The North Pole Is Ours, Not Russia's

<a href="http://www.1421.tv/pages/evidence/content.asp?EvidenceID=344">http://www.1421.tv/pages/evidence/content.asp?EvidenceID=344</a><br />
<br />
The North Pole<br />
· The Arctic, north of Greenland, appears on the Vinland map, with topography correct allowing for glaciers.<br />
· The Arctic was navigable in 1422 (NMI Delf Technical Institute; Buismann; European Union.)<br />
· 30 Chinese claims to have reached North Pole (Needham; Professor Wei; Martin Tai)<br />
<p>---<br>"When you change the way you look at things, the things you look at change." <br />
-Max Planck<br />
<br />

Note that Canada is not mentioned anywhere in this article.
The writer must be considering us already part of the empire.

Ed Deak.

<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pole_of_Inaccessibility">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pole_of_Inaccessibility</a><br />
<br />
"....equidistant from the closest landmasses, Ellesmere Island and Franz-Josef Land, 1,094 km (680 mi) away."<br />
<br />
Don't know where the Yankees get their nerve from........seems the "contest" is between Canada and Russia. If the Yankees wanna use who's first, well, it appears the Chinese beat everyone by 600 years.......<p>---<br>"When you change the way you look at things, the things you look at change." <br />
-Max Planck<br />
<br />

If the Canadian Government is truly committed to Canadian sovereignty and independence Harper would be starting the process of building Deepwater ports, Arctic Naval bases and stationing aircraft, electronic surveillance and military personnel as far north as possible to maintain watch over and surveying Canadian territory without consulting with the U.S. Government. Canada has to draw a line in the sand now not tomorrow. Canadians have to look at this issue as self defence. These are the actions that Russia and the U.S. understand as being committed and determined. Your not a player if you sit on the side lines with your mouth shut not making a move. In-action will only loose Canadian rights, liberty, sovereignty and independence. <br />
<br />
Strategic Plan for the Iqaluit Deepwater Port Project <br />
<a href="http://www.city.iqaluit.katittut.ca/i18n/english/pdf/portproject.pdf">http://www.city.iqaluit.katittut.ca/i18n/english/pdf/portproject.pdf</a><br />
<p>---<br>Perception is two thirds of what we perceive reality to be.<br />
<br />
Difficult decisions are a privilege of rank.<br />

<blockquote> If the Canadian Government is truly committed to Canadian sovereignty and independence </blockquote> Therein lays the problem. As long as we insist on electing either Liberals or Conservatives (two sides of the same coin - always have been, always will be), Canadian "sovereignty and independence" will be viewed simply as an impediment to doing business...... <p>Evidently, the only problem with a deep water military port situated in Iqaluit, is that is does not adequately service the Western Arctic, adjacent to Alaska, and from which the Yankees will launch their Arctic claims.</p> In addition, any military port will need to have an added airforce and army complement.<p>---<br>"When you change the way you look at things, the things you look at change." <br />
-Max Planck<br />
<br />

Too bad we can't find Viking written records.

---
The preceding comment deals with mature subject matter, however immaturely presented. Viewer discretion is advised.

Enforcement and occupation of our territorial boundaries is the only way to ensure ownership and our national rights. This is the only thing the U.S. understands and by doing nothing will only encourage the U.S. to take it from us. The U.S.A. is only Canada's friend when we give into them and support their agendas. Deepwater ports must be built to maintain occupation, shipping, territorial surveying and scientific research of any size.

---
Perception is two thirds of what we perceive reality to be.

Difficult decisions are a privilege of rank.

Welcome to our world. First as a Yankee let me say I think the world of Canadians,I spent some time in Canada and I think I speak for most of the U.S , we love you as our neighbors and friends. This Arctic thing is exactly the sort of thing we face daily. If you play nice guy Russia is going to stab you in a heart beat, if you try to get tough your going to get railed as war mongers, I gaurantee you that. This is our world, when there is a problem in the world if the U.S does not come running to help we are called "uncompasionate capitalistic pigs" who care little for the suffering of innocents. If we try to help or send aid which is generaly and neccesarily delivered by our military we are called "imperialistic pigs" and its said the aid is only an excuse to invade. So on this Arctic deal you guys will either play nice guys and get screwed or get tough and be blamed for starting the next cold war. It doesn't matter much to us because we are getting blamed for all the worlds problems anyway, and if this flag raising thing works then I guess we will have alot of "Moon" realestate available right? I wish all of you luck, I would much rather see a neighbor win than the Russians.

I must say, I find your words unusually refreshing. As Canadians, if we don't back our southern cousins position; often we are accused of being anti-American, and if we take our own sovereign position; we're anti-American. hehe.

Thanks for that, and Welcome to Vive.

---
The preceding comment deals with mature subject matter, however immaturely presented. Viewer discretion is advised.

Thank you Dr. I now see how Canadians can also be put in a position of being "darned if you do and darned if you don't". I would also like to say this article is by one man in the U.S and I for one hope the U.S does not play this land grab or in this respect "pole grab" game. I feel if Canada plays to much of the nice guy here it will get a lot of fond comments from do gooders in Eourpe who are very willing to sacrifice Canada's resources or anything else for that matter to keep the peace, they will tell you what a great country Canada is and then hand everything to Russia because they know Russia will not "play fair". On the other hand as soon as Canada send any military to the Arctic to protect it's resources these same do gooders will call you every evil thing they can and label you as "trouble makers". God bless and good luck.

"... and its said the aid is only an excuse to invade"

Yeah, I know what you mean, like all the aid given off in Afghanistan and Iraq. I mean, where would those two countries be without the blessing of the USA? The people of Iraq lived in terror under Saddam, sure he was helped along by the USA, but Iran was a bigger threat to worry about, at least the people are now being terrorized and tortured under the banner of freedom and democracy rather than under yet another foreign financed dictatorship. Yeah yeah, there's oil, but I know deep down inside the USA is there to help.

In Afghanistan, for at least the 5th time in history, those sorry people are being assisted by a noble military effort that's designed to make Afghanistan a great nation. The going is tough only because those pesky terrorists that the USA financed to kick out the evil USSR Imperialists are ungrateful bastards and want to run their own damned country all for themselves. Yeah yeah, there's oil and gas, but I know deep down inside the USA is there to help - and to git Bin Laden too!

I am happy to address reargaurd's comments. It seems there are a few facts you have overlooked. One being that after the USSR was expelled from Afganistan they had the whole country to themselves to build it as they pleased, now did they build schools and hospitals and such? No they housed persons such as Osama bin Laden. Now all the time they had the country to themselves we knew Bin Laden was recruting and training terrorist to kill Americans, Jews and basicly anyone who didn't believe as they did,in fact the world knew it as well but know one cared. We did not invade Afganistan and well 9/11 killed almost 3,000 people and devestated our economy for years which may not be a big thing to you but we are still a bit upset about it. I for one was not thrilled about the pre-emptive strike in Iraq but lets again look at the facts, Saddam had tons of chemical weapons some of which he used on his own people. Yes you will say none were found, so did he just throw these weapons in a dumpster some where? Saddam hated the U.S and would very likely have put those weapons in terrorist hands if he thought they could deliver them on the U.S, and we could have ignored him and hoped the problem would go away, just like we did with say Osama bin Laden for example. I suppose it is easy to say that would be the thing to do as long as the next 3,000 to die are not youre family or friends or countrymen. And I realize it is quite fashionable these days to jump on the "blame the U.S band wagon" after all "Mob rules" right. But if facts mean anything to you I hope you weigh them in along with the emotional "lets attack the big guy because he has to much power" mentallity.

"... Now all the time they had the country to themselves we knew Bin Laden was recruting and training terrorist to kill Americans, Jews and basicly anyone who didn't believe as they did,in fact the world knew it as well but know one cared." <br><br> Hey Dio, we caught another foaming zionist - hurry, get the specimen bottle! <br><br> "9/11 killed almost 3,000 people and devestated our economy for years which may not be a big thing to you but we are still a bit upset about it." <br><br> OK, but who dunnit? <br><br> "I for one was not thrilled about the pre-emptive strike in Iraq" <br><br> Under international law, your "pre-emptive" strike is a serious war crime. The only reason why your leaders are not rotting in a prison cell is because the UN does not have the means to enforce their own laws on a nation that spends more on its military than all the worlds nations combined. <br><br> "lets again look at the facts, Saddam had tons of chemical weapons some of which he used on his own people." <br><br> His chemical weapons were financed and likely also supplied by the USA. <br><br> "Yes you will say none were found" <br><br> That's right, none were found. <br><br> "so did he just throw these weapons in a dumpster some where?" <br><br> What weapons? Your war criminal leaders were caught red handed faking the evidence! <br><br> "Saddam hated the U.S and would very likely have put those weapons in terrorist hands if he thought they could deliver them on the U.S, and we could have ignored him and hoped the problem would go away, just like we did with say Osama bin Laden for example." <br><br> More ferry tales. Where's your proof? <br><br> "I suppose it is easy to say that would be the thing to do as long as the next 3,000 to die are not youre family or friends or countrymen." <br><br> Well as it turns out my own countrymen are being maimed and killed in Afghanistan based on these lies. <br><br> "But if facts mean anything to you" <br><br> You've been very short on the facts. The available evidence (i.e., what could not be intentionally destroyed and covered up) strongly suggests that 9/11 was a self-inflicted wound. At best the US government knew about the attacks and did nothing to stop it, at worse your own government carried out the attacks. Certainly, 9/11 was exactly what the neocons wanted to kick off the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. <br><br> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_a_new_american_century#.22New_Pearl_Harbor.22">"New Pearl Harbor"</a>

then there is this<br />
<a href="http://www.1421.tv/pages/evidence/content.asp?EvidenceID=202">http://www.1421.tv/pages/evidence/content.asp?EvidenceID=202</a><br />
<p>---<br>"When I tell the truth, it is not for the sake of convincing those who do not know it, but for the sake of defending those that do."<br />
<br />
William Blake<br />
<br />