What Kind Of Ally Is Canada To The USA In Regard To Security?

[damngrumpy]

All the crap about letting in terrorists or Islamic radicals. The people who really did America harm
were let in by America. The prime reason as far as i am concerned is because Reagan
dismantled the professional system at the airports, through deregulation and replaced the
workers with people were Inexperienced, in some cases Illiterate, and some were even
illegal aliens working for cheap.
As for the other groups you don't like, the Sikhs for example, yes there were a few that got
into Canada but some of those people I really like and some are personal friends of mine.
I have spoken a few times in their temple, and I find them to be loyal Canadians. Yes a
few did the Air India attack, and it was the courts fault some went free. Most of these people
were not in favor of what was done either. If you knew anything about the Sikh Religion and
belief system you would understand that. I am a retired Catholic , but I like to know about
other people and their history and customs, which is a good thing. Man you are missing out
on some fantastic food and good times just by eying them with suspicion.
I can't get over how many people are afraid of others and want to marginalize them to make
themselves feel better. I have friends from , Europe China, India, the Middle East a few from
the African Continent and America. Come to think of it Central and South America as well,
and I find they are far more accepting of us than we are of them on an individual level and that
is really too bad. Yes I am critical of a society when I know they are capable of more than they
are living up to , but that doesn't mean I don't like them as a person.
If you are open minded you can engage in some great debate without recrimination or hostility
Unfortunately some people take aim at marginalizing people with generalizations and that rubs
me the wrong way.

 

[dumpthemonarchy]

All the crap about letting in terrorists or Islamic radicals. The people who really did America harm
were let in by America. The prime reason as far as i am concerned is because Reagan
dismantled the professional system at the airports, through deregulation and replaced the
workers with people were Inexperienced, in some cases Illiterate, and some were even
illegal aliens working for cheap.
As for the other groups you don't like, the Sikhs for example, yes there were a few that got
into Canada but some of those people I really like and some are personal friends of mine.
I have spoken a few times in their temple, and I find them to be loyal Canadians. Yes a
few did the Air India attack, and it was the courts fault some went free. Most of these people
were not in favor of what was done either. If you knew anything about the Sikh Religion and
belief system you would understand that. I am a retired Catholic , but I like to know about
other people and their history and customs, which is a good thing. Man you are missing out
on some fantastic food and good times just by eying them with suspicion.
I can't get over how many people are afraid of others and want to marginalize them to make
themselves feel better. I have friends from , Europe China, India, the Middle East a few from
the African Continent and America. Come to think of it Central and South America as well,
and I find they are far more accepting of us than we are of them on an individual level and that
is really too bad. Yes I am critical of a society when I know they are capable of more than they
are living up to , but that doesn't mean I don't like them as a person.
If you are open minded you can engage in some great debate without recrimination or hostility
Unfortunately some people take aim at marginalizing people with generalizations and that rubs
me the wrong way.

The Toronto 18 were Canadian home grown islamist radicals. According to a poll, about 120,00 Canadian Muslims thought the destructive, murderous goals of the Toronto 18 were okay. So immigration ought to be drastically lowered from Muslim countries.

I do not dislike Sikhs, you write unsupported nonsense, thus, you lose credibility. Many Sikhs dislike radical Sikhs who want to publicly wear knives.

 

[DurkaDurka]

The Toronto 18 were Canadian home grown islamist radicals. According to a poll, about 120,00 Canadian Muslims thought the destructive, murderous goals of the Toronto 18 were okay. So immigration ought to be drastically lowered from Muslim countries.

I do not dislike Sikhs, you write unsupported nonsense, thus, you lose credibility. Many Sikhs dislike radical Sikhs who want to publicly wear knives.

Your logic is f'ed. You state that not all Sikh's are alike, wouldn't that the same apply to Muslims?

 

[lone wolf]

The Toronto 18 were Canadian home grown islamist radicals. According to a poll, about 120,00 Canadian Muslims thought the destructive, murderous goals of the Toronto 18 were okay. So immigration ought to be drastically lowered from Muslim countries.

I do not dislike Sikhs, you write unsupported nonsense, thus, you lose credibility. Many Sikhs dislike radical Sikhs who want to publicly wear knives.

Just curious.... How many Rock Machine and Hells Angels guys aren't considered terrorist for their turf war?

 

[dumpthemonarchy]

Your logic is f'ed. You state that not all Sikh's are alike, wouldn't that the same apply to Muslims?

Size matters here. Right now 90% of Muslims in Canada were not born in Canada, thus many have very un-Canadian attitudes. Like agreeing with the Toronto 18's goals. You have logic problem if you don't.

There are almost no Europeans or Latin Americans who have sympathy with the Toronto 18. So, logically, they would make better immigrants as they have fewer security issues. More immigrants from Europe and Latin America, less from Asia and Africa.

Plus, immigrants from Asia and Africa cost $3000 per year to settle, or over $800,000,000 for the fed govt alone. I want cheaper and fewer immigrants.

 

[dumpthemonarchy]

Just curious.... How many Rock Machine and Hells Angels guys aren't considered terrorist for their turf war?

Because gangsters do not have political goals such as attacking Parliament, the stock exchange or cutting off the heads of political leaders, which is what the Toronto 18 had planned in their attacks. The Toronto 18 had terrorists goals. Terrorists threaten, and attack the existence of the state, the state is not just you or me, it is the people and the govt together. When the state is attacked, ordinary criminal law may, and often takes second place because extraordinary measures may need to be taken to suppress this danger to the public because political instability may result. And that can mean war.

Trudeau said, "Just watch me" over the FLQ crisis. Govts may go overboard in their actions.

Gangsters in their turf wars physically threaten the general public with bullets flying around. That is a public danger and terrorizes people. However, a gangsters primary goal is to steal money, sell illegal drugs, beat up people and shoot them. They break criminal laws. They attack individuals and have little interest in the current govt or politicians. Gangsters only care about what the police are doing against them. Gangsters think the current political system is okay, they are indifferent to it. Gangsters do not threaten our current political order with violence, if they did, they become terrorists.

 

[DurkaDurka]

Because gangsters do not have political goals such as attacking Parliament, the stock exchange or cutting off the heads of political leaders, which is what the Toronto 18 had planned in their attacks. The Toronto 18 had terrorists goals. Terrorists threaten, and attack the existence of the state, the state is not just you or me, it is the people and the govt together. When the state is attacked, ordinary criminal law may, and often takes second place because extraordinary measures may need to be taken to suppress this danger to the public because political instability may result. And that can mean war.

Gangsters might not have political goals but they kill innocent people all the same. Look into the Quebec biker wars of the 90's.

 

[dumpthemonarchy]

Gangsters might not have political goals but they kill innocent people all the same. Look into the Quebec biker wars of the 90's.

It takes more than killing civilians to make a terrorist.

A political motive is required to be a terrorist. Here motive is meaningful because if you kill someone and write a pamphlet describing your goals to say, overthrow the govt, then you will get more than the police interested in your doings. Target security forces like the police, army or the govt's diplomats and you could qualify to be a terrorist.

 

[lone wolf]

It takes more than killing civilians to make a terrorist.

A political motive is required to be a terrorist. Here motive is meaningful because if you kill someone and write a pamphlet describing your goals to say, overthrow the govt, then you will get more than the police interested in your doings. Target security forces like the police, army or the govt's diplomats and you could qualify to be a terrorist.

You mean like this?...

Hells Angels member guilty of prison guard murder - CTV News

 

[IdRatherBeSkiing]

It takes more than killing civilians to make a terrorist.

A political motive is required to be a terrorist. Here motive is meaningful because if you kill someone and write a pamphlet describing your goals to say, overthrow the govt, then you will get more than the police interested in your doings. Target security forces like the police, army or the govt's diplomats and you could qualify to be a terrorist.

I believe targetting military targets would mean you are not targetting civilians which would make you not a terrorist.

 

[dumpthemonarchy]

You mean like this?...

Hells Angels member guilty of prison guard murder - CTV News

Not like that at all. Prison guards work in a box, they are not among society. The gangsters had no political manifesto for their actions.

I believe targetting military targets would mean you are not targetting civilians would make you not a terrorist.

Too many nots here, it's confusing.

Whatever you mean, terrorists are usually more focussed because they have clear politcal goals described in manifestos. The FLQ wanted an independent Quebec, that's not hard to understand.

 

[lone wolf]

They drove their van into a box? We ain't sellin' Hotwheels here....

 

[IdRatherBeSkiing]

Not like that at all. Prison guards work in a box, they are not among society. The gangsters had no political manifesto for their actions.



Too many nots here, it's confusing.

Whatever you mean, terrorists are usually more focussed because they have clear politcal goals described in manifestos. The FLQ wanted an independent Quebec, that's not hard to understand.

I missed a which. Corrected in my original post. My point was that if they are targetting only military targets, then they are not terrorists.

 

[dumpthemonarchy]

I missed a which. Corrected in my original post. My point was that if they are targetting only military targets, then they are not terrorists.

Then you have an army I suppose, which seems like standard procedure, one army fighting another army. A fair and proper war. Happens all the time.

But I think you mean civilians attacking the army. A poor target because for one it is a very hard target and can fight back and likely kick the ass of any opposing force out in the open. Got a tank, jet or pile of ammo in your back yard? If not, then you lose. Game over.

That why terrorists go for softer targets like polticians and mailboxes, you need only small bombs and get big publcity.

However, in Canada today, that definition is not likely to fly. Because attacking the army is attacking the state. Have you heard of the war on terror? It's broad lately.

Or you might mean guerilla war, that's been very popular too.