Do you support American / Canadian Cross Border Policing?

[olp1fan]

jesus christ can you stop spelling border wrong

Edited December 4, 2011 by olp1fan

[Guest Derek L]

jesus christ can you stop spelling border wrong

You got me......So what about Canada putting those French restrictions on Muslims.....thus freeing up the border with the US?

[olp1fan]

You got me......So what about Canada putting those French restrictions on Muslims.....thus freeing up the border with the US?

If you haven't noticed, the border is the least of our trade worries in the last few years

[Guest Derek L]

If you haven't noticed, the border is the least of our trade worries in the last few years

Didn’t you start this thread on cross border policing?

stay on topic or leave

[olp1fan]

Didn’t you start this thread on cross border policing?

the poll is in my favour, point has been proven, am leaving now

[Guest Derek L]

Also, since the French and you are in favour of banning the Burqua, and the United States hasn’t, would that make you more paranoid then you claim the Americans are?

[Guest Derek L]

the poll is in my favour, point has been proven, am leaving now

No, you haven't proven any point.......In fact, by you relying on the anonymous votes of others (Has there been any other people posting in this topic with your view?), and you continually dodge questions on your ideals and don’t defend your rather weak “points”, I’d suggest your “point” has yet to be even made……..perhaps you should go read some other people’s opinions on comment pages and continue to make them yours….. :lol:

[olp1fan]

1 person is for cross border policing and 6 are not

that is what this thread is about

I took your bait to make it go off topic and I won't be doing that again

[dre]

I dont have a problem with allowing US police in to search for American perps and conduct investigations on US citizens. But I dont like the idea of foreign police arrest any Canadians thats for sure.

[Guest Derek L]

1 person is for cross border policing and 6 are not

that is what this thread is about

I took your bait to make it go off topic and I won't be doing that again

Gotcha.....you have no point.....more verbal farting eh?

[Jack Weber]

Gotcha.....you have no point.....more verbal farting eh?

Anti-USA Bedwetter.ca (Rabble.ca) standard drivel....

[dre]

Anti-USA Bedwetter.ca (Rabble.ca) standard drivel....

You have to be anti-american to not want foreign police operating in Canada?

[Jack Weber]

You have to be anti-american to not want foreign police operating in Canada?

Read what it says...The RCMP will be allowed to operate inside US borders,as well...

[August1991]

Read the thread......August suggests we should have a freer boarder than France and Germany……

I don't want a "freer" border. I simply think that we Canadians and Americans should be embarrassed: The American/Canadian border is now - in 2011 - more restrictive than the French/German border.

On this simple but important measure, and despite what Steyn says: The Europeans have this right. And we North Americans have this wrong.

Olp1fan suggests it would never fly because the Americans are too paranoid of Muslim terrorists...

Whatever. Edited December 4, 2011 by August1991

[dre]

Read what it says...The RCMP will be allowed to operate inside US borders,as well...

That has no bearing on what I said.

And Im not necessarily against it... Im kinda on the fence until theres more specifics. Are agents of a foreign government going to be arresting Canadian citizens?

[dre]

I don't want a "freer" border. I simply think that we Canadians and Americans should be embarrassed: The American/Canadian border is more restrictive than the French/German border.

Whatever.

Well... the US government was under a lot of pressure after 911 to secure borders and ports. I agree with you that its in our best interests to make it easy for people and goods to flow back and forth... But this move has nothing to do with opening up the border.

[na85]

I don't want a "freer" border. I simply think that we Canadians and Americans should be embarrassed: The American/Canadian border is now - in 2011 - more restrictive than the French/German border.

Quite frankly, with the way civil liberties are going in the United States I'm not sure that a restrictive border is a bad thing.

I'm certainly against US police officials enforcing US laws on Canadian soil - we are a sovereign nation and have our own laws. If I wanted to be subject to the laws of a shattered republic quickly becoming a police state I'd move to California where at least it's warm and sunny all year round.

Edited December 4, 2011 by na85

[Guest American Woman]

I don't want a "freer" border. I simply think that we Canadians and Americans should be embarrassed: The American/Canadian border is now - in 2011 - more restrictive than the French/German border.

On this simple but important measure, and despite what Steyn says: The Europeans have this right. And we

The French/German border is what it is because both countries are members of the EU, while Canada and the U.S. share no such common union/government. Look at the EU, though - the member countries are generally smaller than one of our states/provinces. Look at the size of their borders compared to the U.S. and Canadian borders - and I'm not just referring to our common border. It would be much easier to enter our nations and "get lost" in the mass of our countries.

Furthermore, while we share so much and have so much in common, we do have differences - would the U.S. want to open up the border to drugs crossing more freely into the U.S.? Would Canada want guns crossing freely into Canada? And Canada is more lax on immigration - would the U.S. want the Khadrs, for example, to have free access to the U.S.? Both of our nations have reasons not to want an open border; legitimate reasons.

As for the question, I support it. I have no problem with Mounties entering the U.S.; I have great respect for them.

--------------------------

I'm going to point out, as a side note, that the EU is very young as an organization, and time will prove how successful it is and whether or not the 'openness' that exists now will be lasting. We are seeing a crisis in the EU right now, and we will have to see how it weathers the storm.

Can France and Germany keep the euro alive?

Can Germany and France reach agreement on radical new rules that would mean a loss of sovereignty over fiscal policy for euro nations - and can they do it in time to save the single currency?

Alain Juppe, the French foreign minister, warned that the euro's looming collapse could lead to war.

[dre]

The French/German border is what it is because both countries are members of the EU, while Canada and the U.S. share no such common union/government. Look at the EU, though - the member countries are generally smaller than one of our states/provinces. Look at the size of their borders compared to the U.S. and Canadian borders - and I'm not just referring to our common border. It would be much easier to enter our nations and "get lost" in the mass of our countries.

Furthermore, while we share so much and have so much in common, we do have differences - would the U.S. want to open up the border to drugs crossing more freely into the U.S.? Would Canada want guns crossing freely into Canada? And Canada is more lax on immigration - would the U.S. want the Khadrs, for example, to have free access to the U.S.? Both of our nations have reasons not to want an open border; legitimate reasons.

As for the question, I support it. I have no problem with Mounties entering the U.S.; I have great respect for them.

--------------------------

I'm going to point out, as a side note, that the EU is very young as an organization, and time will prove how successful it is and whether or not the 'openness' that exists now will be lasting. We are seeing a crisis in the EU right now, and we will have to see how it weathers the storm.

Can France and Germany keep the euro alive?

Can Germany and France reach agreement on radical new rules that would mean a loss of sovereignty over fiscal policy for euro nations - and can they do it in time to save the single currency?

Alain Juppe, the French foreign minister, warned that the euro's looming collapse could lead to war.

we do have differences - would the U.S. want to open up the border to drugs crossing more freely into the U.S.? Would Canada want guns crossing freely into Canada?

Yeah thats a good point, and I think you nailed a couple of the hardest issues as far as harmonization goes.

And Canada is more lax on immigration - would the U.S. want the Khadrs, for example, to have free access to the U.S.?

What? Canada is more lax on immigration? The US as more than 20 illegal immigrants within its borders at any given time, and somewhere around 10 million people casually enter the US unannounced every years. Never mind the Khadrs... you gave visas to the 911 highjackers and then taught them how to fly planes...

[Guest American Woman]

What? Canada is more lax on immigration? The US as more than 20 illegal immigrants within its borders at any given time, and somewhere around 10 million people casually enter the US unannounced every years. Never mind the Khadrs... you gave visas to the 911 highjackers and then taught them how to fly planes...

The "immigration" you refer to is "illegal" while I'm referring to immigration policies, which I thought would be clear. As for how "casually" then enter the U.S., that would be a matter of one's perspective.

As for "giving the visas to the 911 highjackers" and "then [teaching] them how to fly," while the US government gave them visas (there was no known reason not to at the time), the government did not teach them how to fly and their taking flying lessons had nothing to do with immigration policies.

But here's the obvious difference between that situation and the Khadrs - the first was prior to 9-11 and there was no evidence of terrorism/support of terrorism - while the Khadrs are post 9-11 and quite openly, obviously not only supportive of al Qaeda, but sent their kids to train with them; yet Canada has made no charges and has not deported or revoked citizenship.

I would hope the difference between the two situations would be glaringly obvious to everyone - along with the fact that the U.S. obviously wants to prevent another situation such as the example you gave. We know what the Khadrs are, how they feel, what they've done - and to give their ilk free access to the U.S. would be ludicrous at best; suicidal at worst.

[MiddleClassCentrist]

I think there is a clear difference between banning a cloth piece that

1. covers one's entire identity and can easily conceal suicide bombs.
   
2. has a main purpose of keeping women as property so that they can't be looked upon by other men.
   
3. does not have a place in modern fashion
   

and

Attacking everyone's freedom by randomly having them searched and fondled for bombs and weapons.

Yes, you can argue that the burqa ban targets a specific people. But, the modern world does not believe in the opression of women which is the main purpose of the burqa within that culture.

Edited December 4, 2011 by MiddleClassCentrist

[Guest American Woman]

More on the deal:

According to people briefed on the deal, the pact envisages more U.S. officers working at ports and factory gates to inspect and approve Canadian-bound cargo before it hits the border. This preclearance is meant to reduce congestion, which companies on both sides of the border complain have boosted transportation costs. and has increased the time required to move key parts to factories.

The countries are also prepared to mutually recognize certain regulatory regimes, to avoid duplication on inspections of food and other goods; and to expand "trusted-traveler" plans, most notably NEXUS, which provide expedited travel to preapproved travelers at the border.

Canada, U.S. To Sign New Border Pact

Sounds as if the deal is intended to make border crossings easier and quicker, not more difficult.

[GostHacked]

But if I don't fly to the U.S.A there is no TSA

Correct, but if you are flying TO the USA, prepare for pat down and/or body scanner. There are body scanners in most airports in Canada, but those are reserved for those heading to the land of the freeaaahahahahahahaha......

[Smallc]

Canada has more lax immigration? Based on what, exactly?

[Guest American Woman]

Correct, but if you are flying TO the USA, prepare for pat down and/or body scanner. There are body scanners in most airports in Canada, but those are reserved for those heading to the land of the freeaaahahahahahahaha......

Oh noooooooooo!! Not a pat down and/or body scanner! Freedom as we know it no longer exists!!!

Of course the easiest way to avoid it is to exercise your freedom not to fly to the USA.