Jun 03 2006
The Al Qaeda Threat In Canada
I posted previously on the news that Al Qaeda veterans had discovered Canada as the preffered place to ‘retire’ to:
Canada’s spy agency says potential terrorists already reside in Canadian cities.The deputy director of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service said Monday that there are many people currently living in Canada who fought with al-Qaeda during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan.
And Jack Hooper says those same people have since trained in al-Qaeda terrorist training camps.
I was curious as to what the Canadian response might be to this. Powerline has some breaking news up this morning on this very subject from the Globe and Mail:
Police across the Greater Toronto Area launched counterterrorism raids yesterday, arresting at least eight people in a roundup expected to continue overnight and beyond.
“We anticipate more arrests, but not necessarily tonight,” an RCMP source said of the arrests, in what appeared to be the most concerted such sweep in Canada since the terrorist attacks in the United States on Sept. 11, 2001.
The Canadian Security Intelligence Service aided the RCMP and officers from Toronto, Peel and Durham in detaining the suspects, described by an undercover officer involved in the operation as “terrorists, the ones who hate the West.”
The ethnicity of the group was not clear. A well- placed police source said they are Muslims, but not Arabs, and unconnected to anti-terrorism raids that occurred simultaneously in Britain yesterday.
I guess they had to move out quickly since the story had been ‘leaked’ in the earlier news article that the Canadian government was on to all these folks. Hopefully none of these thugs got away. Apparently they were preparing to attack Canada:
Intelligence sources allege the men were part of a terrorist cell, close to carrying out attacks on one or more Canadian targets.
Police seized chemicals used to make explosives and weapons.
“That’s the tool of choice for anybody who wants to cause damage,” a source who asked not to be named told The Canadian Press.
The suspects are either second-generation Canadians or recently immigrated to Canada with their families.
Sources claimed the men have no connection to al Qaeda, but were allegedly inspired by militant Islamic groups.
Why they think this would help their cause is beyond me. And I am not sure why anyone would buy into the idea they were not tied to, simply inspired by, Al Qaeda at this early stage. More here and here, and keep checking in on Neale News for updates.
48 Responses to “The Al Qaeda Threat In Canada”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
“Police across the Greater Toronto Area launched counterterrorism raids yesterday, arresting at least eight people in a roundup expected to continue overnight and beyond.”
Good thing this didn’t happen in the U.S. all those illegal immigrant lovers would be up in arms because we were rounding up those honest, hard working, church going nice guys. I’m sure they have just mis-interpreted all their evidence. Why don’t they just walk across the U.S. border, then they would be qualified for the ‘guest worker’ program, no questions asked. Same as those that are already here. Can’t discriminate against them. Might hurt their feelings.
When people stick their heads in the sand they get SURPRISES (?)
Where did Ahmed Ressam, the terrorist who wanted to bomb LA Airport, come from? (Ressam was arrested as he crossed the US-Canadian border with explosives on the eve of the new millennium).
Fo those who want more of this, just vote Democrat in USA and Liberal or NDP in Canada or better still abstain from voting so when the boms explode you won’t be affected because you did not take sides in the dispute!!!
Enforcement:
While we all have varied opinions on the immigration issue and certainly should be privileged to maintain them, I feel it is unfair to tie every other issue to those thoughts.
Were Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols illegal immigrants?
Perhaps if we could get past the anger on this issue we could work together to push congress to enact laws we all could live with.
I do respect your passion and thoughts, I just don’t feel we can paint every situation with the same brush. And on the issue of this round up I feel we should all be grateful that law enforcement was able to arrest thes individuals before they inflicted harm on innocent people.
Canada Disrupts Terror Cell…Disaster Averted?…
A terrorist training camp in Canada was raided, and a total of 17 people were arrested. They’re homegrown jihadis, and who knows what kind of mayhem they were looking to spring on an unsuspecting Canadian population?…
Thanks for the comments smh1012
I too am thankful that they were apprehended before doing harm. I just thought it would be a good time to point out that with the policies being advocated by AJ, CrossP, Macker, and some others, we will maintain a border that they could just walk across any time and apply for our guest worker program, no background check, all they would have to do is sign their own handwritten statement that they are one of the ‘good people’ and we would hand them their citizenship papers. They don’t acknowledge that some illegal aliens “may” be bad people.
For Enforcement -
While I confess that I do not know that I understand the background check provisions of the Senate bill (assuming that you are equating, for example, AJ’s position to be identical with that bill), no doubt there is room for movement on the question of background checks, for resident alien (of whatever category), such that something reasonable may be hammered out in conference.
Of course, that won’t solve all problems. Traffic is pretty free between Canada and the US for tourists (I think it is anyway – and I don’t know that provisions in the House or Senate on immigration are dealing with this), and so far as I am aware, no background checks are required for tourists. (Please correct me, if I’m wrong (I surely could be), and point me to the statute or rule)
And, of course, there’s no guaranty of anything in this world. When you’ve got 15,000 + miles of border (including water-fronting border) like we have, it’s hard to secure it, at least if you don’t fancy having the State resemble the Soviet Union in 1964. Determined and moderately intelligent terrorists (or rum-runners, or drug dealers, etc.) really shouldn’t find it too awfully difficult to evade authorities.
This, of course, is not to say that no measures should be taken to secure the borders on “national security” grounds. But rather to acknowledge that those efforts will be far from foolproof/terroristproof whatever they likely turn out to be. And, as is generally the case with those who get caught (look at our prisons, for example), they will tend be the the dumber (or unluckier) of the lot.
As is the case with so much which has energized the citizenry in this country post 9/11, fear seems to have dissipated a great deal of our native intelligence and practical common sense. This is due, I think, both because it is human nature, and I fear, because it has been fostered by those in power. That, too, is natural (altho unfortunate) in the course of human events.
For all the treasure and blood and often dubious readjustments of civil liberties which the post 9/11 approach has exacted, we might well re-consider devoting energies other approaches to making ourselves safer from terrorism. The Israeli-Palestinian question, for example, remains the biggest elephant in the room, and the retrograde current US foreign policy approach to that subject is disheartening, to say the least. But that (as they say) “is a whole ‘nother thread”.
– Regards
FE,
Canadians can walk across right now for vacation. Don’t kid yourself about how useless the House Bill is. It is nothing but feel good BS without the comprehensive elements added to it.
The plans of the “Canadian residents” (UPDATED)…
…
AJ
It is nothing but feel good BS without the comprehensive elements added to it.
Comprehensive? the only thing comprehensive about it is how comprehensively complete the AMNESTY is for all, including all those terrorists that are already here.
Just out of curiosity? What is comprehensive about the bill in your opinion? I’ve always thought comprehensive meant ” something” like complete, whole. Come to think of it, you may be right, it is complete, whole surrender to the illegal immigrants.
What? Terrorists in Canada? How can that be? I thought that Canada was such a warm, fuzzy nation that prized diversity above all that no one would ever want to harm anyone in Canada. At least, that is what Canadians have told me. They don’t go to war with anyone, they don’t discriminate, they are not like their evil, war-mongering neighbor to the south.
Wonder how they will feel when Montreal is in flames?
Canada Thwarts Terrorists…
From the AP:Seventeen Canadian residents were in custody Saturday on terrorism- related charges, including plots to use explosives in attacks on Canadian soil, authorities said. The Royal Canadian Mounted Police said they arrested 12 male adults and fi…
Terrorism, eh?…
Why is the liberal blogosphere so silent about 17 terrorists being rounded up in Canada? Is it because terrorism in Canada doesn’t fit into their warped reality, a reality where the Bush administration has created this threat?…
Exactly Seison!
Where is the Savage man on this?
Continuing to lead many over the cliff, imho.
We are very lucky about these arrests. And we must all be vigilant here in the States…
And for the record, anyone who wants to do us harm and has half a brain can get into this country LEGALLY…just like the 9/11 terrorists…They did NOT walk across our southern border.
Delusions.
The reason that they don’t think that these guys are officially “Al Qaeda” is that they havbe a lot of intelligence that people are just reading Al Qaeda on the Internet and then doing their own thing.
They aren’t necessarily formally linked with Al Qaeda, but they are Inspired by them on the Internet. they also talk with each other on the Internet.
Here is a general article about what the Canadians have been seeing
http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=8ef8514e-3fa2-44e2-83ee-6073a8e6ea19&k=39010
This article discusses the targets and how the terrorists were tracked.
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1149285034044&call_pageid=976163513378&col=969048863474
They were going to bomb the Canadian internal intelligence. I think this is like the British MI5.
The internal spies monitored the teens on the Internet. It was a lot of teenagers who had never been in the ME. They were inspired by Al Qaeda sites.
Reminds me a bit of the boys that did Columbine.
Rats! I posted the wrong post.
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1149285034044&call_pageid=976163513378&col=969048863474
This is the one I described above. Sorry.
The point is, Al Qaeda is more of an inspiration.
AJ,
This might be the work of Mustafa Setmarian Naser almost bearing fruit. If that’s the case, we really have moved past the era of terrorist organizations and terror franchizes are what we have to look out for in the future. It will be interesting to see what comes out in the next few days, but my guess is that a jihadist veteran came to Canada years ago, possibly before 9/11. After arriving there, he acted as a one-man sleeper cell. After the collapse of the aQ network, he became a kind of jihadist franchize owner, along with a link between homegrown radicals (including native-born, white former protestants, important to remember before we try to make the connections between immigration issues and asymmetrical jihad warfare. We might be able to stop all of the immigrants, both illegal and legal, but what happens when our enemies are not immigrants?) and the world-wide jihad community. This franchize owner trains the newly-radicalized jihadists, making them de facto members of the global jihad network. At this point, the senior, combat-trained veteran from Afghanistan or North Africa or Kashmir or Chechnya or the Balkans can either take on the role of an operational commander of the cell, or just move on to spawn another cell. It would probably be best if a senior jihadist veteran was arrested with the rest of the radicals, because if he wasn’t arrested with them, that means that they are probably following Naser’s plan for global jihad. If that’s the case, the job of both the Canadian security officials and our own becomes exponentially harder. I fear the worst.
If you’re really interested in the global war, I suggest visiting the Counterterrorism Blog and reading up on Naser (a.k.a. Abu Musab al-Suri)
ivehadit -
And for the record, anyone who wants to do us harm and has half a brain can get into this country LEGALLY…just like the 9/11 terrorists…
Well, it that’s the case, then we’re all gonners. If at this point we can’t refuse entry to a whole passel of Saudi-grown threats, including guys already identified as terrorists and actually being by watched the CIA prior to their flying into LA, then it’s time to move to Belgium.
-Regards
SEIXON -
The liberal blogosphere hasn’t been so silent on the subject as you suggest (at least if Huffington is at all typical). Maybe the liberal key on your keyboard is stuck.
- Regards
DGF,
Where is a post on Huffington Post about this? They have a link to the story – that’s it. Just like DailyKos. As I said, no prominent liberal blog has written a blog post about this story as of right now. In comparison, virtually every conservative blog has done so. Start asking yourself why instead of denying the truth.
As far as ties to al Qaeda, I doubt it. I doubt al Qaeda would make the mistake of trying to bomb Canada. After all, al Qaeda is as involved in the propaganda effort as they are anything to do with terrorism. Their efforts in the world are defined just as much by what they preach in comparison to what and who they bomb.
Of course, they did bomb a hotel in Jordan, and that produced a backlash. A strategic error? Certainly I doubt they’d make the same error again in a place like Canada. The terrorists depend on the left-wing to defend and rationalize their actions, and thus they can only bomb places like the USA and the UK, places where the left-wing can justify it. Attempting to bomb Canada, as we have now seen, doesn’t get the left-wing all too excited.
Seixon -
Well, that’s (no prominent liberal blog has written a blog post)not what you said, exactly, on this thread, but you’re forgiven. And there are well over a hundred comments on Huff re: the story.
I imagine that a “prominent blog post” or two will be made before the weekend’s out. Give them some time to tear themselves away from the craps tables and the hookers (I’m assuming a large portion of the liberal blogging community (LBG) is already in Vegas, en route, or packing).
Re: the aQ (non-)link, you’re probably right, and that news, of course, is what is being reported by the media (as reported to them by the authorities).
- Regards (whether in denial or not)
Enforcement:
That comment was completely unnecessary. The idea that the only people in the country who want to protect us against terrorists are people who share your narrow view on immigration issues must mean that two thirds of the population want to be attacked. It is a silly argument and needlessly insulting. I have had two family members serve in Iraq and I don’t need any lectures from you on protecting this country.
It would be nice if we could compromise and move on but it seems that you are not interested in doing that.
And by the way no one is talking about complete amnesty and to be truthful I do not want law enforcement to waste resources rounding up all kinds of harmless people while these kinds of people, people who actually want to kill us are out there.
colin, what is the address for the counterterrorism blog, please and
thank you?
IVEHADIT:
Sorry about that. Here’s the address:
http://counterterrorismblog.org
Enforcement,
“no background check, all they would have to do is sign their own handwritten statement that they are one of the ‘good people’ and we would hand them their citizenship papers.”
A strawman. No one wants this.
You are assuming no screening will be done. How about third party references? Do you trust them? Even security clearances utilize them. How about a criminal record check? Doesn’t that prevent some of your worst fears?
Are you equally concerned about the northern border?
Can you recognize any good in immigrants and immigration?
TERRYE quoting you:
“That comment was completely unnecessary. The idea that the only people in the country who want to protect us against terrorists are people who share your narrow view on immigration issues must mean that two thirds of the population want to be attacked. It is a silly argument and needlessly insulting. I have had two family members serve in Iraq and I don’t need any lectures from you on protecting this country.”
I write a lot of comments, so don’t know which one you were referring to.
Just what is my “narrow view” of immigration?
“The idea that the only people in the country who want to protect us against terrorists are people who share your narrow view on immigration issues must mean that two thirds of the population want to be attacked.”
I have made no argument about protecting us from terrorists, you just jumped to that conclusion. If you will double check what YOU advocate, it is to make citizens of the illegal immigrants presently in the country, without exclusion. That includes the people that may or may not be terrorists. The fact is we don’t and won”t know until it’s too late. I’m gonna assume that you, like myself, do not want anyone to be attacked, so I assuming you were just being facetious.
So you have had two family members serve in Iraq, well thank them for me. But I notice you didn’t say anything about you. I will say that I am a Veteran and proud of it, and I volunteered. So don’t tell me about protecting the country. Why did you let your relatives carry your burden for you?
“It would be nice if we could compromise and move on but it seems that you are not interested in doing that.”
I am willing to compromise, get the fence up, stop the illegal flow completely, then do your part as long as that doesn’t involve blanket citizenship.
“And by the way no one is talking about complete amnesty”
OH YES YOU ARE
” and to be truthful I do not want law enforcement to waste resources rounding up all kinds of harmless people while these kinds of people, people who actually want to kill us are out there”
And you are implying that I do want this? Show me where I said anything about rounding up anyone. In fact, somewhere above I specifically said I didn’t want one dime spent on rounding up anyone. So stop just being selective and implying I’m saying something I’m not.
MACKER, see, this is where you come up short, you obviously don’t know what is in the Senate bill
“no background check, all they would have to do is sign their own handwritten statement that they are one of the ‘good people’ and we would hand them their citizenship papers.”
A strawman. No one wants this.
This is EXACTLY what the Senate bill calls for.
This business about”less than two years will leave, 2 to 5 will bla, bla bla, over 5 will bla, bla, bla
You know what proof is required of when you came into the country. Now hold your breath, drum roll. Ta Da Your own signed statement. That is it, And now, get this. If anyone attempts to investigate your statement, they will be fired. This is in the bill and if you don’t know it, just let me know and I will go and copy and paste it for you. I assume you know how to look it up, tell you what, go look up that provision AND IF it says something different, paste it for me.
“You are assuming no screening will be done. ”
Assuming hell, it is SPECIFICALLY forbidden in the Senate bill.
“How about third party references? Do you trust them? ” I would if they were allowed, but they’re not. And you assumed they would be? LOL
“Even security clearances utilize them. How about a criminal record check?” And we would be running these checks thru? Mexico, Guatamala? I’m sure they would have complete records and would be happy to supply them. By the way, the way this is written is, if a criminal record check shows something, it may or may not be checked out AND get this, again, hold your breath, drum roll. Just because you have a criminal record does NOT mean you can be turned down.
There again, you’re assuming the Senate bill requires some of these things and I’m telling you that you do remember where ASSUME comes from.
“Doesn’t that prevent some of your worst fears?”
Yeah, I’ll really sleep better knowing that we have handed blanket amnesty to all the illegals that have come in without knowing zip about any of them.
Are you equally concerned about the northern border?
YES
Can you recognize any good in immigrants and immigration?
YES
Can you recognize any good in ILLEGAL immigrants and ILLEGAL immigration?
sure, it would help people like you to “feel good about yourself”
For Enforcement
Do me a favor, head over to Macrangers site and log in to the comments for his first article…the one on Haditha. Take on the fellow Frank who is slamming our military. He has them all but convicted and hanged.
You stated that you have served and while I am from a military family I have never been active duty so maybe you can do a better job than I defending our troops. Being surrounded by those who serve is not the same as boots on the ground, with that I do agree.
We may disagree on the immigration issue but I think for the most part, none of us like individuals who take shots at our men and women in uniform, especially when they do not even reside in the USA.
Have a pleasant night all.
Hey Macker, just went and picked one example, and believe me EVERY section, amendment, subsection, etc is 100% full of this kind of double talk:
Oh boy here it is, our ironclad protection:
`(C) WITHHOLDERS OF BIOMETRIC DATA- Any alien who knowingly fails to comply with a lawful request for biometric data under section 215(c) or 235(d) is inadmissible.’; and
This sounds good, we’re gonna ABSOLUTELY, BY GOD, require them to supply Biometric Data so we can positively identify them, oh yeah, read on
(2) in subsection (d), by inserting after paragraph (1) the following:
`(2) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall determine whether a ground for inadmissibility exists with respect to an alien described in subparagraph (C) of subsection (a)(7) and may waive the application of such subparagraph for an individual alien or a class of aliens, at the discretion of the Secretary.’.
MAY WAIVE, MAY WAIVE the application of that subparagraph, so now we are NOT, BY GOD, gonna require it
Oh wait, thank goodness, there is a little more, ah so this must be where we’re gonna REQUIRE IT.
maybe here?
(e) Implementation- Section 7208 of the 9/11 Commission Implementation Act of 2004 (8 U.S.C. 1365b) is amended–
or here?
(1) in subsection (c), by adding at the end the following:
ok, surely this is it:
`(3) IMPLEMENTATION- In fully implementing the automated biometric entry and exit data system under this section, the Secretary is not required to comply
OH NO, NOT AGAIN, HE’S NOT REQUIRED TO COMPLY!! Darn I’m surprised.
with the requirements of chapter 5 of title 5, United States Code (commonly referred to as the Administrative Procedure Act) or any other law relating to rulemaking, information collection, or publication in the Federal Register.’; and
OR ANY OTHER LAW— OR INFORMATION COLLECTION.
Golly and here I thought somebody was looking out for us.
Now MACKER, I’m telling you, the WHOLE DAMN Senate bill is written this way, check it out.
Homegrown jihadists arrested in Toronto…
There is a considerable terrorist threat looming in Canada, and today, there’s been news of arrests made of some members. The Counterrorism Blog’s got a rundown of the news, and Pajamas Media and Michelle Malkin have more updates….
Enforcement:
You are too dense about this subject of immigration to even discuss it. I give up.
We had an entire family of hispanics wiped out in Indianaoplis. Seven people shot to death. They were good people who were active in their local parish. But hey they were wetbacks.
Enforcement:
You are too dense about this subject of immigration to even discuss it. I give up.
Left by Terrye on June 4th, 2006
TYPICAL LIBERAL, IF YOU CAN’T ARGUE THE FACTS, CALL THEM NAMES (DENSE) AND GIVE UP
We had an entire family of hispanics wiped out in Indianaoplis. Seven people shot to death. They were good people who were active in their local parish. But hey they were wetbacks.
Left by Terrye on June 4th, 2006
I resent your implication that I would be happy that these people were killed. I want no harm to befall anyone. Everyone is entitled to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, each in their own country.
I’m sure these people were just leaving church.
TERRY, YOU SAID
“Enforcement:
You are too dense about this subject of immigration to even discuss it. I give up.
Left by Terrye on June 4th, 2006
I humbly accept your surrender,
signed Enforcement
“Enforcement”. you’re doing an excellent job at proving why, in general, single issue voters are the bottom feeders of American political life.
an SIV is almost by definition incapable of rational thought or argument.
And if you’re curious, it was the nasty slam about “I’m sure they were just leaving church”, which implies that the victims were somehow at fault (you know it does, that’s why you wrote it) that caused me to write off you and anything you may ever have to say on anything.
Left by WWS on June 4th, 2006
“Enforcement”. you’re doing an excellent job at proving why, in general, single issue voters are the bottom feeders of American political life.
an SIV is almost by definition incapable of rational thought or argument.
And if you’re curious, it was the nasty slam about “I’m sure they were just leaving church”, which implies that the victims were somehow at fault (you know it does, that’s why you wrote it) that caused me to write off you and anything you may ever have to say on anything.
TYPICAL LIBERAL, IF YOU CAN’T ARGUE THE FACTS, CALL THEM NAMES (bottom feeders ) AND GIVE UP
You should read up, the Church comment came from someone above, I think TERRYE (sorry if I’m wrong) that said 99.9% of the “illegal immigrants are honest, hard working, church going people” and I was only taking him at his word and assumed this family was in that 99.9%
and this” which implies that the victims were somehow at fault (you know it does, that’s why you wrote it) that caused me to write off you and anything you may ever have to say on anything.”
is damn sure not true. False arguments are the tool of those that don’t have anything to say, (see yourself, there partner?)
Whoops slipped up there WWS, you didn’t read this did you?
Thanks, Colin.
And I saw this in an article I just read over at canada.com:
“With the exception of two men, who are aged 43 and 30, the alleged terrorists are all in their teens and early 20s.”
Could the older guys be the “senior jihadist veterans that you were talking about? I hope so.
So many do not realize what is happening around the world every day. Our great military, special ops and spy network are working overtime and I pray for them regularly. If we are not successful in this WOT then we won’t need to worry about “borders”-about which I am SICK TO DEATH OF TALKING/reading.
Thank you Colin.
Did you see where two of the men arrested in Canada were not teenagers or in their 20’s? I hope these were the “veterans” about which you posted!
For Enforcement, Terrye, etc.
You guys are rhetorically beating the crap out of each other over the immigration issue, when you probably agree on 90% of everything else, and your immigration views are most likely a lot closer to each others’ than you would want to admit. This issue is important. Unfortuanately, it has become a costly distraction from other, gravely important, issues. The war on terror is one hell of a lot wider than border enforcement or the lack thereof, earned legalization, or any number of other issues involved in the immigration debate. If everyone, who should be united in the overall cause, keeps bickering over this, we’re going to reap the whirlwind.
Almost half the nation has opted out of this war. The other half which is committed to this war is beating each other’s brains in over an issue that is only tangentially related to the war. Keep it up, and we’ll be looking a combination of Saigon 1975, Pearl Harbor, and the Battle of Britain all rolled into one, and I don’t see any Churchills out there who can save us from ourselves if we get to that point.
There are bigger issues out there than immigration. Don’t let it define you. If you don’t think immigration and the war are tied together, fine. Don’t shut out those who do see it that way. Some of the most innovative thinkers on the war and our warfighting strategy (Frank Gaffney comes to mind) see the issues as intimately related. They deserve to be listened to and take seriously. If you think immigration and the war are tied together, that’s fine also. Don’t shut out those who disagree with you. It’s possible to disagree on one issue, and still be allies, supporters, dare I say, hawks. Like I said earlier, this war is a hell of a lot bigger than just immigration. You could have forgiven Reagan for his apostacy on immigration. Give Bush the same courtesy. Just swallow hard and do it. This is a dangerous time and we need as much unity as we can muster right now.
COLIN
Excellent post. Agree with practically everything you said. one thing, I didn’t forgive Reagan for the Amnesty thing, even tho he is my no. one hero and the best president with the possible exception of George Washington. I do, in fact, consider the terror war our no. 1 problem, and the unsecure border as no. 2 with that being the case because as long as it is not secure we have no idea who is crossing it and the MAY be terrorists. Even IF they’re not, we need to KNOW that. Thanks for your thoughts
Hey Colin,
You seem to be missing the point enforcement is not missing the point Terrye is.
Enforcement is not talking about immigration.
He is talking about security. Too many folks like to see how smart we are by reinventing things.
Security is Security not immigration. Treat the cause not the symptom.
Illegal Immigration is a symptom and it is direct result of poor security and logic.
Terrorism is a result of poor security and logic.
See the connection fix the source and you can fix more than one problem. Politicians almost never goe to the source why should they put themselves out of work.
These bums are alway passing new laws to fix the symptoms.
They never get to the source.
Always looking to impress us and themselves how brilliant they are, LOL
They never fix the source just a constant band aid on the symptoms. destined to continue till we collapse.
One tool can have many uses. We do not need a new tool for every job.
Humans continually complicate this for the sake of ego.
We all should be applying a lot more logic and this can be fixed in short order.
Colin I just read Enforcments post.
Since he agrees with you 90% I guess I have to disagree with both of you .
They are the same.
They are not two different things and if we continue to look at them differently that will be the death of all of us and our way of life.
bloodyspartan, you got it right, I think you just misunderstood what I was agreeing with him on. That we were beating each other up and that we probably agree on most other things, BUT the main issue, the one you picked up on is the Security. I said that was the main problem, so I agree with you on that. Illegal immigration is just a result of the poor security, the same as terrorism , if we have terrorism, may be. So you didn’t get it wrong.
Colin:
You are right. In fact I would say that there are some soldiers that need our support right now.
We Have Miles to go Before we Sleep…
I’ve been spinning my wheels a little lately. Okay a lot. The Haditha story just flew all over me. The liberals/progressives, the MSM, the islamic masses have been having a feeding frenzy at the expense of our Soldiers and our nation….
Enforcment I have to disagree with Colin and Terrye. I may have put the mouth in gear a bit too fast.
But you have to give Terrye credit he don’t give up until we piss him off.