[Nicko]

More evidence of general insanity of Bush & Co. Breaks a 200 year old treaty with us claiming that terrorists are going to start flowing over the lakes?


Great Lakes machine guns raise ire in Canada

U.S. Coast Guard conducting live-ammunition training drills


MARGARET PHILP
From Thursday's Globe and Mail

The United States Coast Guard have started to patrol the Great Lakes with machine guns mounted on their vessels and are conducting live-ammunition training drills on the U.S. side to prepare officers to combat terrorists flooding across the border from Canada by boat.
The automatic-weapon drills started earlier this year but came to light only in the past two weeks after information about the Coast Guard's move to create 34 permanent live-fire training zones in the Great Lakes was published in the U.S. federal register.
Since the beginning of the year, the Coast Guard have conducted 24 drills, each time firing about 3,000 rounds of lead bullets about a third of the size of a fishing-line sinker from light-weight machine guns in waters at least eight kilometres from the Canadian border and U.S. shores. Two more target practices are scheduled for this year.
The high-powered drills have stunned environmentalists, boaters and mayors in cities dotting the lakes in both countries who are outraged that the U.S. government would jeopardize the safety of pleasure boaters and commercial fishermen who could stray into the line of fire. Just as infuriating, they say, is the risk of lead exposure to fish and the more than 40 million people who draw drinking water from the Great Lakes.
Related to this article


Enlarge Image A U.S. Coast Guard response boat equipped with machine guns patrols the Detroit River during Super Bowl festivities in Detroit in February. (Paul Sancya/AP)


“It was a big surprise on both sides of the border. At first I thought it was an Internet hoax,” said Mike Bradley, the mayor of Sarnia, Ont., who has written a letter to Prime Minister Stephen Harper asking him to intervene.
“The longest undefended border in the world is gone. It's passé. And this is an example of it.”
Toronto Mayor David Miller chairs a coalition of U.S. and Canadian mayors working to restore and protect the lakes.
He said the target practice violates a treaty signed after the War of 1812 that outlaws military weapons on the Great Lakes, tampering with two centuries of peaceful history.
“This is very much the wrong direction, to militarize the border between these two countries,” he said in an interview. “It's symbolically important and practically important that the border remain open and doesn't become militarized.”
“At a time ... when there is interest in restoring the integrity of the lakes,” he writes in a letter to the Prime Minister, “it is most disturbing that the U.S. is contemplating exercises that will militarize the lakes, cause pollution and environmental degradation, restrict shipping and recreation, and change the peaceful border between Canada and the U.S.”
Far more people are killed on Toronto streets by illegal U.S. guns crossing the border, he said, than bloody-minded terrorists from Canada crossing south. “The idea that terrorists are flooding across the Great Lakes is utter nonsense,” he said. Until this year, U.S. Coast Guard vessels carried only handguns and small-calibre rifles. But anti-terrorist furor has led to a bolstering of firepower.
“We're trying to be prepared in case something happens,” said a U.S. Coast Guard spokesman, Chief Petty Officer Robert Lanier.
“I don't know what it is, but I know I want to be prepared for it when it happens. We need to conduct these live-fire exercises so we are prepared for whatever it may be. If we are not prepared for it, there are going to be questions about why we weren't prepared for it.”
The Coast Guard said the drills have so far been conducted without a hitch. By way of safety precautions, broadcasts on marine radio bands will be made repeatedly a few hours before training begins, and a second Coast Guard vessel will monitor boat traffic around the training zones during the shooting exercises.
But critics on both sides of the border say that many small pleasure boats are either not equipped with marine radio, seldom tune in, or could mistakenly wander into the unmarked firing range.
Others are raising alarms about the impact of tens of thousands of bullets made from lead, which has been linked to brain-development and behaviour problems in children. In recent years there have been efforts to reduce lead in the lakes, including the banning of lead paint and a more recent campaign asking fishermen to replace lead sinkers.
“We've spent years removing lead from the Great Lakes,” said Mary Muter, a long-time cottager and vice-president of the Georgian Bay Association, a coalition of cottage owners and boaters. “As a Canadian, these are binational waters and this is just offensive.”
The Coast Guard commissioned a study from a consulting group, stating that while lead from spent bullets could be passed up the food chain, the drills would pose “no elevated risk” to the environment or human health.
As for the shaky status of the world's longest undefended border, a spokeswoman for the Department of Foreign Affairs, Ambra Dickie, said that Canada and the United States signed a written agreement three years ago articulating that moves to arm U.S. law-enforcement vessels with light machine guns in U.S. jurisdiction do not violate the spirit of the treaty. That treaty, the argument goes, was drafted to ensure peace in the Great Lakes by forbidding weapons of war such as cannons on sailing ships.
“We don't have any cannons or rocket launchers or anything like that,” CPO Lanier said.

[Macrobat]

Sorry, no treaty was broken. Both sides agreed to alter the agreement. Perhaps a little research before your knee hits you in the eye next time is in order?

U.S. puts machine-guns on Great Lakes coast guard vessels

A Canadian Foreign Affairs official said Ottawa has agreed to read the treaty in such a way that coast guard vessels may be mounted with guns by considering them weapons of law enforcement rather than war.
Canada reserves the right to arm its own vessels as well, the official told CBC News.
Under the reinterpretation, which both sides say honours the spirit of the original treaty, vessels may be outfitted with machine-guns of sizes up to .50-calibre. That would be big enough to bring down a helicopter and shoot through a light-armoured vehicle.
Colclough said the United States has no intention of equipping the vessels with .50-calibre machine-guns at this point.

And, please, it's a 7.62 mm gun. The same caliber as all the deer rifles in abundance on BOTH sides of the border. The treaty has always allowed for the mounting of a single "18 pounder cannon" which would equate to a modern 20 mm cannon - perhaps that would make you happier?

I would say the "hysteria" exists in your own little particular bit of Canada.

[Sky Captain]

I've had my intrest sparked to Kenya.
Intresting place.

[Nicko]

Ok you have a point. Still, I see little sense in ‘militarizing’ the great lakes.

[DBursey]

More crumbs thrown to the Homeland Hysteria crowd.

Meanwhile container ports in the US coastal cities go all but unchecked.

Go figure.

[Big Mac]

At times I wonder if the leftists want to see another 9/11, just so that they can villify Bush all the more.

[itai195]

You're right, we relish nothing more than the thought of fellow Americans dying.

Do people who say things like that ever take a step back and look at wtf they just said?

[DBursey]

Originally Posted by Big Mac

At times I wonder if the leftists want to see another 9/11, just so that they can villify Bush all the more.

Who are these 'leftists' anyway? The Sandinistas? Bolsheviks? Che Guevara? The Borg?

Sounds kind of sinister.

[marden]

Originally Posted by Nicko

Ok you have a point. Still, I see little sense in ‘militarizing’ the great lakes.

You see little point in defending America at all, I suspect.

[Big Mac]

Originally Posted by DBursey

Who are these 'leftists' anyway? The Sandinistas? Bolsheviks? Che Guevara? The Borg?

Sounds kind of sinister.

The leftists know who they are.

[Dakar]

Is a leftist different from a liberal?

[Big Mac]

Depends on your definition.

[Dakar]

I think it's obvious I'm asking for yours.

[marden]

Originally Posted by itai195

You're right, we relish nothing more than the thought of fellow Americans dying.

Do people who say things like that ever take a step back and look at wtf they just said?

See what I mean?

A few American hating instigators say things that are divisive and hateful and the conservative posters respond against liberals in general. The liberal posters want to defend themselves against the conservative criticism. The instigator hides among the liberals and smiles because he has caused further division between the right and left in America.

Please, itai195, I know you love America. And DBursey, I know you don't want America to be attacked. But look at the few common mean spirited, angry instigators who CALL themselves liberals and who get you to provide them shields, just like Hezbollah did the Lebanese.

Don't fall for it!

[Big Mac]

Originally Posted by Dakar

I think it's obvious I'm asking for yours.

The terms are largely synoymous, if only because the term liberal has stronger left-wing connotations than it did in the past.

[Dakar]

Originally Posted by Big Mac

The terms are largely synoymous.

Ok.

I'm gonna go with, I'm not a leftist, since I don't wanna see another 9/11.

Edit: Though that's not to deny my liberal tendencies.

[Big Mac]

Okay, fair enough.

[Sky Captain]

For the current administration it's a damned if we do damned if we don't situation.
Especially if a terrorist bomb boat crossed the Great Lakes.
The "left" would eat that up.

[marden]

Originally Posted by Big Mac

The leftists know who they are.

Some of them are atheists. Some of them are just people who hate America for whatever reason. That is why jihadist terrorism is so difficult to deal with. They could be anyone. John Walker Lind. Jose Padilla. Adam Gadahn.

Or women.

11 April 2002
A woman terrorist, en route to carry out a suicide attack, arrested in Tulkarm

(Communicated by the IDF Spokesman)

Less than two days after IDF forces withdrew from Tulkarm, IDF forces arrested Shefa Kudasi, a young Palestinian woman, resident of Tulkarm. Kudasi had been recruited by Fatah-Tanzim to carry out a suicide attack inside Israel while disguised as a pregnant woman.

Kudasi, 26-years-old, divorced and the mother of an eight-year-old girl, was arrested tonight (April 11) at her parents house. When questioned, she admitted that she had been instructed by wanted Tanzim terrorists to infiltrate into the Sharon region of Israel while disguised as a pregnant woman who is wearing a coat and carrying a bag, and to carry out a suicide attack in a crowded location.

As of late, Israel has seen a large number of attacks carried out by Palestinian women in the service of the terrorist organizations. These organizations are interested in exploiting the assumption that women do not arouse suspicion either on their way to Israel or during their stay there. It is highly likely that the Palestinian terrorist organizations will continue to exploit the innocent countenance of women in order to carry out terrorist attacks. By doing so, they are sending these women to their deaths.

The arrest of Shefa Kudasi was carried out by IDF soldiers who had to re-enter the town of Tulkarm in order to perform this mission. This arrest foiled the young woman's intentions to commit suicide, preventing a murderous terrorist attack.http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Government...%20a%20suicide

[marden]

PLEASE ! Let's recognize the peace loving American liberals who want America to be safe, okay?

That was why I wanted to create unity so we could expose the hate mongers who want us divided like in Iraq!

I think nicko would love to see America hurt or conquered or destroyed.

[itai195]

Originally Posted by marden

But look at the few common mean spirited, angry instigators who CALL themselves liberals and who get you to provide them shields, just like Hezbollah did the Lebanese.

As a rule I don't defend positions that I find disagreeable. However, depending on a host of factors related to the person who posted the position - conservative or liberal - I may not necessarily call them on it.

[Dakar]

Originally Posted by marden

I think nicko would love to see America hurt or conquered or destroyed.

I think Nicko has a giant chip on his shoulder.

[Dakar]

Originally Posted by itai195

As a rule I don't defend positions that I find disagreeable. However, depending on a host of factors related to the person who posted the position - conservative or liberal - I may not necessarily call them on it.

I find that to be the biggest challenge of posting in here.

[lpkmckenna]

“We're trying to be prepared in case something happens,” said a U.S. Coast Guard spokesman, Chief Petty Officer Robert Lanier. “I don't know what it is, but I know I want to be prepared for it when it happens. We need to conduct these live-fire exercises so we are prepared for whatever it may be. If we are not prepared for it, there are going to be questions about why we weren't prepared for it.”

While you're at it, why not prepare for an invasion of cyborg Vogons from planet Neptune? It's just as likely to happen.

[subego]

Originally Posted by marden

Don't fall for it!

Lemme get this straight. A conservative falls for an America basher who claims to be a liberal. Said conservative smears all liberals, and then you ask the liberals to not fall for the America basher by defending ourselves?

That's pretty twisted.

Edit: your concept of peace and unity seems to be based on putting your boot on my neck. You might not care but I find your line of reasoning truly offensive.

[marden]

Originally Posted by Sky Captain

For the current administration it's a damned if we do damned if we don't situation.
Especially if a terrorist bomb boat crossed the Great Lakes.
The "left" would eat that up.

I don't think there is any question in America's minds that creating a strong great lakes defense is important.

The startled response from Canadians just shows how immune they've thought themselves to terrorism. They seem to act as if it is the most out of the question and preposterous idea that could ever be. Well, anyone who really understood what 9/11 meant realized this was war.

There is no "damned if you do" in my book. If someone has a problem with what America does to defend itself they didn't care that much about America, if you ask me.

Tell me, do you care if your neighbor installs a home security system or gets a quiet watch dog and a strong, tall fence to keep him in the yard?

Of course not. You let him do what he needs to do to protect himself and feel safe.

[Dakar]

Originally Posted by marden

I don't think there is any question in America's minds that creating a strong great lakes defense is important.

I disagree.

[marden]

Originally Posted by itai195

As a rule I don't defend positions that I find disagreeable. However, depending on a host of factors related to the person who posted the position - conservative or liberal - I may not necessarily call them on it.

I think there are a few wolves in sheep's clothing. They hate America. They Hate the Iraqi war. They are committed to bash Bush and America and do what they can on these pages to influence negative opinions about America and Bush. They are the most venomous and sneering posters and you know who they are.

Don't let them be considered liberals.

When they say something out of line that is just hateful and calls for or supports America's downfall, just tell them you don't speak for American liberals.

Just imagine if moderate Muslims would all say to the jihadists, "you don't speak for Islam."

Yes, they would be killed for saying that. But that's why it's important that we stand up to these instigators. Because they dare not expose themselves for what and who they really are. We can nullify their effect if we recognize their tactics and just say...

YOU DON'T SPEAK FOR AMERICAN LIBERALS.

[marden]

Originally Posted by Dakar

I disagree.

On what basis?

[itai195]

I don't find it necessary to point out the truism that individuals on an Internet forum are not authorized speak for any large groups of people.

[marden]

Originally Posted by subego

Lemme get this straight. A conservative falls for an America basher who claims to be a liberal. Said conservative smears all liberals, and then you ask the liberals to not fall for the America basher by defending ourselves?

That's pretty twisted.

Edit: your concept of peace and unity seems to be based on putting your boot on my neck. You might not care but I find your line of reasoning truly offensive.

If I explained it better do you think you'd be less offended?

[Dakar]

Originally Posted by marden

On what basis?

That I don't believe a strong Great Lakes defense is important.

[marden]

Originally Posted by itai195

I don't find it necessary to point out the truism that individuals on an Internet forum are not authorized speak for any large groups of people.

Fine.

So be prepared for this to continue:

Jerk: America &^**@$+)!

Patriot Conservative: You liberals are (*@#&$%^@#_!!!

Patriot Liberal: Well you conservatives are *&@#^$!@(&^!!!!

Jerk: *Tee Hee Hee. Such sheeple!*

[marden]

Originally Posted by Dakar

That I don't believe a strong Great Lakes defense is important.

Is it because you believe terrorist are inherently afraid of water?

[itai195]

Note the error that instigated the argument in your example was when the conservative tarred all liberals with the same brush.

[Dakar]

I don't think there is any question in America's minds that creating a strong great lakes defense is important.

Originally Posted by Dakar, an American

I don't believe a strong Great Lakes defense is important.

The only point I was trying to make was that you were making a huge generalization that was incorrect.

And for the record, just because I don't think 'strong' is important doesn't mean I think we should leave the great lakes completely unsecured. You know, since that tends to be the first argument a lot of people use.

[subego]

Originally Posted by marden

If I explained it better do you think you'd be less offended?

Unknowable until you do so.

[kmkkid]

Originally Posted by marden

Tell me, do you care if your neighbor installs a home security system or gets a quiet watch dog and a strong, tall fence to keep him in the yard?

Of course not. You let him do what he needs to do to protect himself and feel safe.

I might get just a little upset if my neighbors had machine guns pointed in my families direction, and shot at us if we happened to wander on their property border by accident.

[marden]

Originally Posted by itai195

Note the error that instigated the argument in your example was when the conservative tarred all liberals with the same brush.

I enjoy chatting with you because you bring up salient points.

The error you mention is there alright!

Why?

Because these jerks are able to assume inclusion in the liberal identity. I tried to isolate the atheists. I tried to isolate the sympathizers. But there are more than those genres posting here. Maybe we should label them the "evilposters?"

Until liberal disavor these jerks they will sully your fine ranks.

Not all Muslims are jihadists. But since the moderates don't stand up and disavor the jerks you can understand why a LOT of Americans have come to believe they are all jerks. So, until you disavor the jerks amongst you don't be surprised that you get called jerks because of the jerks you protect by saying nothing to them.

[DBursey]

The startled response from Canadians just shows how immune they've thought themselves to terrorism. They seem to act as if it is the most out of the question and preposterous idea that could ever be. Well, anyone who really understood what 9/11 meant realized this was war.

Experience would suggest that terrorists stride through your open front door as opposed to crossing the lake from Canadian territory. There are police and coast guard forces on both sides of the lake. This type of intrinsic security is entirely lacking in your container ports, as my previous post mentioned.

Weighing in with my thoughts on the efficacy of your security measures is perfectly fair comment, and is hardly suitable criteria for being pilloried with these rediculous labels.

Canadians know full well the weight of 9/11, having been the 1st to come to your aid in its wake.

[Dakar]

Originally Posted by marden

IMaybe we should label them the "evilposters?"

I'd love to see you keep a public list of them.

[itai195]

Originally Posted by marden

Until liberal disavor these jerks they will sully your fine ranks.

Are you saying atheists are jerks? I'd disagree with that...

We seem to approach politics from different directions. I don't feel the need to disavow anybody because I don't believe anybody else speaks for me. I don't feel a particularly strong need for 'unity' with other liberals, in fact I find such a concept very unappealing.

[marden]

Originally Posted by Dakar

The only point I was trying to make was that you were making a huge generalization that was incorrect.

And for the record, just because I don't think 'strong' is important doesn't mean I think we should leave the great lakes completely unsecured. You know, since that tends to be the first argument a lot of people use.

My "Strong defense" = your "doesn't mean I think we should leave the great lakes completely unsecured."

We both want to prevent waterborne attacks on America's Great lakes.

Agreement with a conservative may be difficult to do, but in a circumstance like this doesn't it feel right?

[Dakar]

Originally Posted by marden

My "Strong defense" = your "doesn't mean I think we should leave the great lakes completely unsecured."

We both want to prevent waterborne attacks on America's Great lakes.

This sounds agreeable, but the Apocalypse Now reminiscent mounted guns are a bit much in my opinion.

[lpkmckenna]

Originally Posted by marden

But since the moderates (Muslims) don't stand up and disavor the jerks...

They don't?

http://www.cair.com/html/911statements.html

[lpkmckenna]

Originally Posted by itai195

Are you saying atheists are jerks? I'd disagree with that...

[Macrobat]

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna

While you're at it, why not prepare for an invasion of cyborg Vogons from planet Neptune? It's just as likely to happen.

You're right! It's absurd! Why, it's as ridiculous as believing that terrorists would hijack innocent transcontinental jetliners and crash them into buildings . . . oh, wait.

[marden]

Originally Posted by itai195

Are you saying atheists are jerks? I'd disagree with that...

I don't feel the need to 'disavow' anybody because I don't believe anybody else speaks for me.

As time goes by just keep an eye open for how they hide their venomous attacks on America behind your reasoned philosophical disagreements with conservatives.

They don't just hate conservatives, they hate what you love. Please don't give them comfort and concealment while they bring undue attacks on your fine opposition. When you look at the interactions you'll see that the more reasonable among you are able to get along with the more unreasonable among us. But the ones who HATE only get along with other haters. They use everyone else.

[subego]

Originally Posted by subego

Unknowable until you do so.

Your post to ital195 explained your position better. I am indeed less offended.

[Dork.]

In my mind, there are two issues here. One is whether or not the U.S. has the right, under the treaty, to bring these weapons into the area. On this point, both countries have agreed to it, so there really should be no issue. It may seem like splitting hairs, but I think we can make a distinction between "weapons of war" and "law-enforcement weapons". And furthermore, I think this is a perfect decision to be made by the respective Federal governments, without local governments' involvement, since it involves the security of the entirety of both countries, not just the Great Lakes region.

(As much as I may feel we need to do it, there will be no amphibious Marine landing to secure the SkyDome and claim Roy Halliday to replace Pedro Martinez' spot on the Mets post-season roster.)

The second issue is the drills on the Great Lakes. This is an issue that should carry more local involvement. This is the first I've heard of it, and I'm relatively up-to-date on local issues here in Western New York. Lots of people use the lakes for recreation, even the bits near the US/Canadian border, and there has been a lot of effort put into cleaning up the lakes. There are more than a few people affected by these live-fire exercises, even if they are done kilometers off the coast, and I'm suprised that this has been going on without our knowledge.

It does seem that the Coast Guard must have been conducting these drills with all this in mind, though, or else the first drill would have been so disruptive as to make a big ruckus, and there have been 23 since then. While dumping any amount of lead into the Great Lakes seems like a bad idea, 3,000 rounds seems like a small impact to me.

So, I'm kind of disappointed about how we all found out about this, but figure that as long as the Coast Guard goes out of its way to make these drills non-disruptive, we're probably better off if they perform them. As the Coast Guard Officer said, if they could have stopped something coming across the lakes and didn't, we'd all be wondering why the heck we have a coast guard in the first place.