Re: CBC.CA Article: Terror Groups Flourish In Canada: U.S. Report

Not to worry Tom. At least we <a href='http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1076973010035&call_pageid=968332188854&col=968350060724'>Get it</a><p> <p>---<br>"History does not repeat itself, but it does rhyme" Mark Twain <br />"The greatest price of not participating in politics is being governed by your inferiors." Plato

If this report mean more pressure to copy US policies like the PATRIOT Act, then it\'s bad news. And we need to resist the inevitable push for \"more security\" here at home AND in the U.S.

Canada has already implemented draconian \"anti-terrorism\" laws just like the US, and prob in some part or even in large part due to US pressure--and what has it done? Are we really safer? Or are we just more paranoid? Have there been no recent attacks because of increased security? OR because the \"terrorist threat\" isn\'t as urgent or as omnipresent as some would have us believe?

I wouldn\'t say the answer is ignoring terrorism, or taking the hands-off attitude. But is the answer really more spending, bigger government and more stringent security--see I can talk like a conservative too--;) ? Seems to me that security has increased to the point where regular citizens are now suspects, and have lost their civil liberties--and that \"security\" measures unfairly target people from certain countries and with a certain ethnic or racial background. Our border is no longer \"undefended\" and if anything is probably \"overdefended\" considering how hard it can be for people to get in and out and the bad treatment and interrogation so many people have to face just to cross now.

Seems to me the best way to do things would be to continue protecting people\'s civil liberties ie freedom (and at least working on getting back to where we were before C-36 in Canada) and using the rule of law to catch people who are actually dangerous, staying away from this pre-emptive stuff which puts people in jail without charges just based on SUSPICION rather than any real wrong-doing, and also addressing the ROOT CAUSES of terrorism such as poverty/inequality, imperlialistic meddling on other countries which inflames existing conflicts now and years in the future, and the arms trade--not to mention only using some increased security when and where it makes sense.

Well it\'s a U.S. report what can we expect? I just recently heard about the situation at customs, this person tells me that when he travels to Vietnam, he passes through two sets of customs, he says if he is bringing in food, he must place a $5 bill in his passport, or they will dump his suitcase and he\'ll be stuck picking up the contents; if it\'s electronic, like a tv or radio etc, the $$$ will be 100.00 and so on. He must do this both ways and at both sets of customs.

So what difference does it make if we have a passport, are on a list etc., if it\'s that simple to get through, the other security measures aren\'t going to make one bit of difference.

In Canada recently a woman tried to enter near Vancouver, with a grenade in the glove box, she was detained etc, the report said she didn\'t know it was there, was visibly shook up and probably no charges would be laid!!! You\'ve got to be kidding, who keeps a grenade in the glove box, if it was entering the U.S. would this be different?( I think so..)

There was another FBI agent, stopped in Tokyo I believe, carrying huge amounts of amunition in his briefcase, he got through the U.S. security but not his final destination,it is claimed to be a mistake again, he didn\'t even have a gun for the amo...ha ha ha

This system is a joke, which we are paying for dearly, in loss of privacy and our own personal security, we are no safer and we are deluding ourselves if we believe that putting all this extra money into security is going to help, when all anyone needs is the right bill hiding inside the passport!!!

We will never, ever, win the war on terrorism the way the U.S. is trying to. Their \"war on terror\" has nothing to do with terror. I believe the U.S. government uses \"al Queda\" for their own \"terror\" tactics. They are the ones benefiting by this terror group. It gives them the leverage they want to make countries like Canada conform to their world domination. They probably sent the lady with the grenade just to see if we\'d catch her and if we did then we\'d see how important it is to have increased security. Or maybe it was a joint effort by CIA and CSIS to show the Canadian people and govenment that yes we do need more money spent on border security.

When a person becomes paranoid does everything sound like a lie?

There are terrorists in Canada. They are: Brian Mulroney, Mike harris, Gordon Campbell, Ralph Klein, Paul sweatship Martin, Paul Cellucci, The frazer institute, the liberal party, the conservative party, and the large multi-national corporations! This isn`t all of them ,but you get the idea of who is starting the violence and terror in Canada when it comes to incidents like walkerton and people dying waiting for hospital beds! Oops! I forgot Chretien too!

---
Dave Ruston

You\'re right Dave, we just need a name for our Canadian terrorists the way the U.S. has al Queda for theirs. Maybe al Quanada?

Makes me think of the Royal Canadian Air Farce on Friday. They had a musician named Kenny Geehad. He had a song called \"ain\'t no camel high enough\" and a whole list of other good ones I\'ve forgotten already. That show is funny.