The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

its global authority. Iran, North Korea and Syria have been centred out as trouble spots by Bush with threats to fall into line or suffer the conseâ€" quences. Those who are usually onside, like France and Canada who dared to stand on the sidelines during the invasion, they will suffer an ecoâ€" nomic spanking: Canada has lost The result of shoving its nose into places where it shouldn‘t be has been disastrous for the Americans. It expeâ€" rienced a humiliating defeat in Viet Nam, so bad that it swept the war under the rug, largely ignoring the living and dead veterans until appeasement appeared in the form of a wall; the same outcome seems sure in Iraq. They should have known someâ€" thing was up when they cruised into Baghdad. They should have known the Iraquis had more sense than to confront a wall of steel with inferior weaponry. They could have known that a guerrilla war would follow "vicâ€" tory‘", a battle the Americans can‘t win. Still hurting from having its bubble of invincibility burst on 9â€"11, the U.S. is intent on reclaiming its pride by Both were strongly opposed on the home front, distant battles where the loss of American lives didn‘t justify the effort. Both were born of an arrogance founded in the belief that overwhelmâ€" ing military might could crush the human spirit. The jungles in south east Asia were sprayed with agent orange to kill foliage and reveal enemy trbop movements. The Bâ€"52s dropped more bombs than in the Second World War, all to no avail as the Viet Cong carved out underground subâ€" ways and carried the war machinery on their backs at night. Victory in Viet Nam would stem the spread of the red tide and preserve democracy, as in Iraq where unseating Saddam‘s regime would help protect the world from terrorism and nuclear holocaust, although no weapons of mass destruction nor links to Al Qaida have been found; despite a frantic f] ~The Iraq conflict is Viet Nam revisâ€" ited, an illegal invasion motivatâ€" ed by selfâ€"interest rather than humanitarian coricems. U.S. has been shoving its nose where it shouldn‘t be You said it YOUR PLANS FOR THE LONG WEEKEND? QUESTION "I‘m going to Blue Mountain to a | _ cottage." | s | Joe Lyonsâ€"Rising LEIIFER Marriage is an institution declared in the oldest book humanity has, it is not a definition that can be changed by the courts or government. In order to be married two key conditions â€" total receptivity and giving â€" must.be met. Just like Jesus Christ, who calls himself the bridegroom and the Church His bride, we (the church) have received Christ‘s total gift of himâ€" self when he died for us. Jesus‘s first commandment To love as God loves" requires us to model his union with the church. We have been instructed that marriage is the most perfect way to model that union, where there is a groom who can give his total self in sexual union with his bride, where she cannot physically meet the conditions of marriage. Regarding Helen Conlon‘s article "Gay marriageis not the end of civiâ€" lization." My moral standard for living is based on the word of God which says:â€" "Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of the Lord." â€" Deuteronomy 8:3. Gay martiage is wrong based on the word of God. God created man and woman to live together in a marâ€" riage union which should not be changed to include people of the In relation to Helen Conlon‘s July 23 guest column "Gay marriage is not the end civilization," I must admit my heart felt compassion that we are livâ€" ing in a society where some people are still clueless as to the moral standards by which to live by. On what do you, Helen, those who seek the change and those who make the change to the definition of marâ€" riage to include same sex union, base your moral standard for living? Marriage is a more than a definition of union Stop fooling yourselves much of its Australian wheat market. community and making war instead The Americans have become the terrorists they‘re out to crush, thumbâ€" ing theis nose at the international "There is a way that seems right to "I tdon‘t really have any plans." Christina Boyington COMMENT â€"Marriage is not man‘s idea, it is God‘s idea. And if we are going to live by it, we should do it His way â€" male The definition of marriage is misâ€" understood in this day and age to mean just the union of two consenting adults, regardless of sex. But it is our sexual difference that allows humans to give and receive each other‘s love fully and completely. This is marriage! We do not have the right to redefine what has been instructed to us and reemphasized throughgut history as the meaning of marriage. Call the sexâ€" ual union of same sexes something else. To call it "marriage" is to downâ€" play what so many Canadian couples consider the sacred union of humans in the eyes of God. a person, but its end is the way to death." â€"Proverbs 14:12 If we are living in a society where moral standards can be changed so easily and anything goes, it would not be surprising for further changes to be sought to have father and son, mother and daughter having the right to If we don‘t stand up for what is right, we will fall for anything. Chances are, sooner or later man will want to marry his best friend â€" dog. What our society needs is to seek and stick to biblical principles for livâ€" "Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a reproach to any people." â€" Proverbs 14:34 Society continues to create equality among all types, however it is not physically possible to make both genâ€" ders physically the same. We need to celebrate our sexual differences, instead of trying to erase them. of peace. "I‘ll be working that weekend." "Don‘t have any. Robert Chong Jim Newton, Deb Mitra You‘d almost think that Sheila would have resigned from Cabinet on principle if she felt that strongly that the Liberals weren‘t meeting the needs of Canadians. Instead, she soldiered along (with the exception of the GST byâ€"election}, pretending publicly that the governing party was something other than a group of Tories in Liberal clothing. At one point while she was Environment Minister, she even blamed the fact that the govâ€" ernment had done so little for the environment on the fact that the Canadian Alliance didn‘t make it a priority in Question Period. Even if she believes the bold statements that she and her campaign team are now making (as opposed to merely using them as a tool to position herself in contrast to Martin}, it‘s hard to believe that she would not fold under pressure again. Unlike Martin, Copps does understand from where the real threat to a fourth Liberal majority comes â€" not from the right, but from the left. Campaign manager Joe Thornley told CTV News that Copps is representing "an important tradition in the Liberal party. The Liberals should never assume that the NDP are not going to be resurgent â€" because that is what makes us different from Americans. Canadians believe in government. Government is not a vice, it‘s a virtue." Copps suggests on her website that "We have now had six years of strong economic growth but, despite many recent iniâ€" tiatives, not all Canadians have benefitted equally from this hardâ€"earned prosperity. The changing nature of the global economy and the social and demographic realities of the 21st century require new investments in Canadians and in Canada, if we are to enhance our quality of life and to serve as a role model of economic success and social harmony for the world." At first, I thought that Copps‘ statements were sheer bravaâ€" do or, at the very least, carefully planned spin. Clearly, she must know that she will be just a footnote in the story of Paul Martin‘s crushing victory. It does seem odd then that she would be releasing a detailed (for a Liberal) policy document on the heals of Manley‘s departure. Entitled "Foundations: An Action Plan for Canatla." it‘s actually 8 pretty progressive document â€" filled with promises of a national child care program, improved access to postâ€"secondary education, and pregrams to diminish the gap between the rich and poor. But, as the 1993 Red Book proved conclusively, documents don‘t govern. John Manley was a candidate but he concluded after three months in the race that to continue would be "irresponsible" â€" _ not to mention, injurious to his future job prospects in Ottawa. "It is apparent to me that 1 do not have the sufficient support to win the leadership race in November," Manley told reporters. "I have offered the party a choice, and the party has chosen â€" Paul Martin will be the next leader of the Liberal Party of Canada and the next prime minister of Canada, and I believe he will be an excellent prime minister." So, there you have it: it‘s all over. ‘ * But wait, someone must have forgotâ€" | hz ’ l ten to tell Sheila Copps, who is still | C > . running and still insisting that she is | CE > i in it to win. While still in the race, | N { Manley had belittled her as "not a | %fi. # serious candidate." Cambridge MP | â€" Janko Peric has gone so far as to SCOTT accuse her of "wasting her time," but PIATKOWSKI Copps argues (much as Manley did [ before midâ€"July) that she must offer Liberals a choice. "I‘m in this race until the end. I‘m in this race until the 15th of November and I have no intention of pulling out. Nobody has voted yet." f all of the world‘s great mysteries, the question of who Ois going to lead the Liberal Party of Canada after Nov. 15 has to rank somewhere near the bottom of the list; somewhere below "What happens when you mix dirt and water?" Paul Martin never really shut down his leadership campaign after losing to Jean Chretien in 1990. He controls nearly every riding association in the country; his organization has conâ€" trolled the party for the past decade; and he‘s got more corpoâ€" rate money than he knows what to do with. Barring an unprecedented meltdown, he‘ll be celebrating victory in three and a half months. Realizing this, potential candidates such as Allan Rock, Herb Dhaliwal and Brian Tobin rejected the idea of running. Dennis Mills boldly set up a "no coronation" website and talked about running himself, before quietly folding his tent and adding his name to the lengthy list of MPs endorsing Martin. Can Copps make this a race? scott. piatkowski@rogers.com ANOTHER VIEW @