11 was part of a plan to bring down western civilization, paving the way for a Muslim takeover posted by buddyholly
:confused: :help: don't tell , u 're really convinced with this explaination as the one reason for 9/11..

buddyholly
11-17-2005, 10:10 PM
s

well, least thing to say; it's not very decent to speak about a guy who's not here to reply.

:confused: :help: don't tell , u 're really convinced with this explaination as the one reason for 9/11..

He may be here, but keeping quiet. I don't know where he may be. Do you?

Convinced. Al Qaeda tried to bring down our economic foundation.
You think 9/11 may have been perpetrated for good? I do not care for any attempt at a cultural explanation. Inhuman behaviour can only be called inhuman behaviour. Murder of the innocent can only be called murder of the innocent. It can never lead to a better world.

Jim Jones
11-17-2005, 10:39 PM
It's the West trying to impose their cultures onto another cultures. I'm not saying the Western powers are to be blamed for the terrorism. But the Western powers can do something to ease the tension. I never believe terrorism is the answer to conflicts and I despise terrorists.

I don't have to take sides on which comments are more reliable or more truth. They are both looking at a situation from their point-of-views and both are true to themselves.

btw, I can't believe I sort of defending Jean Chretien :rolleyes:
I too can't believe that someone is defending Chretien that scumbag. By the way for Jorge fans, he recently was sending pms and reps. Ask Willie who recieved some until recently. As for Al Queda there is no excuse for they do whatsoever. Gitmo Bay is a necessary evil.

Lee
11-18-2005, 05:08 AM
I too can't believe that someone is defending Chretien that scumbag. By the way for Jorge fans, he recently was sending pms and reps. Ask Willie who recieved some until recently. As for Al Queda there is no excuse for they do whatsoever. Gitmo Bay is a necessary evil.

I sort of defending Chretien even I don't like him. So, at least I look into the reasoning than just comment because I don't like the person, or a culture, or a race, or a government.

buddyholly
11-18-2005, 05:15 AM
We are in a 3-year-old thread. What's the matter with us?

joske
11-18-2005, 10:21 AM
:lol:

well I don't hate the Canadians for being against war and for discussion etc at least they don't bend over and let Bush do all the talking for them like some countries :rolleyes:

has anyone heard that thing about this monument they were gonna set up in some Canadian town just across the border from the US - the one welcoming the deserters during the.. Vietnam? war a lot of whom settled there at that time? turns out they're not gonna go throug hwith it because they got some hate mail from angry americans who thought those men didn't deserve a statue because they were "cowards" :retard:

i bet a lot of the guys who sent that hate-mail were veterans (or their family) who didn't have the courage or opportunity to get out of the country themselves when they were drafted.. maybe they're holding a grudge against the more fortunate ones just because they couldn't escape the war?

neways, if leaving everything you hold dear just to stand for what you believe in makes someone a "coward", then I wish I were a coward :worship:

Jim Jones
11-18-2005, 02:14 PM
oh so for you deserters are heros. You really think that citizens of nations where the deserters come from will roll out the red carpet for deserters? Great thinking Joske! America's most infamous deserter is probably Charles Jenkins. He lives now in Japan after spending 40 years in North Korea where he was rewarded for his troubles by being totured, prevented from exiting North Korea etc..There is still apparently another U.S. army deserter in North Korea but I doubt that the Koreans will make the same 'mistake' to allow him to leave the nation. Deserters my dear Joske should thus be prosecuted and serve prison time.

buddyholly
11-18-2005, 02:23 PM
neways, if leaving everything you hold dear just to stand for what you believe in makes someone a "coward", then I wish I were a coward :worship:

A short while ago you could have left everything you hold dear and gone to the Congo to stand up for Belgian colonialism. You would have got your wish.

joske
11-19-2005, 11:31 AM
yes buddyholly, what a great analysis of my personality.... I'm SO very pro-colonialism.... :rolleyes:

oh and Jim Jones: who said anything about the US rolling out a red carpet for deserters? it was about a Canadian town in which quite a few of the citizens today are guys who fled the US - the mayor of the CANADIAN town just wanted a statue for them, because the Vietnam war and the guys fleeing to the town were an important milestone in the history of that town...

Dirk
11-20-2005, 05:40 AM
I too can't believe that someone is defending Chretien that scumbag. By the way for Jorge fans, he recently was sending pms and reps. Ask Willie who recieved some until recently. As for Al Queda there is no excuse for they do whatsoever. Gitmo Bay is a necessary evil.

If you do some researching you would learn why Gitmo Bay is called "Club Gitmo" by some on the right because it's actually much more like a resort style prison than the terrible place the press along with our good old useful idiot demoncats make it out to be.

joske
11-20-2005, 10:02 PM
Jimmy, being called names in bad reps is something NO ONE likes, so calling me a faggot was just as bad...

minger :rolleyes: