NDP , Harper's safety not worth the price to send over amoured car

[Smallc]

Well, that's a fairly sound argument. However, why, then, were two cars necessary?

He wasn't the only one traveling. Probably not enough room in one car.

Why is this sometimes an issue and sometimes not (he travels without his own car more often than with, as far as I'm aware)?

Obviously, something about this trip didn't sit well with the RCMP.

And why is it only for the prime minister and no other ministers or the governor general?

The PM is the biggest target, even if he isn't technically the highest ranking.

[cybercoma]

Well, that's a fairly sound argument. However, why, then, were two cars necessary? Why is this sometimes an issue and sometimes not (he travels without his own car more often than with, as far as I'm aware)? And why is it only for the prime minister and no other ministers or the governor general?

Bilderberg! [/Mr.Canada]

[g_bambino]

He wasn't the only one traveling. Probably not enough room in one car.

The PM is the biggest target, even if he isn't technically the highest ranking.

But your, and others', argument was that cars were brought from Canada for the sake of information security. Ministers of the Crown other than the prime minister are as much members of the Cabinet as is the prime minister; they are all privy to essentially the same very important information that should remain secret from other governments; or, at least, are also privy to important information that should remain secret from other governments. Even people other than ministers have knowledge of and speak amongst each other about sensitive state matters; if the second car was required to keep what they were speaking about inside it secret, why wouldn't other ministers or the governor general (who also has knowledge of governmental affairs that we don't want other governments knowing and likely discusses them with his entourage while on state visits) need the same information security when they travel abroad?

Obviously, something about this trip didn't sit well with the RCMP.

Have Indian authorities become prone to using their state cars as a means to eavesdrop on the conversations of visiting dignitaries?

[Smallc]

We don't know the answers to those questions, but I trust the RCMP to make the right decision. There was obviously a reason that they felt secure cars were needed in this case.

[g_bambino]

Bilderberg! [/Mr.Canada]

Oh, that explains it! The Bilderberg Group controls Harperbot; so, it's they who told him to bring the cars they gave him so they could keep tabs on him at all times, and the RCMP story is just a ruse! Dun, dun, dunnnh...

[wyly]

And as I said, the only way to ensure information security is to use your own vehicles...maybe they didn't trust the Indians?

info security? oh please you're implying the cars were bugged and that's the reason they needed the cars? then they should've built or transported our own buildings there as well....

[wyly]

We don't know the answers to those questions, but I trust the RCMP to make the right decision. There was obviously a reason that they felt secure cars were needed in this case.

i don't trust the RCMP for anything, past behaviours verify they don't deserve our complete trust, they're directed by the PMO...

[Guest Derek L]

Yes, they do. I'm not certain if they're bullet/bomb-proofed or not. However, I can't think of a single time the governor general has taken his/her car(s) along on a state or working visit to another country. The Queen has perhaps taken one of her British state limousines abroad, but very rarely, if ever; especially since the Britannia (which had an on board garage) was decommissioned. (Now, there was a way to show off overseas!)

[ed.: +]

BPS = Ballistic Protection series…………..Bullet-proof up to a .30 calibre rifle round.........Hardly an extravagance, when these series of cars can be purchased by the public...........As to traveling abroad in the case of the Queen, you’ll see she is often in a Range/Land- Rover…….Also up armoured and usually attached to the local consulate/embassy……….The Royals have had improved personal protection since the 70s, including many current members of the 22nd Regiment along in plain clothes…………This has been the case since the assassination of Mountbatten.

[Guest Derek L]

Well, that's a fairly sound argument. However, why, then, were two cars necessary? Why is this sometimes an issue and sometimes not (he travels without his own car more often than with, as far as I'm aware)? And why is it only for the prime minister and no other ministers or the governor general?

It depends on circumstance/location of where they’re traveling………….As to two cars, numerous reasons; spare in case of mechanical fault, if the motorcade is attacked and the primary car is damaged, protection for the RCMP and other officials that can’t fit into the primary car etc........There’s no real difference in cost other than fuel, when said cars are being transported within a RCAF CC-117.

[wyly]

Actually, they are.

secrets that can be found on any armored car manufacturer's website, if you want even you can custom build and price armored cars online there is nothing secret about it...the RCMP had to say nothing about Harper's cars all they needed to do was list where the Indian cars were insufficient... but the Indian cars aren't deficient, the Mercedes available to the PM there included level B7 protection(armor piercing ammunition) the max available other than maybe the car Obama rides in...

[wyly]

BPS = Ballistic Protection series…………..Bullet-proof up to a .30 calibre rifle round.........Hardly an extravagance, when these series of cars can be purchased by the public...........As to traveling abroad in the case of the Queen, you’ll see she is often in a Range/Land- Rover…….Also up armoured and usually attached to the local consulate/embassy……….The Royals have had improved personal protection since the 70s, including many current members of the 22nd Regiment along in plain clothes…………This has been the case since the assassination of Mountbatten.

I pulled this off a manufacturer website... Q 8. What is the difference between B6 and.B7? A. According to the CEN ballistic standards, materials rated at the B6 and B7 level can both defeat multiple 7.62x51mm rifle rounds, but they are rated for different types of ammunition. B7 level armoring can defeat armor piercing 7.62x51mm ammunition that are designed to penetrate armor whereas B6 level armoring cannot. In addition, B7 armoring can defeat 7.62x54R ammunition used in weapons such as the Dragunov SVD rifle and PKM/PKP machine guns.

also in regards to " bomb-proof" they had this to say...

Q 3. Can you provide us with a bomb/IED proof vehicle? A. No vehicle can be made bomb/IED proof – not even a tank. Usually for low profile, up-armored commercial vehicles, the blast protection offered is described in terms of number of hand grenades or some particular small road side bombs. For APCs (Armored Personnel Carriers) it is usually described in terms of quantity (in Kilograms etc) of TNT or any equivalent explosive charge

[cybercoma]

I don't know why you're so hung up on the technical specs of the vehicles, wyly. There are possible logistical reasons that the Indian vehicles may have been inappropriate. They weren't necessarily deficient in the way you're suggesting. In any case, nobody knows the reasons why the RCMP decided our own vehicles were brought because the reasons are a matter of security for the Prime Minister. They're not going to make public what they do to protect the Prime Minister and what they view as questionable or unsafe conditions. This would put the Prime Minister at risk. I trust that they do whatever they can to protect the Prime Minister and Canada's interests. They obviously saw a need for the Prime Minister to have his own vehicles there, so they were brought.

[Guest Derek L]

secrets that can be found on any armored car manufacturer's website, if you want even you can custom build and price armored cars online there is nothing secret about it...the RCMP had to say nothing about Harper's cars all they needed to do was list where the Indian cars were insufficient... but the Indian cars aren't deficient, the Mercedes available to the PM there included level B7 protection(armor piercing ammunition) the max available other than maybe the car Obama rides in...

BS…….The maker of the our Cadillac and that of the previous/current US President’s limos don’/t advertise the specifications for obvious reasons…………….And the only thing Cadillac about them is the badge…….The power-train and level of protection is closer to a Casspir then a car rap singers are driven around in, like the Indian cars.............

As for “armour piercing ammo” and ballistic protection, that safety class includes everything up to 30-06.….a popular calibre for hunting deer with………..A .338 Lapua Mag would penetrate and a .50 BMG round would likely go through the other side…………..But again, unlike our cars, the Indians aren’t protected against mines & IEDs……..A more effective way of killing people in that region……..

[cybercoma]

Also, with all of his pro-Israel rhetoric, Harper's almost certainly become a target of Islamic terrorists. Who knows what kind of threats CSIS have identified? Criticizing the way the RCMP protects the Prime Minister is just too much. I could see people saying he's not protected enough, but to say that our security agencies are doing too much to protect the PM is just ridiculous.

[wyly]

But your, and others', argument was that cars were brought from Canada for the sake of information security. Ministers of the Crown other than the prime minister are as much members of the Cabinet as is the prime minister; they are all privy to essentially the same very important information that should remain secret from other governments; or, at least, are also privy to important information that should remain secret from other governments. Even people other than ministers have knowledge of and speak amongst each other about sensitive state matters; if the second car was required to keep what they were speaking about inside it secret, why wouldn't other ministers or the governor general (who also has knowledge of governmental affairs that we don't want other governments knowing and likely discusses them with his entourage while on state visits) need the same information security when they travel abroad?

Have Indian authorities become prone to using their state cars as a means to eavesdrop on the conversations of visiting dignitaries?

...yes exactly, these cars aren't meeting rooms, discussions among canadian officials would take place elsewhere usually a hotel room or a dedicated meeting room in a hotel...and if movies are accurate descriptions of reality security teams do electronic sweeps looking for listening devices...

[cybercoma]

g_bambino, I get that the Governor General is the de juris leader of our country, as viceroy to Her Majesty the Queen; however, Harper is the public face of our government home and abroad. He's the one making the deals and he's the one in the media backing Israel. If anyone knows anything about our government, they would know Stephen Harper as Prime Minister. I doubt very many people know David Johnston is our Governor General. I bet almost half of Canadians have no idea who the Governor General is.

[Guest Derek L]

Also, with all of his pro-Israel rhetoric, Harper's almost certainly become a target of Islamic terrorists. Who knows what kind of threats CSIS have identified? Criticizing the way the RCMP protects the Prime Minister is just too much. I could see people saying he's not protected enough, but to say that our security agencies are doing too much to protect the PM is just ridiculous.

Exactly........And there are oodles of them across India’s border.

[wyly]

..But again, unlike our cars, the Indians aren’t protected against mines & IEDs……..A more effective way of killing people in that region……..

mountains of BS....first you claim the specs are secret now you claim you know the specs ...the PM's car isn't bomb/IED proof, our military's APC's aren't even bomb proof...and the PM doesn't have anything remotely similar to Obama's caddy...Obama's car is an a class of it's own...

[cybercoma]

The specs don't matter. They're completely beside the point.

[wyly]

Exactly........And there are oodles of them across India’s border.

India's PM is more of a target than Harper yet India is able to protect their PM...you attach far to much importance to our PM, internationally our PM is a bit player, it's doubtful any terrorist in Pakistan even knows his name...

[cybercoma]

more of a target.... doubtful.....

I think going on CSIS and the RCMP's intel is probably better for the PM than the assumptions of someone on MLW.

Edited November 13, 2012 by cybercoma

[Guest Derek L]

mountains of BS....first you claim the specs are secret now you claim you know the specs ...the PM's car isn't bomb/IED proof, our military's APC's aren't even bomb proof...and the PM doesn't have anything remotely similar to Obama's caddy...Obama's car is an a class of it's own...

No, I don't claim to know the specs, but the specs are greater than an up-armoured Humvee, hence why they're built on a 5-ton truck chassis.......And like ballistic protection, Mine/IED protection is relative…..a Humvee is less protected than a MRAP, and MRAP is less protected then a MBT……….As to Obama’s versus Harper’s, they were both manufactured by the same company, with Harper’s offering the same level of protection as that of GWB…..Obama’s is clearly an improvement on that desgin, but both are IED protected……..unlike the cars listed from your link.

[Guest Derek L]

India's PM is more of a target than Harper yet India is able to protect their PM...you attach far to much importance to our PM, internationally our PM is a bit player, it's doubtful any terrorist in Pakistan even knows his name...

I don't really care about the Indian PM.......let the Indians pay for his protection.

[wyly]

The specs don't matter. They're completely beside the point.

it is the only point, quality of Indian vs canadian armored cars is the issue....that's the only justification for turning down Indian armored cars, if it can be shown Indian cars were inferior then the cost for transporting cars to India can be justified...if not then it was an excessive expense done for vanity...

[cybercoma]

Have we forgotten Mumbai already? Couple that with Harper vocally supporting Israel, as well as our role in Afghanistan, and it's pretty safe to say there is absolutely potential for him to be the target of a terrorist attack. The surest way to make sure your vehicle isn't compromised is to bring your own. It's one less thing out of your control when trying to protect the PM.