QMJHL Player 'fired for not signing flag for troops'

[Looger]

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

There is no point trying to get into an anti-US debate with me because i stand with you on that one. With reguards to the support of Al Quada, the Taliban and the US Administrations support for the Saddam regieme. I consider all of these as proxy wars, in relation to the US opposition of the Soviet Union at the time as well as the opposition to Iran. More so of a strategy to get someone else to fight your war for you. The Taliban has never been an ally to the United States, it was simply used to combat soviet infleunce so the United States did not have to. The fact of the matter is, these countries, factions and groups looked like viable options at the time for whatever reasons, but to sit here and insinuate there is still some sort of conspiracy is just ridiculous. Allys can be allys one minute and emenys the next.

i'd accept this argument as relevant if western nations hadn't been caught red-handed using al-CIA-da to stir up the bosnian conflict, to assassinate quaddafi, and maintain high-level contacts and support with sick regimes like the taliban, all after the cold war ended.

iran was anti-soviet under mossadeq and he was overthrown over oil interests. cia.gov, operation ajax. plenty of bragging aboot it, kermit roosevelt, grandson of teddy, near the end of his life was in national papers talking up his part in the operation.

empires need enemies, imperialists need conflicts, the masses need bogeymen.

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

Nevertheless, anyone who thinks our soldiers aren't there to bring freedom to the Afghans, stabalize that country to prevent it from going into turmoil and preventing the ability for Al Quada to operate freely in that country, to plan future attacks on global targets - Canada included - is just brainwashed.

holy irony batman

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

As for personal insults, where? I simply fired what you said to me, right back at you. What goes around comes around.

the insult wasn't that HUGE a deal but it was in your first post response, just pointing it out - if you want to debate that's great but the tone of my response is ALWAYS metered by the tone of the challenger.

[RougeUnderoos]

Say this was another issue -- for example, Quebec sovereignty.

If this kid were playing for a team in Quebec and the coach was a ferocious separatist and he said in that paper "he refused to sign a declaration of support for a sovereign Quebec so we cut him", I wonder if the whole "he deserved it" choir would be singing the same tune.

[Flame Of Liberty]

Originally Posted by Looger

if i was some genius that 'busted their secret plans', i'd sure feel like an idiot after spending all that time and effort to research it when all i would have had to do would be to read the publicly available plans and doctrines on think tank websites and in books like 'the grand chessboard' by brizhinski, chief of staff during 'operation cyclone' and the creation of al-CIA-da, where al these guys brag and go on and on aboot how clever they are.

jeez, the current crop of neocons publicly praise leo strauss for god's sake! mr. lie-to-the-public and constant-warfare himself!

yep, i'd sure feel like an idiot. good thing i just don't have to be a genius to 'piece this all together'.

Question - what does make these guys (ex army, ex CIA, ex executive, ex whatever) credible to you? Cant they have their own agenda too? They are all trained to have and follow their agenda, to deceive and fool people, fabricate things and simply lie. Its what they have been doing all their lives. No?

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Agamemnon

So what? If someone doesn't agree with that then they should lose their non-related job? Since when do your personal politics = your right to keep your employment?

So if you don't agree with the mission..you can't support the troops?

Because really, sending that flag over there has NOTHING to do with the Afghan mission.

Like Looger said..we should let the troops know we're always looking out for them.

[Looger]

Originally Posted by Flame Of Liberty

Question - what does make these guys (ex army, ex CIA, ex executive, ex whatever) credible to you? Cant they have their own agenda too? They are all trained to have and follow their agenda, to deceive and fool people, fabricate things and simply lie. Its what they have been doing all their lives. No?

if my house is burnt down when i'm on vacation and there's a guy passing out flyers that said he did it, it might be worth looking into.

everyone has their own agenda.

brizhinski isn't a whistleblower, he's a facilitator. carol quigley (spelling?), bill clinton's mentor, was public aboot the aims and methods of what he called the anglo-american empire, he thought that we were ready back then to hear all this and accept it. when the guys that plan all of this write books aboot it, i will check it out.

as for people pushed off the bus, they of course have their own agenda. why wouldn't they? not sure what you're getting at here.

[Crazy Flamer]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

What if his opinion was that the owner was an idiot, and that his teammates were crappy? Could you kick him off then? If the team wants to portray an image to it's fans, it is up to the players to go along. If they can't then they don't belong on the team.

If the player thought the owner was an idiot and his teammates sucked then yes, kick him off the team because its hockey related. Not signing a flag has nothing do with hockey. You can't kick him off a team for his political views.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by the_hound

What ever happened to that policy of isolationism the USA used to fall back on? They only ever do things overseas nowadays if it benifits them somehow in the long run.

My God. The US hasn't used the theory of isolation since WW2.

[Azure]

I can't believe people actually think signing the flag has something to do with the war.

Nice hole you're all digging here...I once mentioned if you support the troops, you support the mission. Seems to me if you don't support the mission, you can't support the troops. So why sign the Flag?

Turns out I was right.

[eazyduzzit]

Originally Posted by Looger

i'd accept this argument as relevant if western nations hadn't been caught red-handed using al-CIA-da to stir up the bosnian conflict, to assassinate quaddafi, and maintain high-level contacts and support with sick regimes like the taliban, all after the cold war ended.

Cold war or not, can one nation not have other intrests to still put support in a group or organization?

Look, i know as much as the next person, the United States is one big corrupt operation full of lies and deception which constantly looks for backways to get around things.

All i'm saying is the United States supported the bad guys to fight more bad guys and in the end, they have had to fight the initial bad guy. It was one big corrupt operation as well as being wrong but to somehow sit here and say the United States, or Canada has some intrest or dealings with the Al Quada currently is disgusting.

But for someone to sit here and tell me, my friends, my family members and some of my colleagues, are over in Afghanistan for oil and natural gas, conspiracy and for useless reasons is demeening, disrespectful and out-right ridiculous.

I wouldn't put it past you if you believe in those ridiculous 9/11 conspiracies too.

I have nothing more to say to you.

[Looger]

Azure, i disagree with you mightily.

i can (and do) have great empathy for the troops in afghanistan, they're there doing a job and they fight for their comrades and to see home again, not directly for whatever started the war.

if all the troops were involved in making the decision and the reasons, if they all got stock certificates in the corporations involved and were guaranteed some kind of job in said company after the conflict is over, then i would agree with you.

i don't know why or how it's impossible to support the troops and not the mission, because that is how i genuinely feel.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Azure

Like Looger said..we should let the troops know we're always looking out for them.

You go ahead and do that then, but if you don't want to, you shouldn't lose your job.

[TimSJ]

Again the flag thing was just one of many things.. he was going to get cut anyways.. apparently he also said he would have maybe signed it if it was a quebec flag..

[eazyduzzit]

Originally Posted by TimSJ

Again the flag thing was just one of many things.. he was going to get cut anyways.. apparently he also said he would have maybe signed it if it was a quebec flag..

Was i wrong to assume this guy was from Quebec without even looking for his place of birth?

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Looger

i don't know why or how it's impossible to support the troops and not the mission, because that is how i genuinely feel.

Exactly. So why wouldn't the player sign this Flag? Because he doesn't support the war? What the hell does supporting the war have to do with showing your support for our troops?

I actually agree with you.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

You go ahead and do that then, but if you don't want to, you shouldn't lose your job.

Sure, whatever.

The player lost his job for numerous other reasons besides this.

[Looger]

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

Cold war or not, can one nation not have other intrests to still put support in a group or organization?

sure. but what interests are really involved? are all the people in the employ of the people truly serving the interests of said people? is it so impossible that there are interests outside of fighting the evil empire?

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

Look, i know as much as the next person, the United States is one big corrupt operation full of lies and deception which constantly looks for backways to get around things.

the US has a lot of power and a lot of prestige worldwide. sounds like a prime playground for those that don't consider themselves under the rule of law.

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

All i'm saying is the United States supported the bad guys to fight more bad guys and in the end, they have had to fight the initial bad guy. It was one big corrupt operation as well as being wrong but to somehow sit here and say the United States, or Canada has some intrest or dealings with the Al Quada currently is disgusting.

disgusting? disgusting is blind support and blind obedience to the very perpetrators of most terror against you. disgusting is not holding leaders accountable to their actions and inactions. disgusting is turning your brain off because someone tells you something you believe automatically. that's disgusting.

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

But for someone to sit here and tell me, my friends, my family members and some of my colleagues, are over in Afghanistan for oil and natural gas, conspiracy and for useless reasons is demeening, disrespectful and out-right ridiculous.

no, it's demeaning, disrespectful and out-right ridiculous to continue to support and give lip service to the very forces behind the threat to your friends, family, and co-workers.

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

I wouldn't put it past you if you believe in those ridiculous 9/11 conspiracies too.

guess you're new here!

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

I have nothing more to say to you.

fair enough.

[the_hound]

Originally Posted by Azure

My God. The US hasn't used the theory of isolation since WW2.

Exactly, and what has been the growing concensus among other countries of the world since then on their foriegn policy ? NOT GOOD. Ever since WW2 they seem to think they are "World Police" of somesort and are constantly angering other countries by interfering, especially when they go against the United Nations policy. (IE: Iraq)

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by Crazy Flamer

If the player thought the owner was an idiot and his teammates sucked then yes, kick him off the team because its hockey related. Not signing a flag has nothing do with hockey. You can't kick him off a team for his political views.

Allright, what if he was in the paper, saying things like the Jews are responsible for every war, and that black people should all be deported?
Those have nothing to do with hockey, whould the owner be justified for kicking him off the team then?

The fact of the matter is that the owner sees this kid not signing the flag as reflecting badly on the team. If you tarish the team immage you should be sent packing.

[the_hound]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

Allright, what if he was in the paper, saying things like the Jews are responsible for every war, and that black people should all be deported?
Those have nothing to do with hockey, whould the owner be justified for kicking him off the team then?

The fact of the matter is that the owner sees this kid not signing the flag as reflecting badly on the team. If you tarnish the team image you should be sent packing.

What if the coach wanted him to go on TV and say those things and he refused? Kick him off the team?
It swings both ways.

And who decides what reflects badly on the team and who would know he didnt sign it if it were'nt for them making a big stink?

What tarnishes the teams image more than this story making headlines is making it into a big deal, if you ask me thats worse.

[Crazy Flamer]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

Allright, what if he was in the paper, saying things like the Jews are responsible for every war, and that black people should all be deported?
Those have nothing to do with hockey, whould the owner be justified for kicking him off the team then?

The fact of the matter is that the owner sees this kid not signing the flag as reflecting badly on the team. If you tarish the team immage you should be sent packing.

Maybe its just me, bu it feels like your grasping at straws here. What if this, what if that? THe fact of the matter is, none of your "what if" scenarios happened. He's not preaching hatred, he simply didn't want to sign a flag. He's well within his right to not do so.