Canadians boo the American National Anthem!

[Taft]

Re: Re: Here it is.

Originally posted by dukestreet
Pathetic, if you ask me. I'm thoroughly annoyed. Oh, well. Guess I openned this can o' worms.

I'm thinking someone in charge of these games should say something before playing the anthems, ask for the respect due to the visiting teams.

D

Actually, one of the articles states that the annoucer DID ask the crowd to respect the anthem. The crowd booed anyway.

http://etheridge.ca/articles/anthem.html

Real nice. Some people are just pigs.

Taft

 

[kansaigaijin]

they did that at the Islanders game ( the last link) it likely made it worse.
sounds like you are a reasonable guy Dukestreet. I wouldn't boo either. But maybe that would be dishonest?
My wife won't stand for the Japanese anthem, nor will many other people at public events here. I guess they feel you are bringing politics to sport if you play the anthems, why not leave them out?

 

[Mr. Anderson]

Originally posted by kansaigaijin
I guess they feel you are bringing politics to sport if you play the anthems, why not leave them out?

I seem to remember hearing something about how it all came about playing anthems at a sports event. WWII, WWI, not sure, going to have to dig that up.

If it were just for an American game, not international, that might be one thing. Now its more tradition than anything else. And baring state events, you don't hear the anthem played anywhere else.....

Very interesting, actually. And I try to be reasonable as often as possible. I have my own buttons that can be pushed though, like everybody esle

D

 

[pseudobrit]

Canada's looking better by the day. Hey, all the neocons keep saying "if you don't like it here, you can leave." Be careful what you wish for.

Contrary to some of the ridiculous assertions above, Canada is NOT a protectorate of the US military. Canada's defence is provided for by their own military as well as the UK's. Canada would have no problem gathering a large coalition and defending herself from foreign aggression.

Also, the Kuwaiti invasion that precipitated the first Gulf War was not Saddam saying "oh, there's a piece of land I'd like to grab!" but the result of decades-long animosity and territorial disputes. Read your history.

Booing the American anthem is a reaction to the govenment of the USA. Not her people, and especially not her troops. The booing was directed at the military-industrial complex that rules the administration and the illicit causes to which they have dedicated our troops and people.

Go Canada.

 

[Mr. Anderson]

Originally posted by pseudobrit
Booing the American anthem is a reaction to the govenment of the USA. Not her people, and especially not her troops. The booing was directed at the military-industrial complex that rules the administration and the illicit causes to which they have dedicated our troops and people.

But you see, that's not the point. Rationalizing why it was done doesn't make it any better. Like I was saying above, at a professional sports venue, its just not appropriate to show that sort of disrespect, period. Whether its Canadians or Amercians or Greenlanders doing the booing.

D

 

[pseudobrit]

Originally posted by dukestreet
But you see, that's not the point. Rationalizing why it was done doesn't make it any better. Like I was saying above, at a professional sports venue, its just not appropriate to show that sort of disrespect, period. Whether its Canadians or Amercians or Greenlanders doing the booing.

D

Disrepsect is renaming french fries and french toast.

Disrespect is ignoring the world community, calling it insignificant.

Disrespect is blaming the French for our diplomatic debacles.

Disrespect is to classify an entire race as cowardly appeasers.

A lighthearted reply is to boo the anthem of the nation that shows you such disrespect.

 

[NavyIntel007]

Originally posted by Dont Hurt Me
Well canada doesnt really have much of a military since we are the ones that truely provide their security, Just as we provide S.Korea's, and West Germany for 50 years etc etc. Just more people who would rather be living under tyranny rather then freedom. I know this doesnt represent all of the country but a very common theme is that many young people (teens- mid twenties) are active in these anti U.S marches etc. They dont understand that the Freedoms they enjoy were not just given to them. Time and time again we have risen to overcome the Hitlers, the Saddams, the Stalins,The Milosevich's etc etc. These were not accomplished by doing nothing and hoping for the best. They were accomplished by action or threat of force,negotiation and even war. The U.S. does not war because we like it, we do this because of the failure of the world community. The U.S. detests war and have found appeasement to Tyrants never works. Negotiation with a killer, liar, can only go so far and then enough is enough. I am ashamed of those that were booing because i guess they would be happy if Saddam was just allowed to keep his people oppressed and to keep ignoring what he was required to do after the Gulf war.

The forces in Korea are there to keep the North from striking Japan.

 

[Mr. Anderson]

Originally posted by pseudobrit

A lighthearted reply is to boo the anthem of the nation that shows you such disrespect.

You didn't understand, or just don't agree with me, that's fine.

I do not think booing is a 'lightharted reply' at all in this context.

D

 

[NavyIntel007]

Dude, I'm not even going to bring this up with my girlfriend (Canadian).

I didn't read the article at first, I thought it was Canadians booing at the US anthem... man, I'm in trouble. I really hope she doesn't hear about this... I was flamed at when this war started...

 

[mcrain]

Originally posted by pseudobrit
Contrary to some of the ridiculous assertions above, Canada is NOT a protectorate of the US military. Canada's defence is provided for by their own military as well as the UK's. Canada would have no problem gathering a large coalition and defending herself from foreign aggression.

Perhaps, but with the exchange rate, those two tanks, one canoe and a cessna aren't quite as intimidating.

THAT WAS ONLY A JOKE!

Actually, what I wanted to add to this conversation was the way in which Canadians are portrayed by the WWE. There have been more Canadian vs. American storylines than I care to remember. Little kids watch this stuff, and they have to be affected.

 

[jethroted]

I think they were saying "Boo-URNS! Boo-URNS!" It's really just a little mix up.

 

[NavyIntel007]

Originally posted by mcrain
Perhaps, but with the exchange rate, those two tanks, one canoe and a cessna aren't quite as intimidating.

THAT WAS ONLY A JOKE!

Actually, what I wanted to add to this conversation was the way in which Canadians are portrayed by the WWE. There have been more Canadian vs. American storylines than I care to remember. Little kids watch this stuff, and they have to be affected.

Dude, you're so right. What's going to happen a generation from now when the kids who've seen this rift get to be in power?

 

[Mr. Anderson]

Originally posted by mcrain
Actually, what I wanted to add to this conversation was the way in which Canadians are portrayed by the WWE. There have been more Canadian vs. American storylines than I care to remember. Little kids watch this stuff, and they have to be affected.

Well, bringing up the bigger picture, all this tells people is that its ok to hate, on top of all the tv and video game violence. Very sad, actually.

D

 

[eyelikeart]

Re: Re: useless post of the day

Originally posted by dukestreet
You are complaining about my thread, Mr. Poop!?!?!

ah...no complaints on the thread duke...

I'm just disgusted by the view of Americans as a whole now from this war. I don't understand how anyone can look at us and say we should not be doing anything.

Now we're being booed by other countries...that's wonderful.

I guarantee u if it were any other country in this world, we'd be welcomed for the help.

I'm not for the conflict...but our hands are tied and we simply cannot afford to back away from this.

 

[cubist]

Originally posted by pseudobrit
Disrepsect is renaming french fries and french toast.

Disrespect is ignoring the world community, calling it insignificant.

Disrespect is blaming the French for our diplomatic debacles.

Disrespect is to classify an entire race as cowardly appeasers.

A lighthearted reply is to boo the anthem of the nation that shows you such disrespect.

Arrogant disrespect is saying "no matter what resolution you propose, we will veto it."

 

[Taft]

Originally posted by cubist
Arrogant disrespect is saying "no matter what resolution you propose, we will veto it."

Corrent me if I'm wrong, but thats not exactly what they said. Who are you talking about? Chirac?

I believe they stated publicly that they would oppose any resolution that called for force to be used against Iraq. The rest was predictions and speculation by the press and the international community.

And regardless, I don't think it shows disrespect. It shows disagreement. The French knew the US would propose military action against Iraq. They opposed that. Is their opposition disrespetful? Not in my mind.

There are a lot of people here who have blatently disrepected the French to the point of racism simply because they disagree with our course of action. I, like psuedo, find that reprehensible.

Taft

 

[Fukui]

South Korea can look after it's self. they have a million man army, and 4.5 million reserves. the US has what, 47,000 troops in South Korea?
Who is protecting whom?
If you had paid any attention, you would know Canadians don't support your war. They don't share your paranoia. Who do you think you are protecting us from?

Gaijin, my wife's bro is in the So Korean army, I don't really CARE what some gaijin think they "can look after" themselves, I don't want anything happening to them, so U.S can protect them all they want. So. Korean army, if you've ever been there isn't like the U.S one, they only train for 2 years unlike the U.S which is 4 year minimum, and the U.S has airforce and navy that can attack with great precision and keep loss of life to a minimum...If 4.5 million civillians got called to fight in a war there, IT WOULD BE A "BLOODBATH."

And I am not for this war, I hate it, but I also am not stupid to slap someone who would put thier life to protect my loved ones (In SK and JP).

YCGTH...

 

[pseudobrit]

Originally posted by Fukui


Gaijin, my wife's bro is in the So Korean army, I don't really CARE what some gaijin think they "can look after" themselves, I don't want anything happening to them, so U.S can protect them all they want. So. Korean army, if you've ever been there isn't like the U.S one, they only train for 2 years unlike the U.S which is 4 year minimum, and the U.S has airforce and navy that can attack with great precision and keep loss of life to a minimum...If 4.5 million civillians got called to fight in a war there, IT WOULD BE A "BLOODBATH."

And I am not for this war, I hate it, but I also am not stupid to slap someone who would put thier life to protect my loved ones (In SK and JP).

YCGTH...

I know a guy who was in S. Korea in the early stages of their militarisation under the tutelage of the US military. He claims that even back then, they could take care of themselves. Not to disrespect the US forces there, but in case of war, they would not be needed per se. I'm sure their efforts and their presence would be appreciated in case of war.

 

[bsmart]

Come on people. It happens all the time. It's not about anything more than hockey! The Quebecers are a ferverent lot and love their team.

 

[Fukui]

He claims that even back then, they could take care of themselves. Not to disrespect the US forces there, but in case of war, they would not be needed per se.

Lets just hope they don't ever need to take care of themselves (no wars there).

 

[pseudobrit]

Originally posted by Taft
Corrent me if I'm wrong, but thats not exactly what they said. Who are you talking about? Chirac?

I believe they stated publicly that they would oppose any resolution that called for force to be used against Iraq. The rest was predictions and speculation by the press and the international community.

And regardless, I don't think it shows disrespect. It shows disagreement. The French knew the US would propose military action against Iraq. They opposed that. Is their opposition disrespetful? Not in my mind.

There are a lot of people here who have blatently disrepected the French to the point of racism simply because they disagree with our course of action. I, like psuedo, find that reprehensible.
Taft

The French -- and the Germans, Russians and Chinese -- vowed to varying degrees not to support a resolution that automatically authorised use of force. Other (a majority) Security Council nations publicly anounced that they would not vote for such a resolution.

Since we couldn't get the authorisation, we acted like there was enough proof in the first resolution. If there were, why did we pursue the second one?

 

[Totalshock]

Originally posted by bsmart
Come on people. It happens all the time. It's not about anything more than hockey! The Quebecers are a ferverent lot and love their team.

And it's worth noting that a proportion of them also boo the Canadian national anthem, because they are hardcore separatists.

Kinda reminds me about the thing with the Philly fans, and safe landings at the airport.

 

[superfunkomatic]

double standard?

i think it's odd that we're concerned about "weapons of mass destruction". being canadian, we don't have to worry about being attacked since we are not poking at rabid animals like saddam hussein with a stick. you leave us alone, and we'll do likewise. we have a reputation as peacekeepers in conflicts, not as agressors. the only war where we played a major role as aggressors was the war of 1812, and americans know how that turned out...

there's a fundamental difference between american and canadian politics. and everyone should be able to accept that. the US is big and plays a larger role, we have a population about 1/10th of the size and we are not as much of a player in world politics.

why can the us and ussr have "weapons of mass destruction" yet anyone else is a threat. frankly i'm more concerned about GW Bush than anyone else, he's a renegade and takes heed from no one. who's really the loose cannon?

americans you do your thing and we'll do ours, let's agree to disagree.

 

[ddtlm]

superfunkomatic:

why can the us and ussr have "weapons of mass destruction" yet anyone else is a threat

Thats a very baised way to say it. Many other nations have WMD, including the UK and France, China, India Pakistan and Israel. The only "everyone else" we really don't want having WMD is Iraq and N Korea. Of course that said, the less WMD out there the better, no matter who has em.

pseudobrit:

Since we couldn't get the authorisation, we acted like there was enough proof in the first resolution. If there were, why did we pursue the second one?

Bush said many times that the USofA doesn't need authorization at all, he was trying to be diplomatic and get some support. Which he apparently sucks at, but thats besides the point.

I know a guy who was in S. Korea in the early stages of their militarisation under the tutelage of the US military. He claims that even back then, they could take care of themselves.

So why does the opinion of this one guy carry much wieght?

 

[boobers]

Re: double standard?

Originally posted by superfunkomatic
i think it's odd that we're concerned about "weapons of mass destruction". being canadian, we don't have to worry about being attacked since we are not poking at rabid animals like saddam hussein with a stick. you leave us alone, and we'll do likewise.

why can the us and ussr have "weapons of mass destruction" yet anyone else is a threat.
americans you do your thing and we'll do ours, let's agree to disagree.

I'm also Canadian, and see no threat from Iraq to either Canada or the US. Why do american's feel threatened from Iraq? I just don't understand this. They had nothing to do with 9/11! Those were Saudi's! Why isn't the US attacking the Saudi's? Maybe they are next, after they get into a good attack position from Iraq. I talk to american friends who are scared ****less about terrorism. Does fear justify attacking small Arab countries for oil and geopolitical position?
A booing at a hockey game is mild from what the US has done to other countries with bad foreign policy.
This war disgusts me.