More Proof Canada in Danger from Islamic Terrorism!

[wulf42]

Anyone that can say that this country

is not in Danger from Islamic extremist's needs a head examination!!

The evidence grows on a daily basis...yet the Liberals say it is all in our

heads???........yeah okay!!

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2009/09/25/z...-bomb-plot.html

Edited September 25, 2009 by wulf42

[nicky10013]

Anyone that can say that this country

is not in Danger from Islamic extremist's needs a head examination!!

The evidence grows on a daily basis...yet the Liberals say it is all in our

heads???........yeah okay!!

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2009/09/25/z...-bomb-plot.html

The real question is what is in YOUR head when you come up with this garbage? Especially the last line.

[Sir Bandelot]

Anyone that can say that this country

is not in Danger from Islamic extremist's needs a head examination!!

The evidence grows on a daily basis...yet the Liberals say it is all in our

heads???........yeah okay!!

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2009/09/25/z...-bomb-plot.html

I haven't heard the liberals say islamic terrorism is not a threat to Canada, so don't know what you're going on about.

When I read the first story about this several days ago, it became apparent that he was part of a sting operation, just as others have been in the past few years. Security agents use these methods to seek out those who might be interested in conducting terror attacks, which is a pretty good strategy in one way. In the other way though it could lead to entrapment. So let the courts carefully examine the evidence, without inciting undue fear or propaganda in the media. We've had enough of that, right?

[nicky10013]

I haven't heard the liberals say islamic terrorism is not a threat to Canada, so don't know what you're going on about.

When I read the first story about this several days ago, it became apparent that he was part of a sting operation, just as others have been in the past few years. Security agents use these methods to seek out those who might be interested in conducting terror attacks, which is a pretty good strategy in one way. In the other way though it could lead to entrapment. So let the courts carefully examine the evidence, without inciting undue fear or propaganda in the media. We've had enough of that, right?

The only problem is, in the states this guy will never get a fair trial in a court of law. He'll be locked away somewhere in Guantanamo and forgotten about.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

The only real problem we have is conquering our own fears. Our political leadership should be above such things, but they are not. They use our fears against us.

Let us not take counsel of our fears and instead consult our hearts and minds. We should base our politics on hope and prosperity.

[ToadBrother]

The only real problem we have is conquering our own fears. Our political leadership should be above such things, but they are not. They use our fears against us.

Let us not take counsel of our fears and instead consult our hearts and minds. We should base our politics on hope and prosperity.

You know, I'm trying to compare this "THE SKY IS FALLING" attitude to, say, Londoners during the Blitz. At that point, there was a very real danger that you might get blown to smithereens by a German bomb. Now, the odds of anyone dying from a terrorist attack are exceedingly slim at best. Londoners were stoic, put a brave face on and went on with their lives in the midst of it, now everyone runs around half mad. Governments have mutual freak out sessions, and the media whips everyone into frenzies.

Yes terrorism is bad, but compared to, say, the threat of Communist expansion by the Soviets and the uncontrolled proliferation of nuclear weapons, it's pretty small potatoes. Our civilization has survived plagues of unimaginable destructiveness and wars that in one way or another involved almost every person in the countries involved, so I think we can probably get through these times as well.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

You know, I'm trying to compare this "THE SKY IS FALLING" attitude to, say, Londoners during the Blitz. At that point, there was a very real danger that you might get blown to smithereens by a German bomb. Now, the odds of anyone dying from a terrorist attack are exceedingly slim at best. Londoners were stoic, put a brave face on and went on with their lives in the midst of it, now everyone runs around half mad. Governments have mutual freak out sessions, and the media whips everyone into frenzies.

Yes terrorism is bad, but compared to, say, the threat of Communist expansion by the Soviets and the uncontrolled proliferation of nuclear weapons, it's pretty small potatoes. Our civilization has survived plagues of unimaginable destructiveness and wars that in one way or another involved almost every person in the countries involved, so I think we can probably get through these times as well.

We certainly can and will get through these trying times. The issue at hand is in how we get from here to there. The loss of some civil rights may not seem like a very high price to pay for some, but then they are not the ones losing them.

[daniel]

We certainly can and will get through these trying times. The issue at hand is in how we get from here to there. The loss of some civil rights may not seem like a very high price to pay for some, but then they are not the ones losing them.

Over-the-top right-wing paranoid fanaticism attracts terrorists like flies to a log of sh*t.

[Topaz]

I think Canada was ok until we united with the US and NATO and took on the Taliban and the US mistake was taking Hussein out. I think the US has created more terrorist after 9/11 than before. Now, the West may have to be on guard for a very long time, for Middle-Easterners who will try to cause death over here.

[Argus]

The only real problem we have is conquering our own fears. Our political leadership should be above such things, but they are not. They use our fears against us.

Let us not take counsel of our fears and instead consult our hearts and minds. We should base our politics on hope and prosperity.

Howzabout we try and control our borders and the massive numbers of third world goat herders who pour across them every day instead?

[bush_cheney2004]

I think Canada was ok until we united with the US and NATO and took on the Taliban and the US mistake was taking Hussein out. I think the US has created more terrorist after 9/11 than before. Now, the West may have to be on guard for a very long time, for Middle-Easterners who will try to cause death over here.

Sure...the "pre 9/11" terrorists just loved Canada so much......wanna bomb LAX ?

[bush_cheney2004]

Over-the-top right-wing paranoid fanaticism attracts terrorists like flies to a log of sh*t.

Good...makes it easier to shoot them!

[Jerry J. Fortin]

Howzabout we try and control our borders and the massive numbers of third world goat herders who pour across them every day instead?

Hey Argus you will get no argument from me about defending our borders. You realize of course that this effort is daunting to say the least.

[daniel]

Good...makes it easier to shoot them!

The flies will scatter and the sh*t will fly (all over).

[bush_cheney2004]

The flies will scatter and the sh*t will fly (all over).

That's the idea.....

[wulf42]

Howzabout we try and control our borders and the massive numbers of third world goat herders who pour across them every day instead?

Bingo......we have a winner!!

it is an easy solution...not sure why someone doesn t do it?

slam the gate shut!

[Michael Hardner]

it is an easy solution...not sure why someone doesn t do it?

Maybe because everytime we get an answer on how this would work from the folks behind these ideas, it involves excluding people from Canada because of their religion.

Of course most Canadians understand that that is a stupid idea, so no politician in their right mind would propose it. For that matter, the Conservatives haven't even proposed lowering immigration.

CBC Article

According to the projections, the visible minority population of Toronto will range between 2.8 million and nearly 3.9 million within 12 years.

The main reason for this, Statistics Canada says, is an expectation of sustained immigration to Canada over the next 12 years, and the fact that a high proportion of immigrants are non-white.

[waldo]

The real question is what is in YOUR head when you come up with this garbage? Especially the last line.

yup... what really is rattling around up there?

so, the guy is brought to the U.S. at 7 years of age... raised in Flushing and talked of as "just another teenager - nothing unusual, nothing different about the guy growing up"... just another (alleged) home-grown terrorist type... just the ole 'donut vendor' guy for years in lower Manhattan.

in the spirit of helping wulf42 come to grips with his worrisome obsession, one could always distract his attention with something like, oh... say, the OK City bomber, for instance... also another home-grown type - raised as a Catholic but claimed later in life that "science was his religion". In the spirit of helping to spread some of that worrisome obsession around a bit...

[daniel]

...

Of course most Canadians understand that that is a stupid idea, so no politician in their right mind would propose it. For that matter, the Conservatives haven't even proposed lowering immigration.

CBC Article

And we already know the views on this forum don't represent those of the general population. And as stated by an immigration minister, if immigration to Canada were to stop, the last Canadian would die in about a hundred years.

Edited September 26, 2009 by daniel

[Michael Hardner]

And we already know the views on this forum don't represent those of the general population. And as stated by an immigration minister, if immigration to Canada were to stop, the last Canadian would die in about a hundred years.

daniel,

That's pretty clearly false but anyhow...

[daniel]

daniel,

That's pretty clearly false but anyhow...

Actually the real quote is:

“If we were to stop the tap of immigration tomorrow and not let one person in, the last Canadian would die in 175 years.”

~ Sergio Marchi, Minister of Immigration, The Globe and Mail interview, 27 June 1994

[Michael Hardner]

From what I can find, our fertility rate is about 1.5 children per woman, which I think means our population reduces by 25% in an average lifetime. That still means Marchi's numbers are off.

[eyeball]

From what I can find, our fertility rate is about 1.5 children per woman, which I think means our population reduces by 25% in an average lifetime. That still means Marchi's numbers are off.

This would probably not be a bad thing ecologically speaking.

[daniel]

From what I can find, our fertility rate is about 1.5 children per woman, which I think means our population reduces by 25% in an average lifetime. That still means Marchi's numbers are off.

So how many years would that be: 75% every 75years until the population is in single digits. Anyways, the point is made about cutting off immigration.

[Michael Hardner]

Rough math, taking 75% of population every 75 years

Year Pop (Millions)

2009 30

2084 22.5

2159 16.9

2234 12.7

2309 9.5

2384 7.1

2459 5.3

2534 4

2609 3

2684 2.25

2759 1.7

2834 1.3

2909 .950

If I'm right the population goes under 1M at the end of the millenium.