Hillier says - Canada at higher risk of attack.

[Scoobie Newbie]

There have been a few isolated incidents in Asia where they believe that the bird flu has been transmitted bird to person to person.  This shit creeps me out.

 

[from darkness lite]

Glorifed Ape wrote: "To get back to the topic at hand: interesting that of that "list of 5", we're the only ones that haven't suffered an attack. I'm not implying anything, it's just curious."

As alluded to in some of the first posts in this thread, its, in my personal opinion, luck that we haven't been attacked, not some "touchy feely policy".   Canada is still actively involved in the War on Terror.   See link:   http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/Newsroom/view_news_e.asp?id=1615 ), and AQ knows this. Also, AQ never rushes anything.   The UK embassy bombing in Turkey occurred what, almost 2 years after Bin Laden's Nov 02 video naming Canada a target?  

I hope everyday that we don't get hit, however my gut tells me otherwise.

Cheers

 

[RCD]

Already are.Domestic terrorist
Our current Government (funding)

 

[from darkness lite]

CFL wrote "There have been a few isolated incidents in Asia where they believe that the bird flu has been transmitted bird to person to person.  This crap creeps me out."

Been following this as part of my work.  According to the World Health Org, this is part of the virus' evolution/adaptation until it can easily transmit from human-to-human.  The good news, if you consider it good news, is the WHO believes the virus, as it evolves, will become less deadly (in order to spread the virus needs living hosts).  Currently the mortality rate of the bird flu is 70%, lets hope to God that the WHO is right and the mortality rate drops significantly, or else we could have one h*ll of a disaster on our hands.

All this stuff can be checked at the WHO's website, for those who don't mind the heeby-jeebies.

Cheers.......

 

[Scoobie Newbie]

I think it would just scare me even more.  I hope the gov't has plans for shutting down air travel etc on a major scale.

 

[Dare]

Not at all. The point I was trying to make (maybe I should have been clearer) was that we're nowhere near innocent in the entire affair and while we can't be expected to just say "okay, do what you will", we do need to stop behaving as though we've had no hand in what has been dealt to us.

That's a very revealing statement. Explain to me exactly what "hand" Canada has had in creating Islamic terrorism? I hope you would travel back through your history text books far enough to know that Islamic fundamentalism/expansionism and extremism has existed before Canada was even incorporated. The only difference now is that they have access to weapons that can kill all of us, fast efficient centralized communication and the delivery methods. The will and intent has always been there. I would love for you to explain to me why it is we should not meddle in the domestic affairs of these countries when their platform includes conquering our democracy and subjugating our people? I would also love an explaination as to how representative democracy would even exist in these countries if it was not for the West's "meddling". Anyone "mildly versed" in the Qur'an and Shar'ia law and the history of the middle east shouldn't be shocked we're proactively defending ourselves.

To get back to the topic at hand: interesting that of that "list of 5", we're the only ones that haven't suffered an attack. I'm not implying anything, it's just curious.

Canada is a conduit to the U.S. and I would think that it would be less likely any enemy would want to risk losing that entry and safety by triggering a sizable adverse reaction to their presence. Especially with a significant portion of the population expousing sympathetic views and kinship towards any and every anti-American bend. It's easy to operate here. The very fact that our biggest problem "seems" to be drug lords should present to us that the big fish and more dangerous cliques are *not being caught*. We're the best launching pad into the U.S. Strategically it makes sense. Unfortunately (or fortunately), most Jihadists operate independantly. One day someone will come along and "make an example" of us, not because of what we have done in the middle east, but because we are deemed infidels.

 

[shaboing]

Shaboing:

Was the third country Spain?

to be honest i really can't remember. something in the back of my mind says france but i'm pretty sure its not spain but dont quote me. it was over a year ago i had this lecture.

my sources are reliable for the person who was questioning them because we were being lectured by cops and shown the video that would have been sent to bin laden or whoever in his command that takes care of that if it wasn't for the police catching the guys. with it being a lecture i dont quite have any links to give you but apparently the top 10 list is on al quida's website if you can read it and want to go to it and possibly have your IP tracked by the government, lol.

 

[CH1]

Hey Guys!

The scenario that Canada is a target is not new.  There has been crap happening in this country for decades.  The political task masters have kept their collective heads buried for years, so they wouldn't incite panic onto John Q. Citizen.  Ignorance is bliss, in their eyes.

I am glad to see General Hillier has gained the chutzpah to challenge the nay sayers (long overdue).  I wish him all the best as they will probably shorten his tenure.

Back on topic though.  Canada has had the reputation as a terrorist clearing house for decades.  As we are a major supplier to our neighbour & not fully capable (tactically) of looking after our own house, we have opened the flood gates.  As proud  as I am of our military & country,  our military is neither capable in terms of equipment, or manpower to seriously challenge an asymetrical or conventional war on our own turf.  If matters really got out of hand, I dare say the retired military, hunters & Mr. Citizen would likely have more than a word or two for any body that upsets the peace & tranquility. (I wonder what would happen to gun control?)

The Leaders have known about & tracked terrorist groups starting right after the FLQ crisis, & the list grows almost every day.  The military still maintains their dark broom closet, prepping info & scenarios in the event of terrorist attack.  Since 9/11, the threat has increased by almost 100 fold or more.  Even during the cold war, Canada was listed as a major target.

A very quick way to bring our southern ally to his knees is to cut off supplies & resources.  Guess where their closest secure suppy is.

That's about all I can add without landing myself in a sling. So for the nay sayers, WAKE up, it is all too real a possibility.

 

[Stirling N6123]

Personally, I do not think that Canada is at a much higher risk of attack than anybody else. Why would a terrorist group attack a Canadian target, when they can take an extra 45 minute drive south and attack Americans. If they have spent years getting a plan together, why not take an extra few days, drive south, and hurt your real enemy?

I firmly believe they are among us, providing support at various levels. Whether it be cash, communications, intelligence. They are here, and they are busy.

Canada being a multi cultural country, every population on earth is represented in our cities, towns and neighbourhoods. As for an overseas group wanting to conduct an attack against one of its enemies, in Canada, that could certainly happen. History has shown that the Canadian way of doing things can provide a rich environment for organizations to attack it's enemy within our boarders. Look at the Air India bombing, or the Turkish embassy incident March 12th 1995. Terrorist attacks can and will happen here, but to have them directed at Canadians in General is something I don't feel will happen. If they really wanted too, I think terrorist's already would have.

 

[daniel h.]

What debate?   I didn't realise there was any debating about who attacked us on 9/11.


Not sure about Britain, but Australia was targeted with the Bali bombings in nightclub(s?) killed over 200 most of them Australian tourists, also one of their embassys was bombed, in I think (but may be wrong) Indonesia.

http://edition.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2002/bali/

Us? Canada wasn't attacked on September 11th. There are a number of theories as to the accuracy of the official story, similar to the JFK situation, but seeing as this site doesn't like discussing things that can't be proven clearly I can't get into it. There was no criminal investigation, only the televised inquiry. Google on your own time.

 

[daniel h.]

Personally, I do not think that Canada is at a much higher risk of attack than anybody else. Why would a terrorist group attack a Canadian target, when they can take an extra 45 minute drive south and attack Americans. If they have spent years getting a plan together, why not take an extra few days, drive south, and hurt your real enemy?

I firmly believe they are among us, providing support at various levels. Whether it be cash, communications, intelligence. They are here, and they are busy.

Canada being a multi cultural country, every population on earth is represented in our cities, towns and neighbourhoods. As for an overseas group wanting to conduct an attack against one of its enemies, in Canada, that could certainly happen. History has shown that the Canadian way of doing things can provide a rich environment for organizations to attack it's enemy within our boarders. Look at the Air India bombing, or the Turkish embassy incident March 12th 1995. Terrorist attacks can and will happen here, but to have them directed at Canadians in General is something I don't feel will happen. If they really wanted too, I think terrorist's already would have.

In the biggest cities it is quite diverse. Rural areas are a different world.

I just don't know if I like the premise. Life is risky. Terrorist attacks kill very small numbers of people and rarely happen--especially in Canada. A good way to sistract people from bigger threats like everything else.

Last good example of terrorism in Canada was Canadian--much as the Timothy McVeigh issue was a U.S. domestic issue:



The Squamish Five (sometimes referred to as the Vancouver Five) were a group of self-styled "urban guerillas" active in Canada during the early 1980s. Their chosen name was Direct Action.

The five were Ann Hansen, Brent Taylor, Julie Belmas, Doug Stewart and Gerry Hannah of the music group Subhumans. Unlike the Red Brigades, Red Army Faction, and other groups, they were not motivated by a political ideology which placed them at the vanguard of a Marxist revolution. Rather, they were activists who had become disenchanted and frustrated with traditional methods of activism. They believed that by engaging in semi-symbolic propaganda by the deed, they could jolt people into action themselves.

Early Actions
The first actions associated with the group were not particularly militant. They vandalized the headquarters of Amax, a British Columbia (BC) mining company which had been granted a special exemption from environmental laws, and the British Columbia Department of the Environment.

After these actions the group began to become more militant and began training with stolen weapons in a deserted area north of Vancouver. By pure chance they came upon large caches of dynamite used for construction work, which they looted for their own use. They dropped out of normal life, obtained a roster of fake IDs, and began supporting themselves through various forms of fraud and theft.

On 30 May 1982, Hansen, Taylor, Stewart and Belmas drove to Vancouver Island and set a large bomb at an electricity transmission project. Four transformers were wrecked beyond repair, but no one was injured. The electrical substation had been criticized for being environmentally unsound and serving to help destroy the remaining wilderness on the island.


The Litton Bomb
Following this action, Hansen, Taylor,Belmas and Stewart filled a van with 500 pounds of dynamite and drove cross-country to Toronto. Their target this time was Litton Systems, a company producing guidance components for the controversial American cruise missiles many feared would increase the risk of nuclear war. Hansen recalls driving the truck full of dynamite across the praries, "listening to the Dead Kennedys, D.O.A., the Doors and Bruce Springsteen's Nebraska". (Ironically, the Litton bombing was referenced in a later Dead Kennedys song, "Where do you Draw the Line?")

The Litton bomb was supposed to cause property destruction only, with no injuries. The van was parked in full view of corporate security, and an elaborate "warning box" was duct-taped to the hood, displaying a message, a digital clock counting down, and a single stick of dynamite to show it was no joke. Belmas called the security desk and warned them of the explosion, giving instructions on exactly what to do and where the danger area was. But security did not respond the way they expected. The evacuation was just getting started when the bomb exploded minutes ahead of schedule. Seven people were injured in that incident.


Arrest
The bombers fled Toronto for Vancouver and ceased their activities for several months. But the high-profile crime had attracted major police attention and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) was closing in. Hansen and Belmas would commit one more militant action, the firebombing of two stores selling violent pornographic films, before all five were captured on the road to their training area by an RCMP tactical unit disguised as a road crew. This was just outside the town of Squamish, BC, giving rise to the name.

The five received sentences ranging from six years to life. All are now out of prison.

In 2002, Ann Hansen's Direct Action: Memoirs of an Urban Guerilla was published. While she acknowledges tactical mistakes and misconceptions, Hansen maintains that her actions were justified, and that liberal, capitalist democracies should be challenged through direct action and other forms of protest.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squamish_Five

 

[Dare]

Us? Canada wasn't attacked on September 11th. There are a number of theories as to the accuracy of the official story, similar to the JFK situation, but seeing as this site doesn't like discussing things that can't be proven clearly I can't get into it. There was no criminal investigation, only the televised inquiry. Google on your own time.

http://www.members.shaw.ca/kcic1/cdnwtc.html

 

[Dare]

In the biggest cities it is quite diverse. Rural areas are a different world.

Last good example of terrorism in Canada was Canadian--much as the Timothy McVeigh issue was a U.S. domestic issue:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/airindia/

I just don't know if I like the premise. Life is risky. Terrorist attacks kill very small numbers of people and rarely happen--especially in Canada. A good way to sistract people from bigger threats like everything else.

Terrorist attacks only kill (relatively) small numbers of people because they only have easy access to (relatively) small bombs. The idea is to prevent them from getting big bombs. Just remember, if you or someone you care about is on the business end of one of those bombs, it's scope suddenly engulfs your entire world regardless of its size.