Harper, Terrorism and his own Patriot Act?

[geopolitics]

Before I post I wanted to make it clear I am not one sided (left/right), I've always believed that the last great Progressive Conservative Leader was John Diefenbaker and the last great Liberal was Trudeau, they had the best vision for Canada. Too bad the Liberals have gone into this scandal and the PC Party is just a shadow of the past.

It's been said before that Canada is a target to "terrorists" and it has been said that its bound to happen, but under a Harper government will it happen and what would happen thereafter?

Harper's terrorism policy is as follows (Source: The Globe and Mail Harper vows to combat terrorism, Tuesday, July 19, 2005):

- Establishment of a Single Spy and Security Force (National Security) -possibly similar to Homeland Security or NSA?

- National Identity Card - The US is currently going ahead with the program.

- Continental Alliance with the US for Security - Will the US now spy on us even further?

This is all we basically know by far. We do know that the Liberals initiated C-36 and C-7 however under a Harper government would he also establish his own Patriot Act? If a terrorist attack occurs would we live in a "Big Brother" style country?

Most important question of them all, who would stand to gain if a terrorist attack would occur?

 

[I think not]

Most important question of them all, who would stand to gain if a terrorist attack would occur?

Too bad you spoiled your entire argument with yet another conspiracy theory. Who has to gain? Why the evil corporations headquartered within the Evil Empire, every rational person knows this :roll:

 

[geopolitics]

Most important question of them all, who would stand to gain if a terrorist attack would occur?

Too bad you spoiled your entire argument with yet another conspiracy theory. Who has to gain? Why the evil corporations headquartered within the Evil Empire, every rational person knows this :roll:

What conspiracy theory

 

[I think not]

The who will have to gain bit.

 

[nomore]

geopolitics...I have a sneeking suspision you are a liberal plant on this board, because I have never heard such stretches of the facts, and such hatred of the cons/harper.

BTW....we already have an agency like this (relativly new), it's called PSEP. "Public Security and Emergency Preparedness":

"Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada (PSEPC) was created in 2003 to ensure coordination across all federal departments and agencies responsible for national security and the safety of Canadians.

From natural disasters to crime and terrorism, our mandate is to keep Canadians safe."
(source: PSEP canada, http://www.psepc-sppcc.gc.ca

We also already have an alliance with the U.S. for security:

"Canada remains a committed partner with the United States on security – whether on our continent through smart borders, or internationally through our collaboration in Afghanistan, Haiti and the Middle East. Our close partnership with the United States in the defence of North America stretches back to the Second World War, with the establishment of the Permanent Joint Board on Defence, the creation of the North American Aerospace Defence command in 1958 and the establishment of a Bi-national Planning Group in 2002. The Bi-national Planning Group is currently exploring how both countries can better cooperate in defending against threats to North American security after the attacks of September 11, 2001. In particular, it is looking at how we can further bolster our relationship to address maritime threats, and to support each other in responding to natural disasters and other emergencies"
(source: Forgien Affairs Canada http://www.dfait-maeci.gc.ca)

Edited: added some more info.

 

[geopolitics]

geopolitics...I have a sneeking suspision you are a liberal plant on this board, because I have never heard such stretches of the facts, and such hatred of the cons/harper.

BTW....we already have an agency like this (relativly new), it's called PSEP. "Public Security and Emergency Preparedness":

"Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada (PSEPC) was created in 2003 to ensure coordination across all federal departments and agencies responsible for national security and the safety of Canadians.

From natural disasters to crime and terrorism, our mandate is to keep Canadians safe."
(source: PSEP canada, http://www.psepc-sppcc.gc.ca

We also already have an alliance with the U.S. for security:

"Canada remains a committed partner with the United States on security – whether on our continent through smart borders, or internationally through our collaboration in Afghanistan, Haiti and the Middle East. Our close partnership with the United States in the defence of North America stretches back to the Second World War, with the establishment of the Permanent Joint Board on Defence, the creation of the North American Aerospace Defence command in 1958 and the establishment of a Bi-national Planning Group in 2002. The Bi-national Planning Group is currently exploring how both countries can better cooperate in defending against threats to North American security after the attacks of September 11, 2001. In particular, it is looking at how we can further bolster our relationship to address maritime threats, and to support each other in responding to natural disasters and other emergencies"
(source: Forgien Affairs Canada http://www.dfait-maeci.gc.ca)

Edited: added some more info.

I believe we all know this already, I was laying out Harper's policies from his own words and besides what your showing me doesn't help Harper, just think about what your saying and compare to what he's saying.

 

[nomore]

I believe we all know this already, I was laying out Harper's policies from his own words and besides what your showing me doesn't help Harper, just think about what your saying and compare to what he's saying.

that dosen't make any sense.
I just did the comparison above, and it made your post a moot point, since the policy Harper has apparently proposed, acording to your post, has already been done, as I'm showing. :idea:

 

[geopolitics]

The who will have to gain bit.

How could asking a question like this is considered a Conspiracy Theory? Its a question not a theory.

Don't go telling me that things such as "Freedom for Security" isn't happening today (or a conspiracy), its already been talked about here in Canada last year on CBC and they concluded that eventually we may have to give up all our freedoms to our government because of "terrorism".

After 911, The Liberals initiated C-36 which is the first step to violate our freedoms, thereafter C-7 and C-250 bills were presented and are very questionable. If Harper got rid of these policies he vows to protect the charter and our freedoms I would applaud him and join his cause and hate the Liberals for what they did.

Maybe what you need to do is research Terrorism as a whole.

May I ask why did Israel fund Hamas at one point a few years back (BBC Report) for what reason would they have to do such a thing?

Let me guess BBC is a Conspiracy website!

 

[geopolitics]

I believe we all know this already, I was laying out Harper's policies from his own words and besides what your showing me doesn't help Harper, just think about what your saying and compare to what he's saying.

that dosen't make any sense.
I just did the comparison above, and it made your post a moot point, since the policy Harper has apparently proposed, acording to your post, has already been done, as I'm showing. :idea:

Harper proposed his policies in June of 2005, what your showing happened from 2003 and onwards. Why would he be talking about something which has already happened beforehand, thats my point.

 

[I think not]

The who will have to gain bit.

How could asking a question like this is considered a Conspiracy Theory? Its a question not a theory.

Good spin, but I never questioned anything other than who has to gain from it. Since you simply asked the question and provided no answer, it's a conspiracy theory in the making. Unless you would like to debunk it, by responding to your own question.

 

[geopolitics]

The who will have to gain bit.

How could asking a question like this is considered a Conspiracy Theory? Its a question not a theory.

Good spin, but I never questioned anything other than who has to gain from it. Since you simply asked the question and provided no answer, it's a conspiracy theory in the making. Unless you would like to debunk it, by responding to your own question.

Well theres a few possibilies, the terrorists either get what they want or Harper gets what he wants or the Liberals get what they want ("we told you so")... I have NO evidence that Harper will declare himself as dictator if thats what your thinking. I'm only asking, I guess you probably heard Bush stood to gain over 911... I don't even want to go further.

On the other hand whats your take on Harper's National ID card plan?

 

[nomore]

I believe we all know this already, I was laying out Harper's policies from his own words and besides what your showing me doesn't help Harper, just think about what your saying and compare to what he's saying.

that dosen't make any sense.
I just did the comparison above, and it made your post a moot point, since the policy Harper has apparently proposed, acording to your post, has already been done, as I'm showing. :idea:

Harper proposed his policies in June of 2005, what your showing happened from 2003 and onwards. Why would he be talking about something which has already happened beforehand, thats my point.

Because items like this are always up for review, we do live in a changing world you know.

"Separate reviews of the Anti-Terrorism Act are now underway by the House of Commons and the Senate. In the House of Commons, the review is being undertaken by the Subcommittee on Public Safety and National Security of the Standing Committee on Justice, Human Rights, Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness. The Senate has created a special committee specifically to undertake the review of the Anti-Terrorism Act."
(source: Privy Council office of canada)

 

[I think not]

The who will have to gain bit.

How could asking a question like this is considered a Conspiracy Theory? Its a question not a theory.

Good spin, but I never questioned anything other than who has to gain from it. Since you simply asked the question and provided no answer, it's a conspiracy theory in the making. Unless you would like to debunk it, by responding to your own question.

Well theres a few possibilies, the terrorists either get what they want or Harper gets what he wants or the Liberals get what they want ("we told you so")... I have NO evidence that Harper will declare himself as dictator if thats what your thinking. I'm only asking, I guess you probably heard Bush stood to gain over 911... I don't even want to go further.

On the other hand whats your take on Harper's National ID card plan?

I am against anything that has to do with national ID's, and anything other that permits the state to track you. The more they know, the easier it is for them to come up with new and inventive ideas and laws that "protect" the citizen.

 

[geopolitics]

The who will have to gain bit.

How could asking a question like this is considered a Conspiracy Theory? Its a question not a theory.

Good spin, but I never questioned anything other than who has to gain from it. Since you simply asked the question and provided no answer, it's a conspiracy theory in the making. Unless you would like to debunk it, by responding to your own question.

Well theres a few possibilies, the terrorists either get what they want or Harper gets what he wants or the Liberals get what they want ("we told you so")... I have NO evidence that Harper will declare himself as dictator if thats what your thinking. I'm only asking, I guess you probably heard Bush stood to gain over 911... I don't even want to go further.

On the other hand whats your take on Harper's National ID card plan?

I am against anything that has to do with national ID's, and anything other that permits the state to track you. The more they know, the easier it is for them to come up with new and inventive ideas and laws that "protect" the citizen.

I agree, makes sense.

 

[nomore]

I am against anything that has to do with national ID's, and anything other that permits the state to track you. The more they know, the easier it is for them to come up with new and inventive ideas and laws that "protect" the citizen.

too late, it's already very easy to track anyone. Passport, driver's licence, credit cards, bank accounts, phone numbers, cell phones, car registration, SIN numbers..etc etc.

 

[I think not]

I am against anything that has to do with national ID's, and anything other that permits the state to track you. The more they know, the easier it is for them to come up with new and inventive ideas and laws that "protect" the citizen.

too late, it's already very easy to track anyone. Passport, driver's licence, credit cards, bank accounts, phone numbers, cell phones, car registration, SIN numbers..etc etc.

True, why make it worse than what it is?

 

[nomore]

I am against anything that has to do with national ID's, and anything other that permits the state to track you. The more they know, the easier it is for them to come up with new and inventive ideas and laws that "protect" the citizen.

too late, it's already very easy to track anyone. Passport, driver's licence, credit cards, bank accounts, phone numbers, cell phones, car registration, SIN numbers..etc etc.

True, why make it worse than what it is?

The way I see it...if they really want to track my boring life, they are welcome to it.

 

[the caracal kid]

there are two ways of viewing this:

1 - if "they" know everything about the movements and actions of the citizenry, and the citizenry are aware of this tracking, there is an increase in safety from the loss of anonymity those seeking to "break the law" so desire.

2 - if they know nothing, and the citizenry are not tracked, people are free to do whatever they desire and can do things they otherwise may not if anonymity is a strong possibility.

In either case, there will be those that seek to circumvent the "laws" for their own purposes. As such, it is much more preferable to not be tracked than tracked.

In a worst case scenario (conspiracy theory wise), a lack of information collection systems makes the fabrication of evidence harder than a plethora of collection systems.

 

[I think not]

I am against anything that has to do with national ID's, and anything other that permits the state to track you. The more they know, the easier it is for them to come up with new and inventive ideas and laws that "protect" the citizen.

too late, it's already very easy to track anyone. Passport, driver's licence, credit cards, bank accounts, phone numbers, cell phones, car registration, SIN numbers..etc etc.

True, why make it worse than what it is?

The way I see it...if they really want to track my boring life, they are welcome to it.

:lol: That's great logic! Screw them!

 

[FiveParadox]

In my opinion, some kind of "national ID" system is unnecessary.