Potential Terrorist Attacks

[missile]

You just worry about what the Mohawks are going to do! They are better armed than your Provos,and they don't mind shooting them.

 

[I think not]

Re: RE: Potential Terrorist A

An attack on Québec soil would only give another argument for Québec seperatism, and would bring the majority of the undecided into the Yes camp.

Numure, I have chatted with many on other boards regarding this Quebec separatism. Most of them seem to feel its just a way for Quebec to get what it wants, basically money and power. Is there a real reason to believe Quebec will actually separate? Real question here, no sarcasm.

 

[Frappuccino Dibs]

I suggest you don't dwell on what you know nothing about.

 

[no1important]

Re: RE: Potential Terrorist Attacks

But I think it would be easier for them to operate in Montreal.

That's why I don't think they'd expend their opportunities on a Canadian target. Better to lay low in Canada to attack the USA in future. Why attack a target in Montreal or Toronto when you could slip into the USA and hit an American city or blow up Washington?. I don't think they're dumb enough to have Canadian authorities kicked into high gear to root them out.

I actually saw some guy on Newsworld after the London attacks state that very point. He said basically we could be safe from terror attacks for all the wrong reasons. Like easy acess to the US and that they would not want Feds hunting them down. After all it is a long border.

I think the Feds would be running around like a chicken with its head cut off f we were attacked. They would not have a clue what to do.

 

[stratochief]

"They would not have a clue what to do."

They'd have a clue what to do even if they didn't catch the bad guys.

It's not the worse thing in the world to not live in a police state with police files on all citizens, cameras everywhere and civil rights suspended. I don't want to give up my liberties because of some act that 'might' happen some day. Precaution is good but there seems to be an anti-terrorism industry developing in Western countries. Canada has struck a good balance AND the bottom line is we have not been a target.

 

[PoisonPete2]

there has been an endless turfwar of policing in Quebec, that makes it easier for penetration by terrorist cells. The level of corruption and lack of coordination of intelligence gathering makes Quebec the soft underbelly of North America. That the RCMP is back in the intelligence game does not bode well. A bunch of barn burners. As a nation we should have an open dialoque as to our part in the so called 'war on Terror'. Now the Politicians can hide behind their shield of 'national security'. I think we are being duped and our freedoms are being eroded without cause. Oops, the gestapo are are my door.

 

[Numure]

Re: RE: Potential Terrorist Attacks

there has been an endless turfwar of policing in Quebec, that makes it easier for penetration by terrorist cells. The level of corruption and lack of coordination of intelligence gathering makes Quebec the soft underbelly of North America. That the RCMP is back in the intelligence game does not bode well. A bunch of barn burners. As a nation we should have an open dialoque as to our part in the so called 'war on Terror'. Now the Politicians can hide behind their shield of 'national security'. I think we are being duped and our freedoms are being eroded without cause. Oops, the gestapo are are my door.

Corruption, in Québec?

 

[Numure]

Re: RE: Potential Terrorist A

An attack on Québec soil would only give another argument for Québec seperatism, and would bring the majority of the undecided into the Yes camp.

Numure, I have chatted with many on other boards regarding this Quebec separatism. Most of them seem to feel its just a way for Quebec to get what it wants, basically money and power. Is there a real reason to believe Quebec will actually separate? Real question here, no sarcasm.

That what anglo's think. Or what they are fed by their respective government, and Federal Government. Seperatism/Independance has always been around, ever since conquest. Its had its up and downs. From the violence of the Patriot Rebellion almost 200 years ago, the extermination of the Metis tribes, to the current wave that started during the Empires Boer Wars in South Afrika.

Our way of doing it is laugh upon and described by so many idiotic, like the one reason you just stated. we are doing is threw political, and diplomatic means. Not threw violence and taking up of arms. Its taking alot more time then an armed revolt, and gives opposition alot of time to find what ever argument to discredit it. But it is alive, and will happen eventually. That is, if the Canadian Federal system doesnt change dramaticly.

 

[Karlin]

Today July 21/05 was another bomb-day in London , but they didn't go off or something. It looks like the bombs were being detonated ahead of schedule, to kill the bombers, the bombers figured that out from last time, and unhooked them and only the detonators went off. People love life. So do they. Bush is wrong about that.

We might wonder when our turn is in Canada, but I think its pretty slim chance it will ever happen here.

The border arguement is a good one - the terrorists want it open , "the soft underbelly of the beast" [good one!]

However, why risk it? Canada has those troops in Afghanistan, illegally, and if they are not wanted there, we should bring them home. Our Canadian special forces in iraq should come home too.

If we wait until after a terrorist bomb goes off here, then it will be too late, it would look like we are responding to their tactics of terrorism.

Canada should also make a statement that clearly says "we do not condone the invasion of sovereign nations".

Then we could propose an agreement that "no nation will mount an invasion of another nation prompted by one incident [eg9-11], nor choose a country to invade based on false pretenses."

Londoners should tell Blair that "the terrorists are pissed at British troops being in Iraq STILL, so get out."
Does Bush have a worse punishment for you if you abandon him now?

 

[manda]

Does Bush have a worse punishment for you if you abandon him now?

It really wouldn't surprise me if he did Karlin

 

[Gertrood]

When they attack us we can blame Chretien and Martin for trusting the terrorists.

 

[mrmom2]

Do you actually know whats going on Gertrood :roll: Grab a brain

 

[peapod]

hahahhahhhaha... I think Chretien could take care of those terrorists himself. Did you see when that one guy tried to ruff him up, that guy is a street fighter...It cracked me up almost as much as pierre trudeau giving the finger. :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[manda]

Re: RE: Potential Terrorist Attacks

When they attack us we can blame Chretien and Martin for trusting the terrorists.

I thinl it's about time to pull you're head out of the sand, you're not a frickin' bird. I don't know if there is anyone who trusts terrorists less than these men, they just have to try to enact policies that have been gathering dust since Vietnam or the like, I'd like to see the tories, Or YOU do any better. :wink:

 

[PoisonPete2]

Canada should also make a statement that clearly says "we do not condone the invasion of sovereign nations".

Then we could propose an agreement that "no nation will mount an invasion of another nation prompted by one incident [eg9-11], nor choose a country to invade based on false pretenses."

Answer - I thought that was all in the U.N. Charter, to which Canada is a signateur. But then again we are supposed to oppose sending persons to counties who use torture. Our PM is violating human rights and our last PM allowed the violation of civil rights. We need an open and frank debate in this country before we take on missions to occupy foreign countries.

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: Potential Terrorist A

It is all in the UN Charter and various other things we have not only signed, but initiated, over the years. We keep electing bean-counters and pig-f**kers though.