• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

‘White nationalism’ a threat the Canadian Armed Forces aren’t equipped for: watchdog

Kirkhill

Army.ca Relic
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
5,352
Points
1,160
Be careful not to conflate being accused of and punished for offences with being deemed reliable and having a security clearance. You can and must get ahead of threats and err on the side of caution with security clearance screening. The risk of screwing it up is way too high.

Though I recognize the thread has very much moved on, the NSIRA report originally reported on is a study into the CF National Counterintelligence Unit. The report isn’t looking squarely at the ability to discipline or prosecute troops who may simply be shitty people. Rather it’s looking at security threats from extremist organizations, and the ability of CFNCIU to address these is hampered in some ways by tools it doesn’t have access to. Reading through some of the report, and being able to make inferences about what’s ‘under the black’ in some case, clearly they don’t have such ready access to some investigative tools like wiretaps or other private communication intercepts (there are very tight legal constraints on these). The report highlights some issues with prioritization, their case management model, and some other aspects of how they dig in and get info on possible security threats that may not necessarily yet be provably criminal.

So no, in counterintelligence and the world of trusting people with access to sensitive information, you don’t and can’t err on the side of trust and waiting to let them screw up.


But if you want to maintain an inclusive institution you cannot assume that the only trustworthy people suitable to wear the Crown's uniform are those that have passed security clearance to Cosmic or Ultra or whatever the magic word is today.

The uniform should be available to the average young Canadian on the street. Once they are in then they can demonstrate their trustworthyness and be suitably promoted and assigned.

I makes no sense to me to treat all recruits as if they are headed for the inner sanctums of CSE or the Privy Council. For the record most of the stuff the Yanks consider necessary to field a private is widely published as Field Manuals.
 

dapaterson

Army.ca Relic
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
11,374
Points
1,090
Want to maintain a vehicle with most firms of technology? Drive that vehicle? Handle those weapons? Track those supplies?

Guess what? Need a level 2 secret clearance.
 

brihard

Army.ca Legend
Mentor
Reaction score
8,401
Points
1,110
But if you want to maintain an inclusive institution you cannot assume that the only trustworthy people suitable to wear the Crown's uniform are those that have passed security clearance to Cosmic or Ultra or whatever the magic word is today.

The uniform should be available to the average young Canadian on the street. Once they are in then they can demonstrate their trustworthyness and be suitably promoted and assigned.

I makes no sense to me to treat all recruits as if they are headed for the inner sanctums of CSE or the Privy Council. For the record most of the stuff the Yanks consider necessary to field a private is widely published as Field Manuals.
I hope you’re being facetious. The uniform IS available to the average Canadian on the street. The average Canadian is nothing close to a security risk. Recruits will get an enhanced reliability screening. I never saw an actual security clearance til I went overseas (caveat- I was PRes, I don’t know if your average Pte in battalion is cleared for Secret). Obviously there are trades where a true clearance is required for basic functions, but even that doesn’t mean a super close scrutiny is given to every prospective recruit.

The original report in question is talking about investigating flagged and identified risks; not some sort of redo of the Spanish Inquisition. Even identified potential risks seem to be straining the system in terms of both capacity, and investigative techniques unavailable to CAF outside of an MP criminal investigation. It’s not saying every kid walking through the door needs to be subject to some greater and more onerous screening. Did you look at the report at all?
 

Brad Sallows

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
4,554
Points
1,010
Not sure what "Canadian" or "Canadian society's" beliefs are, or what they should be. Probably can't go wrong by skewing heavily (classical) liberal.

If you're allowing your dislike for what people stand for to increase your willingness to reach for more extreme measures, you're wrong. And I see a strain of that in "Canadian society". "Canadian society's" beliefs are not above reproach.
 

brihard

Army.ca Legend
Mentor
Reaction score
8,401
Points
1,110
If you're allowing your dislike for what people stand for to increase your willingness to reach for more extreme measures, you're wrong.

Who here do you believe is doing that? It’s not clear who you’re referring to?
 

Brad Sallows

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
4,554
Points
1,010
Who here do you believe is doing that? It’s not clear who you’re referring to?
"Canadian society". Including the people at the top of government and politics, regrettably. Rule of law (ie. applying the rules scrupulously equally) is a demanding master.
 

RangerRay

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1,214
Points
1,110
Seems pretty clear to me. If a security clearance for an applicant shows a history of supporting or membership in Diagalon or some other unsavoury group or ideology, they should be told to find employment elsewhere. No different than what we currently do with an applicant that was supportive of Al Qaeda or violent Marxist revolution.
 

Quirky

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1,333
Points
1,140
We won't kick Thomas out for belonging to a religion with the same beliefs.

I’ve seen way more Thomas’ that need to be kicked out for being utterly incompetent at their job, rather than having personal views that are “inappropriate”.

With reconstitution it’s going to be even harder to drain the swamp. Anyone who can show up and put in the bare minimum effort is guaranteed the same pay and benefits as your top performers. It’s maddening we are a welfare service.
 

MJP

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1,164
Points
1,040
I’ve seen way more Thomas’ that need to be kicked out for being utterly incompetent at their job, rather than having personal views that are “inappropriate”.

With reconstitution it’s going to be even harder to drain the swamp. Anyone who can show up and put in the bare minimum effort is guaranteed the same pay and benefits as your top performers. It’s maddening we are a welfare service.
That was status quo before reconstitution sadly. The sad part is we have the tools but many CoC are misinformed or don't want to go down that road
 

singh1947

New Member
Reaction score
30
Points
330
Thx for the input. That could very well be true, but I would like to hear it in his words, so there is no confusion.
I don't think quality of life or comfort issues are at the root of the CAF's problem with cultural literacy.
It's more an intolerance to anything outside the agnostic milquetoast liberal, current thing, mainstream.
Smoke leads to fire, and an inability to accommodate small things either indicates larger prejudices or an administrative lapse.

I was told to remove my Kirpan for the CFAT, a great start that left a lasting impression.
I had a Pte rant about how I want to fly planes into buildings, and stone women.
He began to cry after an NCM jacked him up, insisting he's not 'racist' or something.
I mentioned Brenton Tarrant as an example of terrorism having no colour.
The CoC took this as evidence of harassment of said Pte & anti-white hatred on my part.

Someone might ask about the Kirpan? I'd mention weapons worship.
People would snicker about it behind my back, in this case led by a devout Christian.
More than one person told me that people were looking for reasons to take issue with me.
The Turban, and not really my conduct was the core problem.

People regularly quipped that I resemble ISIS or that the Turban doesn't belong in uniform.
Superiors sometimes joined in, for example once when I mentioned I don't eat beef.
A dozen people surrounded me, and a few rattled on on about steak.

@Jarnhamar My religion came up due to other people's curiosity. Deeds bring glory not rhetoric.

A lot of folks can't handle disagreement, and are told/feel that anything offensive is off-limits.
However, they're offended by the unfamiliar or uncomfortable.

@Furniture All what you're saying leads to is a witch hunt, I've been there.
The average person isn't an expert on religion or belief nor its context within modern society.
Partisanship is a personality trait, and judging beliefs over actions is textbook bigotry.

@Kirkhill If I ask that you smoke away from me due to my religion, and you turn and blow it in my face.
Who's responsible for the hospital bill? I can lose face in my community & ignore the Guru's orders.
Or just take my chances, set a new norm, and teach a lesson.
1668902004877.png1668902019521.png
@Colin Parkinson Maryada (code) bans inter-caste marriage.
I've had public school teachers/staff huff, pace, and interrupt when I'm with a white woman.
Same types will smile shyly when it's an Indian girl. They don't do the same to a black-white couple.

@Brad Sallows I just meant that ethnocentrism is a natural phenomenon. Someone might be mildly annoyed at immigration, but really angry at Turbans in the CAF. Treating European ethnocentrism as a unique problem is weird, as is considering liberal values akin to a state religion. Multiculturalism is about fostering pride and respect toward all people's heritage as far as I know.

Basically what @Eaglelord17 said.

I left the institution on my own terms, got more than even, and made a mark on more than one report/study concerning the issue. In my opinion, I started off as a Sikh with a Turban and a trimmed beard. I left with one down to my belt line, and a three-foot sword right next to it daily. I made out like a bandit, and whether out of fear, respect or awe I don't think those people would've treated me the same had I entered the institution that way.
 

singh1947

New Member
Reaction score
30
Points
330
If I may, can you tell us what rank and unit? Were you released or did you quit. I just wonder what unit was so much in contravention of our rules on racism. Was your rank not sufficient to address it with authority? Lastly, did you release on your own or did they put you out for trying to address it. I just want a little more background to get a clearer picture of your perspective and what brought you to it.
Multiple units, multiple ranks. Authority didn't back me up, but it's all in the past.
The responses in the thread were all enlightening since I hadn't considered the atheist angle before.

Thanks.
 

Furniture

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
2,333
Points
1,110
@singh1947 I'm not suggesting that people be barred from th CAF based on religion or beliefs, I'm simply pointing out that some belief systems are not compatible with the CAF. People need to make a decision for themselves about whether CAF service or their personal beliefs will be paramount in their lives.

If a religion forbids interacting with members of the opposite sex who are not family, that religion is incompatible with CAF service. The member can either choose to be a CAF member, and bend/break the religious rules, or they can release/not join.
 

Brad Sallows

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
4,554
Points
1,010
ethnocentrism is a natural phenomenon.
Yes. It's not as if no Chinese or Japanese person, for example, ever felt his people were better than Europeans.
considering liberal values akin to a state religion. Multiculturalism is about fostering pride and respect toward all people's heritage as far as I know.
Properly understood, liberal values are about maximizing the freedom of a person to live the life he chooses. No other doctrine I know of can do that. Multiculturalism by definition has to tolerate illiberal practices.
 

lenaitch

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1,655
Points
1,040
Why does someones personal beliefs have to be in alignment with ‘Canadian societies’ beliefs? What is the beliefs of Canadian society?

I have met racists, communists, neo-nazis, feminists, misogynists, misandrists, monarchists, libertarians, gays, homophobes, Christians, Muslims, Sikhs, Hindus, Buddhists, etc. what did they all have in common? They are all Canadians.

They have the right to act provided they aren’t breaking any laws. Your definition of abhorrent will vary too. To me it abhorrent to deny citizens the chance to serve their country because of their personal beliefs.



Is the groups they are part of illegal or not? Have they committed crimes or not? Those should be determining factors. Considering once they put on a uniform the moment they suggest using violence against the government they have committed a crime, maybe that might be the best for all involved.

This holier than thou attitude the CAF is adopting is morally disgusting to me.
You have a young daughter. You want to go out for dinner and someone gives you the name of a sitter. Said sitter has numerous public social media posts discussing pedophilia. Going to hire them and have a peaceful night out? After all, they have no history of acting on their feelings or beliefs.

It's about due diligence and risk management.
 

mariomike

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
938
Points
1,260
A recruit who would have served honourably in WWII wouldn’t be accepted today. Let that sink in.

I suspect members serving during WWII largely reflected Canadian society of the period Many aspects of said society would be be considered unacceptable today.

Saw an interesting official WW2 U.S. Army training film: "How to behave in Britain".

The film provides examples of how to interact with several varied groups of people: children, strangers, prostitutes and military officers.
The film also portrays attitudes towards race in the United Kingdom, which were generally more progressive than those in the United States at the time. Referring to Black soldiers as "coloureds", the film depicts a British woman inviting "coloured" soldiers for tea. To alleviate potential concerns of impropriety, an elderly woman was chosen to portray the hostess in the tea scene rather than a young woman. This segment was intended primarily for white American service personnel, to encourage them to adopt a "veneer of ethnic tolerance" while in Great Britain.

 
Top