Perhaps the question should be: does the world need Louise Arbour?
If you said no, you are correct.

What did the world do to us that we had to inflict Louise Arbour on them?

I mean really . . cruel & unjust punishment.

This list is absurd for a ton of reasons:
1. Yes, Louise Arbour is a complete twit and the antithesis of anything considered rational thought. Her mishandling of UNHRC is one of the low points in an already dismal institution. Not to mention that she's been on the side of every boneheaded decision by the Supreme Court during her legal career.

While many of you here hate PET, the one thing he did which all of you would agree was a good thing was enacting the WMA to put down the FLQ. And our dear sweetie Louise was opposed to that.

2. The list is riddled with dimbulbs from the social sciences, particularly economics, politics and psychology, but not one geniune scientist other than Vaclav Smil, and he's only in environmental science. Not one mathematician, physicist, chemist, biologist or geneticist. This absence alone speaks to the sublime ignorance of those who compiled this sewage.

3. The inclusion of Papandreou, and Cameron, just to name two politicians on the list, is howlingly funny. Both are complete idiots.

All 3 of them are nobodies in the real Canadian world. As for Louise Arbour she is like a bulls ass in fly time. Real ripe and way past her best before date. Even a hungry coyote would hold his breath to feast on her overipe carcass.

This list is nearly "The Crazy People" of "The World Is Being Run By Crazy People"

richfisher nails it.

The UN and all its tentacles have been a great sand box where liberal elites (See below) could play and as long as no one took them seriously little real harm was done. No truly sane nation would ever belong to such an institution but what else do you do with all those f...ing liberals. You don't want them involved domestically, you might end up with HRCs etc. Far better to let them experiment with the Africans, and they did, and it wasn't good.

cgh

The WMA was totally unnecessary as the QPP knew who was behind the LaPorte kidnapping and Cross execution immediately. I recall walking past embarrassed soldiers posted on the U of A Campus on the way to classes (2000 miles from the nearest FLQ cell). One soldier accidentally shot himself with a machine gun while jumping out of a troop transport in Montreal. Burned into my memory, the most arrogant PM ever, glibly replied "watch me" with a shrug, when asked on the CBC (an actual hardball question) how far he was prepared to go and that was with the full knowledge from QPP / RCMP briefings.

Steven Pinker rocks -- the Blank Slate is a great book. It dissects the philosophical basic of modern (liberal) intellectual life.

From the comments.......
Martin:
[........Canada had influence during and shortly after WW 2, due to a large, effective fighting force, not to the efforts of our diplomats......]

John Chittick
[........One soldier accidentally shot himself with a machine gun while jumping out of a troop transport in Montreal.........]

And that was just the one you heard about.
Several of us, then enlisted with Uncle Sam's posse, who were home on furlough were "seconded" to the CF......some after being arrested and incarcerated by the WMA circus. On returning we were thoroughly debriefed on our impressions of the CF readiness....my comment....'an overweight, outa shape, boy's brigade'.....was typical.
There were officers blithely, driving onto base, ignoring challenges to stop, by "armed" personel at the gates and living through it.

The problem with Canadian foreign policy, is that 2 generations of diplomats have believed in promoting the interests of their small clique, rather than representing Canada's best interests. They believed that if one bowed and scraped to the UN, signed every treaty placed before them, that some day they could aspire to a Nobel prize.
L Pearson was a qualified diplomat and worthy of the prize in 1957; certainly as worthy as Arafat, Kissinger, Carter or Obama. His plan brought 11 years of peace to the Mid-East and it's not his fault what since followed.
Pearson was also a veteran of WW 1 and a diplomat in London in WW 2, who understood that fighting is sometimes necessary.
His successors in the Liberal party, Trudeau, Chretien, Axworthy understood only "peace keeping", soft power and childish anti-Americanism. It is no coincidence that the so called golden age of Canadian diplomacy came shortly after WW 2, where Canada made a determined, significant fighting contribution.

Martin: In the decade after 1945 Canada, despite its relatively small population, was disproportionately economically strong until W. Europe and then Japan recovered from WW II. There was a substantive reason for our brief period of real international clout.

Remember that we supplied F-86 Sabres to some NATO members because US manufacturing capabilities were stretched, plus some CF-100s to Belgium:
http://www.wcam.mb.ca/sabre.html
http://www.avroland.ca/al-cf100.html

Mark
Ottawa

Martin; Its called "peace through superior firepower: or "Pax Romana" if you prefer Latin. Regardless of how hackneyed these phrases seem, they are still the only way to get things done in the world. The Americans are very good at it and, 60 years ago, we were too. We're just now getting back in the game.

only canadians take notice canadians

anything beyond the neighbourhood is celebrity-ism

""" While many of you here hate PET, the one thing he did which all of you would agree was a good thing was enacting the WMA to put down the FLQ"""

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

cgh, that was one of the worst things that fool did. The WMA was abused, and it set a dangerous example that may be use in the future to justify using it again, to turn the states power against her own people, just a Turdough did!!!

I've always been proud to be Canadian, but I have to admit that at times I've envied citizens of other countries. Canada has never had a leader like Reagan or Thatcher. We don't have a right to property, or even a right to free speech.

But over the past decade, some of the nations that I used to envy have sunk to lows I wouldn't have have imagined years ago. I still think we don't have the freedoms we should have, and I think we've lost a lot of what we used to have. But we haven't fallen as hard or as fast as some of the other countries whose example I used to think we should follow.

Gotta say... I have to agree now. Believe it or not, the world needs more Canada!

I wouldn't get to puffed up about Old Lisping Red Mike Pearson. He was a communist Herbert Norman died to protect him.

The War Measures Act by Trudeau was overkill to an unimaginable degree.

There were 6, ie six, yes only six, FLQ terrorists involved in that episode and Trudeau in a desparate panic choose to make an extravagant and completely unnecessary use of the WMA.

One book (Grits or Northern Maggot?) written on the Liberals and Trudeau pointed out that there were far more murders and serious events going on in the USA at the time and they never ever considered the suspension of civil rights to deal with their problems.

Calling out the army to deal with an apprehended insurection by 6 guys- what a laugh that was.

On that note the FLQ terrorists were never banned from returning to Canada, the country they hated.

Now they enjoy their pensions.
Thanks Turdough.
WMA not tough enough.

re. the War Measures Act thing: Imagine if the Brits had acted that way every time the IRA carried out a terrorist attack. In 1984 they bombed a hotel in England, nearly killed the Prime Minister and did manage to kill five others and cripple at least one person.

But Thatcher isn't really a drama queen, is she?

My reflexive answer was that they are all slimeball globalists who would sell their nation out to internationalist power mongers in a heartbeat. But on reflection, I think they are all suffering from a psychotic narcissist complex so large it consumes their reason.