Canada's new Prime Minister's stance on Terrorism given the attacks in Paris

[IndyRnRfan]

You don't get to decide that for my country, thank you very much.

M.

I never said I did get to decide, thank you very much. I said that is what a govt is for. If that isn't their job then you don't need a govt.

You obviously aren't from the U.S. so tommorow call your govt and tell them you will be more than happy to support all the refugees into your country that they can handle.

No good deed goes unpunished and we just witnessed that this weekend.

 

[lizabu]

How many of those 14 million if that is the correct number have ties to terrorist groups? Even if it's .5% that's 70,000 you are allowing around the world. I'm not going to agree that we let them in so there's a chance that even 1 American, Canadian, Mexican, wherever could die. The number one job of a countries govt is to keep its people safe and allowing refugees in weakens a country and its people, period. I'm sorry you feel your fellow countrymen and women are not as important as people from a country you probably have zero ties too. Can you imagine how terrible France's PM must feel knowing he had a part in some of those killed the other night by agreeing to allow refugees in his country. This is assuming he had a say so in allowing them in. I'm not 100% sure how their govt makes decisions.

If these refugees had put a stop to these radical teachings before it started becoming a problem they wouldn't be in this situation. We have radical groups in America and so do many countries but we (govt and citizens) keep them in check.


This is exactly what you do. First place I'd put them, Gitmo, and keep them isolated from the remaining detainees if there are any left there.

It's ridiculous to say this happened because France let Syrian refugees in. One suicide bomber out of all of the suicide bombers just happened to have a Syrian passport on him. Do you think that was an accident? It was very deliberate. He wanted officials to find his passport. And now they're reporting that the anti-ISIS coalition received Intel that an attack of this severity was going to happen. If the PM of France feels sorry for anything it's not letting in Syrian refugees. It's ignoring Intel which warned him this was going to happen. And now their bombing ISIS training camps. Too bad if they knew where these training camps were all this time that they waited for this to happen before they decided to bomb them. The leaders of all of our nations have plenty to feel sorry for tonight but it's not letting refugees in.

 

[IndyRnRfan]

It's ridiculous to say this happened because France let Syrian refugees in. One suicide bomber out of all of the suicide bombers just happened to have a Syrian passport on him. Do you think that was an accident? It was very deliberate. He wanted officials to find his passport. And now they're reporting that the anti-ISIS coalition received Intel that an attack of this severity was going to happen. If the PM of France feels sorry for anything it's not letting in Syrian refugees. It's ignoring Intel which warned him this was going to happen. And now their bombing ISIS training camps. Too bad if they knew where these training camps were all this time that they waited for this to happen before they decided to bomb them. The leaders of all of our nations have plenty to feel sorry for tonight but it's not letting refugees in.

I never said this was a direct result of letting refugees in. However, the Syrian refugee killed how many people? If he wasn't let in then those he killed might still be alive.

I do agree with you on the Intel. I certainly hope they didn't have Intel saying this was going to happen.

 

[maddiel]

Nor do you. Whatever country you are from, someone else is deciding who gets in.

In my country, it's my govenment voted in by my fellow citizens that makes those decisions. And clearly based on this thread, not all of those citizens agree on a policy.

I never said I did get to decide, thank you very much. I said that is what a govt is for. If that isn't their job then you don't need a govt.

You obviously aren't from the U.S. so tommorow call your govt and tell them you will be more than happy to support all the refugees into your country that they can handle.

I don't agree that that is solely or primarily what a govenment is for. And I really don't believe admitting refugees weakens a country.

I already sent the message that I am in favour of increasing the number of refugees we accept with my vote.

M.

 

[IndyRnRfan]

In my country, it's my govenment voted in by my fellow citizens that makes those decisions. And clearly based on this thread, not all of those citizens agree on a policy.



I don't agree that that is solely or primarily what a govenment is for. And I really don't believe admitting refugees weakens a country.

I already sent the message that I am in favour of increasing the number of refugees we accept with my vote.

M.

We will just have to agree to disagree. That's what's great about this place.

Since I don't know where you are at and your countries issues I'll leave this so you can understand my POV. Right now, we have thousands of homeless veterans and homeless children in this country. From what I've briefly read and I hope what I read is not set in stone, we are going to give money, transportation and a whole list of other benefits to refugees while we can't even house our own veterans and children. This is one of the other reasons besides allowing more terrorist onto this country.

I don't want to come across as mean or not caring. I'm the first person to help someone in need and I do feel we should help those in Syria. I just don't agree with bringing them into our country without proper checks.

 

[bcla]

I never said this was a direct result of letting refugees in. However, the Syrian refugee killed how many people? If he wasn't let in then those he killed might still be alive.

You mean the dude who was determined to have come in with a fake passport? There's no reports that he was actually Syrian. Just look up the term "false flag". There are reports of French nationals traveling to the Middle East and obtaining fake passports. Why would they have any identification on themselves during the attacks? That they did was intentional - probably meant to taunt Europeans.

The big problem is that one person isn't going to make that much of a difference. If that one person couldn't make it through, there are probably others to replace him for the attack.

 

[IndyRnRfan]

You mean the dude who was determined to have come in with a fake passport? There's no reports that he was actually Syrian. Just look up the term "false flag". There are reports of French nationals traveling to the Middle East and obtaining fake passports. Why would they have any identification on themselves during the attacks? That they did was intentional - probably meant to taunt Europeans.

The big problem is that one person isn't going to make that much of a difference. If that one person couldn't make it through, there are probably others to replace him for the attack.

I hadn't heard the info about him having a fake passport.

If that one person though doesn't get through that's one less person to worry about. If they replace him with someone inside already then that govt should have knowledge about him and that could be the difference in stopping the attack. So many what ifs. There obviously isn't one answer but I hope there is something that can be done.

 

[mnrose]

You vet them. No one is seriously doing that. They have to wait in holding areas and be vetted. If home is SO bad that you are fleeing (not saying it's not!) then having to wait in a holding area to be properly vetted should be fine with you.

Where's the "holding area?" Who is paying for it? These are practical questions. Which "country" gets to hold all these people until we figure out who is "good" to go and who isn't? It all sounds good on paper, but are YOU willing to have your country be the "holding pen?"

 

[pat fan]

Where's the "holding area?" Who is paying for it? These are practical questions. Which "country" gets to hold all these people until we figure out who is "good" to go and who isn't? It all sounds good on paper, but are YOU willing to have your country be the "holding pen?"

The US currently has 5 in countries around the world. "We" are paying for it, just like we'll be paying to get them here, house them., feed them etc...We do not do nearly a good enough job vetting them, AT ALL. There are refugee camps in all the countries on the refugee route, those countries are paying for them. The countries are being strained to the breaking point.

Do you not want them vetted at all? just let them waltz from one border to another? Nothing?

 

[mnrose]

How many of those 14 million if that is the correct number have ties to terrorist groups? Even if it's .5% that's 70,000 you are allowing around the world. I'm not going to agree that we let them in so there's a chance that even 1 American, Canadian, Mexican, wherever could die. The number one job of a countries govt is to keep its people safe and allowing refugees in weakens a country and its people, period. I'm sorry you feel your fellow countrymen and women are not as important as people from a country you probably have zero ties too. Can you imagine how terrible France's PM must feel knowing he had a part in some of those killed the other night by agreeing to allow refugees in his country. This is assuming he had a say so in allowing them in. I'm not 100% sure how their govt makes decisions.

If these refugees had put a stop to these radical teachings before it started becoming a problem they wouldn't be in this situation. We have radical groups in America and so do many countries but we (govt and citizens) keep them in check.


This is exactly what you do. First place I'd put them, Gitmo, and keep them isolated from the remaining detainees if there are any left there.

Gitmo? You are going to put a million Syrian refugees in Gitmo? LOLOLOL. Right now, we've got something like 112 people there (high of 775). What you are talking about is many orders of magnitude larger. Oh, and the cost of Gitmo prisoners is north of $2 million dollars per year PER prisoner. Nice. Apparently, we've got tons more money in this country than I know about.

 

[pat fan]

You are going to put a million Syrian refugees in Gitmo?

Now we're taking a million? I thought it was 65,000?

 

[mnrose]

The US currently has 5 in countries around the world. "We" are paying for it, just like we'll be paying to get them here, house them., feed them etc...We do not do nearly a good enough job vetting them, AT ALL. There are refugee camps in all the countries on the refugee route, those countries are paying for them. The countries are being strained to the breaking point.

Do you not want them vetted at all? just let them waltz from one border to another? Nothing?

Sure, you vet them and that is happening. But, no system is perfect, and no amount of vetting is going to catch every single dingle person with bad intent. So your choices are let NO ONE in, and pay through the nose forever to help these people (or I suppose we could watch them die...so much for the sanctity of life and all that...or are only some lives worth saving?), or do the best you can to vet refugees, accepting that yes, you may let a bad apple or two through.

The current refugee crisis is a humanitarian nightmare. And, I'm not sure what the solution is, but I know for a fact that watching them die just seems wrong. Especially since a lot of the turmoil in that region can be traced to our actions there. We kicked the hornet's nest in Iraq and look what we got.

 

[mnrose]

Now we're taking a million? I thought it was 65,000?

I thought the discussion was what to do with the estimated 1 million Syrian refugees (a small portion of the worldwide 14 million refugees). Currently the US has committed to taking 10,000 (aren't we generous). But, let's assume it's only 10,000 ...10,000 would not fit at Gitmo. And 10,000 times 2 million per year is a boat load of money. If it's 65000, add more money. And, that still leaves over 900,000 Syrian refugees.

 

[CPanther95]

Gitmo? You are going to put a million Syrian refugees in Gitmo? LOLOLOL. Right now, we've got something like 112 people there (high of 775). What you are talking about is many orders of magnitude larger. Oh, and the cost of Gitmo prisoners is north of $2 million dollars per year PER prisoner. Nice. Apparently, we've got tons more money in this country than I know about.

Taking in refugees isn't free. We either decide that their safety is worth us investing in them, or we decline to help them.

 

[pat fan]

I thought the discussion was what to do with the estimated 1 million Syrian refugees (a small portion of the worldwide 14 million refugees).

I'm only speaking on the USA's commitment. I wouldn't presume to tell another country what to do. Well, I might, but I wasn't in this case

 

[bcla]

I hadn't heard the info about him having a fake passport.

If that one person though doesn't get through that's one less person to worry about. If they replace him with someone inside already then that govt should have knowledge about him and that could be the difference in stopping the attack. So many what ifs. There obviously isn't one answer but I hope there is something that can be done.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...gee-passport-found-at-stadium-bomb-scene.html

They had lots of help. It's not necessarily a matter of having one person the government knows, but that there could have been additional people who may or may not be under surveillance. The fake passports are mainly being used by Syrians who of course can't obtain one.

These were coordinated attacks. I'm pretty sure one person doesn't stop it. There was that would-be 9/11 hijacker who didn't make it on a plane, but that didn't stop the hijackings. I really doubt that he was irreplaceable in their plans.

 

[CPanther95]

It doesn't really matter how terrorists cross the border. You either have a system in place to thoroughly check anyone coming in and make sure there are no red flags - or you don't.

If you waive checks for any particular avenue of entry, even if it wasn't a method being used by terrorists previously - it will certainly be used by them now.

 

[Suger Mag]

....and a lovely portrait of her in your avi, I might add....

You mean my felt frog portrait? LOL that was part of a quilt. My daughter made that ... it is supposed to me. I am a scientist and at the time I was working in frog and as such did a lot of dissections. My daughter was in kindergarten when they were asked to make a felt portrait of their parent at work to be part of a quilt to be auctioned off at the school fundraiser. I am forever immortalized in felt stabbing a felt frog with a scalpel.... cost me a pretty penny at the fundraiser auction but TOTALLY worth it!! I still do feel bad about the frogs though.... switched to working on people after I finished that project. Unlike the frogs... my test subjects now have a choice if they participate as research subjects.

 

[lizabu]

I never said this was a direct result of letting refugees in. However, the Syrian refugee killed how many people? If he wasn't let in then those he killed might still be alive.

I do agree with you on the Intel. I certainly hope they didn't have Intel saying this was going to happen.

The pieces are starting to come together. A number of news sites are saying the suicide bomber was "posing" as Syrian and they are reporting that as far back as August they were receiving information that something like this was going to go down at a concert hall.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ay-foiled-Jihadi-John-revenge-attack-day.html

 

[TLSnell1981]

Does it matter, whether or not he was Syrian? So what, if the passport was faked...or not. He still used it to enter through Greece. How many others are arriving with fake passports, as Syrian Refugees? They told us, they were going to do this and they did. Why don't we believe them?