Jump to content


Getting an "Insecure Connection" warning for Exisle? No worry

Details in this thread

This is why I love my country!

US Canada Terrorism

  • Please log in to reply
57 replies to this topic

#41 Rov Judicata

Rov Judicata

    Crassly Irresponsible and Indifferent

  • Islander
  • 15,720 posts

Posted 08 May 2003 - 07:45 AM

And still, I'm with Lil et al.

This is like "Blame Canada", but not funny.....

That being said, the welfare gaffe is extremely serious.
St. Louis must be destroyed!

Me: "I have a job and five credit cards and am looking into signing a two year lease.  THAT MAKES ME OLD."
Josh: "I don't have a job, I have ONE credit card, I'm stuck in a lease and I'm 28! My mom's basement IS ONE BAD DECISION AWAY!"
~~ Josh, winning the argument.

"Congress . . . shall include every idiot, lunatic, insane person, and person non compos mentis[.]" ~1 U.S.C. ß 1, selectively quoted for accuracy.

#42 CJ AEGIS

CJ AEGIS

    Warship Guru!

  • Islander
  • 6,847 posts

Posted 08 May 2003 - 07:47 AM

Quote

QF: Canada gave someone welfare money. Canada didn't intend for the recipient to use the money to build a bomb.

Someone?  He was a known, wanted, and hunted international terrorist.  This is the guy the Canadian government gives their welfare money to?  

Quote

Lil:  I'm still not understanding why Canada is to blame for the United States' failure to protect its own borders.

Then I would suggest rereading Sidís posts and my earlier ones.  Then ask as to what parts elude you Lil and Iíll be more than happy to elaborate.  To restate the same thing again without knowing the foggy parts for you would be simply eat up posting space.

Edited by CJ AEGIS, 08 May 2003 - 07:48 AM.

"History has proven too often and too recently that the nation which relaxes its defenses invites attack."
        -Fleet Admiral Nimitz
"Their sailors say they should have flight pay and sub pay both -- they're in the air half the time, under the water the other half""
        - Ernie Pyle: Aboard a DE

#43 Han

Han

    When all else fails, use fire.

  • Islander
  • 483 posts

Posted 08 May 2003 - 08:08 AM

CJ AEGIS, on May 8 2003, 05:34 AM, said:

Quote

QF: Canada gave someone welfare money. Canada didn't intend for the recipient to use the money to build a bomb.

Someone?  He was a known, wanted, and hunted international terrorist.  This is the guy the Canadian government gives their welfare money to?  

Quote

Lil:† I'm still not understanding why Canada is to blame for the United States' failure to protect its own borders.

Then I would suggest rereading Sidís posts and my earlier ones.  Then ask as to what parts elude you Lil and Iíll be more than happy to elaborate.  To restate the same thing again without knowing the foggy parts for you would be simply eat up posting space.
I don't think its correct to condemn a Canadian policy put in place, democratically, by the Canadian people to help its own disadvantaged citizens, simply because some dangerous individuals have abused it. Were these men dangerous? Yes. Did the government know about them at the time they applied for welfare? We don't know that.

Are you suggesting that we Canadians shouldn't help our own citizens? That we abandon our sovereignty in deciding what is best for our people? That it was our fault that the terrorists took advantage of our welfare and that anything bad that happens because of this is our responsibility?

What's next? If some evil doers get a tax refund because we have some obscure tax credit and uses it to buy some explosives, that means Canada failed to have tighter control over who gets a tax refund?

And before we get into a debate of why didn't Canada track these people better, wouldn't you say this is kinda like the pot calling the kettle black (or was it the other way around?)? Why didn't the US keep track of those hijackers?

Regarding the coast, I agree that Canada should do more to protect it. Regarding the border crossing, Canada has a responsibility to screen people but so does the US. We share the border and if anything failed, then its a shared failure. For the US government to blame Canada for everything is both juvenile and incorrect.

Finally, the US doesn't have a monopoly on liberty and freedom. Canada has both liberty and freedom as well. And as such, we the citizens of Canada will choose how we take care of our citizens. Not the US.
If the US doesn't like our policies, then tough. If the US feels that they need to take measures to make them feel more secure, they I say, go right ahead. But Canada will not and should not bow to US pressure to change our way of life.

--
Han
Han

#44 Kevin Street

Kevin Street
  • Islander
  • 6,256 posts

Posted 08 May 2003 - 08:17 AM

Okay, this thread has drifted far, far from what I originally intended it to be in the initial post, but to address the main issue of contention here:

Quote

CJ AEGIS wrote:
Sections of LAX and hundreds of American lives were saved not by the alertness of Canadian authorities but rather a US Customs Agent who stopped a suspicious individual. Canada was the perfect haven for the known international terrorist Ahmed Ressam; he easily slipped though the lax immigration policies and then went about constructing a bomb funded by happy Canadian welfare programs.

I agree with you about the need for tougher screening of immigrants. The Air India Bombing trial (which is finally coming to a close after eighteen years), shows how terrorists sometimes take advantage of our system. They should be screened out from the legitimate refugees with more alacrity.

But as to the way he used the welfare system...

Quote

mystic wrote:
Yes and the US did not intend to train terrorists to fly into buildings.

Which is a very good point. The problem is the system that lets them get into the country, and then lets them stay here while it grinds its slow wheels, not the resources they use when they get here. Democratic countries are supposed to be open and free for citizens and authorized visitors. Restricting resources and programs is the wrong way to solve the problem.

Quote

CJ AEGIS:
Case study two occurred a few months back when two unknown vessels running with lights off in a suspicious manner were reported by a US merchant vessel. Canada this time failed (no big surprise) in her international obligation to patrol her maritime waters by missing these vessels. Instead a US merchant vessel had to do it and the story gets better from here. When the US vessel tried to contact one of the suspicious vessels they were warned away and threatened. So they contacted the Canadian Navy to alert them. Well sure they managed to reach Canadian authorities given some time but then got told that they had no assets to investigate the claim. Exactly how many materials could these ships of passed off to terrorists if that was their intent while Canadian authorities sat on their collective thumbs?

Once again, I agree with you. This country is letting its Armed Forces waste away from inattention and lack of funding. We should be able to police our own waters, and that incident should be a wakeup call. But sadly, it was not. "Defense" isn't just a dirty word in Ottawa, it's hardly even a word at all. The Armed Forces have had their funding cut over and over, and it's going to take some kind of huge outcry to wake up the Feds. Maybe a change of leaders. Chretien is retiring soon. Hopefully his successor will have a more rational outlook on these matters.

Quote

Canadaís policy is the best friend a terrorist who is trying to attack the US could ask for. Canada feeds them, funds them, and then provides lax security for them to slip into the US.

I'd have to say that's an exaggeration, CJ. The US feeds and funds far more terrorists than we do (even Saddam was an American ally back in the day), and that lax border is an enormous ecomic benefit to the US as well as Canada. There's a reason America has a 7.8 billion dollar trade deficit with Canada. Your economy needs our resources and products (just like we need yours), and increasing the delays and paperwork at the border hurts the American economy as well as ours.

The fear of terrorism can be almost as damaging as terrorism itself.

Quote

Then should we get into how Canada allows terrorists groups banned by many groups to operate in their borders fund raising as humanitarian organizations?

If your talking about Hamas, that's finally been dealt with. They're banned.
Per aspera ad astra

#45 Bad Wolf

Bad Wolf

    Luck is when opportunity meets preparation

  • Islander
  • 38,881 posts

Posted 08 May 2003 - 08:19 AM

To Hankuang  I don't agree with you one hundred percent but the area of disagreement is negligable and what I really have to say is:

BRAVO!

Edited by Una Salus Lillius, 08 May 2003 - 08:20 AM.

Posted Image

#46 Kevin Street

Kevin Street
  • Islander
  • 6,256 posts

Posted 08 May 2003 - 08:31 AM

AnneZo, on May 7 2003, 10:47 PM, said:

As for security, if the USofA would ditch "Homeland Security" and Ashcroft and his McCarthyite
Patriot Act, maybe the Administration would have the time to think of the obvious thing to do, which is to radically overhaul the visa system.  All of the 9/11 terrorists were in teh USofA on USofA-issued visas.
Thank you, AnneZo. This is what I was hoping we could talk about.

Just what is this Patriot Act? From what I hear, it gives the authorities the right to do some extremely scary things, like spy on people with nary a warrant or explanation. Then there's things like that guy who was arrested for expressing anti-Bush sentiments in an Internet chatroom, or all those material witnesses who are being held in jail even though they haven't  been charged with a crime. And then there's Patriot II...

Is this sort of thing really acceptable?
Per aspera ad astra

#47 CJ AEGIS

CJ AEGIS

    Warship Guru!

  • Islander
  • 6,847 posts

Posted 08 May 2003 - 08:42 AM

Quote

Hankuang:  I don't think its correct to condemn a Canadian policy put in place, democratically, by the Canadian people to help its own disadvantaged citizens, simply because some dangerous individuals have abused it.

I suggest it is within the rights of the US to tell Canada to either tighten their borders or suffer the consequences of not doing so.  That includes the economic and political backlash that occurs when we tighten our borders with Canada.  Canadaís biggest trading partner is the United States and that trade is important to the US but it is even more important to Canada.  The economic backlash from the US tightening our borders enough to deal with the threat that Canada has allowed into her borders would drive the Canadian economy into the mud.    

Quote

Hankuang:  Did the government know about them at the time they applied for welfare? We don't know that.

A simple call to Interpol would have solved that issue.  He was known as a terrorist and had several different organizations attempting to track him down at the time.  This list includes the famous Jean-Louis Bruguiere the French Magistrate who convicted Carlos the Jackal. In fact Bruguiere warned the Canadian government on this one only to be ignored.  So either that shows a high level of competency or ineptitude among Canadian officials to miss this one.    

Quote

Hankuang:  Are you suggesting that we Canadians shouldn't help our own citizens? That we abandon our sovereignty in deciding what is best for our people? That it was our fault that the terrorists took advantage of our welfare and that anything bad that happens because of this is our responsibility?

Iím suggesting that Canada should seriously reevaluate their policies that allow terrorists to freely enter and operate within Canada.  Then they should compare that to the economic losses and political losses they would incur when the US tightens the border in response.  As noted by Sid, a good part of the reason why Canada can play with those nice little social programs is they have the free border with the US.  

Quote

Hankuang:  Why didn't the US keep track of those hijackers?

Canada unlike the US has taken very little action toward any meaningful changes in their policies that allow in and then fund terrorist since 9-11.  

Quote

Hankuang:  But Canada will not and should not bow to US pressure to change our way of life.

Then the US has every right to change the border relationship with Canada.  Canada will then have to deal with the economic and political consequences of that policy.
"History has proven too often and too recently that the nation which relaxes its defenses invites attack."
        -Fleet Admiral Nimitz
"Their sailors say they should have flight pay and sub pay both -- they're in the air half the time, under the water the other half""
        - Ernie Pyle: Aboard a DE

#48 Bad Wolf

Bad Wolf

    Luck is when opportunity meets preparation

  • Islander
  • 38,881 posts

Posted 08 May 2003 - 08:43 AM

The Patriot Act scares the beejeezus out of me.  I read the damned thing when it was proposed and I am appalled that it was so easily passed.

It's proof positive of how easily short sighted people can be when they are panicked.
Posted Image

#49 Han

Han

    When all else fails, use fire.

  • Islander
  • 483 posts

Posted 08 May 2003 - 09:05 AM

Quote

Quote

Hankuang:† I don't think its correct to condemn a Canadian policy put in place, democratically, by the Canadian people to help its own disadvantaged citizens, simply because some dangerous individuals have abused it.

I suggest it is within the rights of the US to tell Canada to either tighten their borders or suffer the consequences of not doing so.  That includes the economic and political backlash that occurs when we tighten our borders with Canada.  Canadaís biggest trading partner is the United States and that trade is important to the US but it is even more important to Canada.  The economic backlash from the US tightening our borders enough to deal with the threat that Canada has allowed into her borders would drive the Canadian economy into the mud.    

What does tightening borders have to do with our welfare system that you so disagree with?
Borders concern national security. Yes, our borders should be tightened but welfare has nothing to do with it. Welfare concerns economic health of our citizens.

And forgive me if I sound idealistic, but I would rather live in the mud than be threatened into compliance by the US. Don't forget that the economic backlash will cut both ways.

Quote

Quote

Hankuang:† Did the government know about them at the time they applied for welfare? We don't know that.

A simple call to Interpol would have solved that issue.  He was known as a terrorist and had several different organizations attempting to track him down at the time.  This list includes the famous Jean-Louis Bruguiere the French Magistrate who convicted Carlos the Jackal. In fact Bruguiere warned the Canadian government on this one only to be ignored.  So either that shows a high level of competency or ineptitude among Canadian officials to miss this one.    

If it was incompetence, then so be it. Then it was the fault of the Canadian officials in that part of government that screwed up.

Now, if you like, we can turn to the US's intelligence failure, its INS failure and all the other failures...

The point? Canada and the US both screwed up. Stop pointing fingers!

Quote

Quote

Hankuang:† Are you suggesting that we Canadians shouldn't help our own citizens? That we abandon our sovereignty in deciding what is best for our people? That it was our fault that the terrorists took advantage of our welfare and that anything bad that happens because of this is our responsibility?

Iím suggesting that Canada should seriously reevaluate their policies that allow terrorists to freely enter and operate within Canada.  Then they should compare that to the economic losses and political losses they would incur when the US tightens the border in response.  As noted by Sid, a good part of the reason why Canada can play with those nice little social programs is they have the free border with the US.  

Define "freely enter and operate"? Where is your proof that Canada is allowing terrorists to freely enter and operate within Canada. Seriously, I don't know. I concede this point, but I do know that what you said about our welfare system being a contributor to terrorism is wrong.

Quote

Quote

Hankuang:† But Canada will not and should not bow to US pressure to change our way of life.

Then the US has every right to change the border relationship with Canada.  Canada will then have to deal with the economic and political consequences of that policy.

So be it.

--
Han

Edited by Hankuang, 08 May 2003 - 09:25 AM.

Han

#50 CJ AEGIS

CJ AEGIS

    Warship Guru!

  • Islander
  • 6,847 posts

Posted 08 May 2003 - 09:26 AM

Quote

Hankuang:  What does tightening borders have to do with our welfare system that you so disagree with? 

I could care less about Canadaís welfare system.  It concerns me when Canada allows a known terrorist in their border and gives him welfare checks that he uses to build a bomb.  This bomb funded by Canadian taxpayers was what he tried to smuggle into the US.

Quote

Hankuang:  And forgive me if I should idealistic, but I would rather live in the mud than be threatened into compliance by the US. Don't forget that the economic backlash will cut both ways.

Of course it will but Iím not willing to accept another 9-11 because of Canadaís willingness to allow in terrorists.  In addition the impact in the long term would be substantially more devastating to the Canadian economy than the US.    

Quote

Hankuang:  The point? Canada and the US both screwed up. Stop pointing fingers!

The point is the US changed our policies to adapt to those screw-ups.  Canada did not change those policies and is still playing Russian roulette.  That gun rather than being aimed at Canadaís head is aimed at the United States.  

Quote

Hankuang:  Define "freely enter and operate"? Where is your proof that Canada is allowing terrorists to freely enter and operate within Canada. Seriously, I don't know. I concede this point, but I do know that what you said about our welfare system being a contributor to terrorism is wrong.

A terroristís tale

Quote

Living in an apartment building in Montreal, as an asylum-seeker he actually was subsidized by the Canadian government, getting a $500 welfare check each month ó and he augmented that by stealing from tourists.   ďHe was arrested four times for theft in a period of a couple of years,Ē says McKenna. ďThis seemed to have absolutely no effect on his refugee claim.Ē

He paid for bomb materials with the welfare check.  As for Canada allowing terrorists to operate freely in her borders that tidbit had been all over for months.
"History has proven too often and too recently that the nation which relaxes its defenses invites attack."
        -Fleet Admiral Nimitz
"Their sailors say they should have flight pay and sub pay both -- they're in the air half the time, under the water the other half""
        - Ernie Pyle: Aboard a DE

#51 Kevin Street

Kevin Street
  • Islander
  • 6,256 posts

Posted 08 May 2003 - 09:36 AM

Quote

CJ AEGIS:
It concerns me when Canada allows a known terrorist in their border and gives him welfare checks that he uses to build a bomb. This bomb funded by Canadian taxpayers was what he tried to smuggle into the US.

Once again, I agree with you about the border part. But Hankuang is right when he says that the welfare system has no bearing on this issue. Terrorists infiltrate western countries and use our own resources against us all the time. This is no different than the Florida flight schools.

Quote

Of course it will but Iím not willing to accept another 9-11 because of Canadaís willingness to allow in terrorists. In addition the impact in the long term would be substantially more devastating to the Canadian economy than the US.

Would you really want of make a permanent enemy out of your closest ally? Because that's what that kind of economic terrorism would do. Pretty soon the US would be surrounded by nothing but enemies, and then what?

Quote

The point is the US changed our policies to adapt to those screw-ups. Canada did not change those policies and is still playing Russian roulette. That gun rather than being aimed at Canadaís head is aimed at the United States.

Yes, we need to change our immigration polices, or at least enforce the ones we have more strictly. I agree with you on this. A lot of Canadians do.
Per aspera ad astra

#52 Han

Han

    When all else fails, use fire.

  • Islander
  • 483 posts

Posted 08 May 2003 - 09:49 AM

CJ AEGIS, on May 8 2003, 07:13 AM, said:

Quote

Hankuang:† And forgive me if I should idealistic, but I would rather live in the mud than be threatened into compliance by the US. Don't forget that the economic backlash will cut both ways.

Of course it will but Iím not willing to accept another 9-11 because of Canadaís willingness to allow in terrorists.  In addition the impact in the long term would be substantially more devastating to the Canadian economy than the US.    

And I'm not willing to accept the US dictating Canadian policy and society through economic threats and assignment of blame. Change your society however much you like, but leave ours alone. On increasing security at the borders and the coasts, you have my full support but demanding that we change our society by scraping our systems like immigration, welfare, etc. is unacceptable.

9-11 was a horrific and terrible moment in history for America and the world. And should be prevented from happening again, but not at the loss of one's own society and way of life.

--
Han

Edited by Hankuang, 08 May 2003 - 09:50 AM.

Han

#53 tennyson

tennyson
  • Islander
  • 6,173 posts

Posted 08 May 2003 - 10:01 AM

There was no talk of scraping social programs at all and I don't see where you're getting that from at all. "Reform" does not mean "abolish" and that was what I understood was being called for, reform of the system. So far as I've seen non one has been dictating anyhing of the sort nor has even thought of it.There was no talk of scrapping, no talk of doing away with anything. Tightening standards doesn't mean ending the program.
"Only an idiot would fight a war on two fronts. Only the heir to the throne of the Kingdom of Idiots would fight a war on twelve fronts."

— Londo, "Ceremonies of Light and Dark" Babylon-5


#54 Aric

Aric

    Ar1ARX

  • Islander
  • 504 posts

Posted 08 May 2003 - 10:03 AM

Hi, just stopping by, rather late in the discussion, and barely able to skim most of the posts.

I just wanted to add my voice to those who agree that Canada should be doing more to protect our territory and guard against terrorists who might use Canada to get at the US.  That being said, I don't think there's a country in the world for whom this statement does not apply.  Canada is taking steps to improve the security of our country, but they are definitely not as drastic as the US has done.  Speaking of which, just how constitutional were some of these actions, how many honest, innocent people were arrested, detained for months without any civil rights protections, all in the name of security?  How many of these innocent people endured utter humiliation for no reason, how many are suing the government for their treatment?  Am I to believe that this is what the US would expect Canada to do?  Not in this country, not while the Charter still means something here, which could be more than I could say about your Bill of Rights in many cases.

It really should not be forgotten that terrorists are not stupid, they do not walk into countries wearing signs saying I'm a terrorist, won't someone please arrest me, they can be insidious, clever and sublime, intelligent, highly trained.  They study the countries they wish to infilitrate, they learn their culture, the laws, the system, how best to manipulate a well meaning, caring society's genuine wish to help the poor and disadvantaged from around the world, to give them a better life here, for their own nefarious ends.  The best terrorists can operate around the world with impunity, because they know how to blend in, how to be inconspicuous, avoid suspicion, and fool the diligent but well meaning officials of any country.

Hi CJ Aegis, I have to say, any attempts at economic punishment or blackmail is sheer folly.  Trying to over protect the Canada US border will also hurt the US economy, and let's not forget, we're doing much better than you are, and we don't have a presidency at stake over the performance of the economy.  The US may be Canada's largest and most important trading partner, but Canada is the US' largest and most important trading partner, as well.  The US sells well over $170 billion worth of exports into Canada, and buys around $220 billion worth of Canadian products, do you really think the US can just threaten over 20% of their overall trade without serious consequence to their own economy?  This is not some game where we try to see who gets hurt more, there's no winner in this, not to mention how would it look around the world?  Let's not forget, examine if you will the US capital account surplus, see how many billions of foreign dollars is needed, every day, by the US in order to finance your quality of life, then tell me you'd be willing to jeopardize it by antangozing friends with outrageous actions.  The US has legitimate concerns, and they will be addressed, but we're not going to turn this country into something other than what it is to do it, no matter what the stake.

Aric

Edited by Aric, 08 May 2003 - 10:33 AM.


#55 Han

Han

    When all else fails, use fire.

  • Islander
  • 483 posts

Posted 08 May 2003 - 10:07 AM

Sorry, didn't mean scrapping exactly. Just don't like the idea of being told to make a change to something that's a part of our society...or face consequences. Border security we have a common responsibility to. But what goes on in our country is for our people to decide freely without external pressure. To say that we must do this or that or that we must limit our citizens' liberties and freedoms or face consequences just turns my stomach.

--
Han

Edited by Hankuang, 08 May 2003 - 10:11 AM.

Han

#56 Bad Wolf

Bad Wolf

    Luck is when opportunity meets preparation

  • Islander
  • 38,881 posts

Posted 08 May 2003 - 10:07 AM

Quote

Speaking of which, just how constitutional were some of these actions, how many honest, innocent people were arrested, detained for months without any civil rights protections, all in the name of security? How many of these innocent people endured utter humiliation for no reason, how many are suing the government for their treatment? Am I to believe that this is what the US would expect Canada to do? Not in this country, not while the Charter still means something here, which could be more than I could say about your Bill of Rights in many cases.

:D

*Meaning I have nothing to add*
Posted Image

#57 CJ AEGIS

CJ AEGIS

    Warship Guru!

  • Islander
  • 6,847 posts

Posted 08 May 2003 - 04:13 PM

Quote

Kevin Street: Once again, I agree with you about the border part. But Hankuang is right when he says that the welfare system has no bearing on this issue.

I could care less about the workings of the Canadian welfare system.  To state it differently Iím concerned that Canada so openly and still does openly allow for the use of their borders and national resources to individuals who seek to attack the United States.  You can give welfare to any refugee you want but when Canada openly allows in a known terrorist and then unwittingly funds him there is serious issues.  

Quote

Kevin Street: This is no different than the Florida flight schools.

With action being taken against it.  None of that has been done in Canada to any meaningful degree.  Instead many Canadians apparently have an attitude hey since it happened before 9-11 in the US it is ok for us to do it still. Again Canada is playing Russian Roulette with terrorists and has the gun aimed at the US.    

Quote

Kevin Street: Would you really want of make a permanent enemy out of your closest ally?

Closest allies shouldnít openly allow individuals who are known terrorists into their borders when they have an open border with their ally that those terrorists are seeking to attack.  What type of backlash do you think Canada will take on the part of the US citizenry and government the first time a terrorist slips through from Canada and manages a major attack killing American citizens?  How will that reflect on Canadaís reputation as a power for peace when it is shown the impotence of the Canadian government has allowed a terrorist attack to kill Americans while the US was trusting Canada to secure their end of an open border system?      

Quote

Kevin Street: I agree with you on this. A lot of Canadians do.

Then maybe some action should be taken on the part of Canadians rather than just talk on the issue.

Aric, Iíll agree that I donít want to see the economic impacts of closing the border.  That is why Canada should start living up to its obligations for maintaining our border in its current open state.  The US cannot also afford to take another 9-11 level attack or worse because Canadians authorities were unwilling to actually have the will and good faith to enforce policies that will keep that open border secure.
"History has proven too often and too recently that the nation which relaxes its defenses invites attack."
        -Fleet Admiral Nimitz
"Their sailors say they should have flight pay and sub pay both -- they're in the air half the time, under the water the other half""
        - Ernie Pyle: Aboard a DE

#58 G1223

G1223

    The Blunt Object.

  • Dead account
  • 16,164 posts

Posted 08 May 2003 - 04:38 PM

Well maybe we need to let the CIA go back to wet work.(Like they ever left) I mean this guy as worked to attack us. maybe we should when the legal means of defense fail go to self defense which means find the guy kill him and let Canada figure out what is going on.

Now this violates Canada's sovernty but since they are willing to do nothing they must support his actions,and if they do not then his having a fatal accident  is in their best interest.

Basically I think we need to start doing like the Isrealies did after Munich in 72. Activly go after these guys and getthem fair and foul. no extraditions no show trials just kill them.  

There is alot to be said about preempive self defense.
If you encounter any Trolls. You really must not forget them.
And if you want to save these shores. For Pity sake Don't Trust them.
paraphrased from H. "Breaker" Morant

TANSTAAFL
If you voted for Obama then all the mistakes he makes are your fault and I will point this out to you every time he does mess up.

When the fall is all that remains. It matters a great deal.

All hail the clich's all emcompassing shadow.

My playing well with other's skill has been vastly overrated

Member of the Order of the Knigths of the Woeful Countance.



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: US, Canada, Terrorism

0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users