Report about Toronto terror threat being taken ‘very seriously,’ RCMP say

[JohnLarue]

What makes it a fact that it is fool proof as it stands?

NO way

 

[JohnLarue]

Again the anti Liberal propaganda against Trudeau. Harper had no desire to bring in the Syrian refugees until the tide was turning against him. He then brought the deadline day for 10000 refugees from 3 years to one year as public opinion was clearly turning against him.

Oh Great,
Policy decisions as determined by public opinion and the media

Was his system any more secure than Trudeau's?

absolutely

Definitely not, as Trudeau has despatched many security and immigration officials to speed up the process

.

Your confusing speeding up the process with security
That is the heart of the issue as those two are incongruent

Your response was expected, as it is clear that you are the supporter of the conservatives and they can do no wrong, as far as you are concerned

nobody is infallible
However stupidity at the top job is not acceptable,
That is why if this goes wrong Justin will forever be "Not ready & never will be ready........"

 

[fuji]

Let's see what chicken little has to say this time

It is concern not terror you idiot
One in 25,000 that might spread an infectious diseases would get your attention pretty quick, however assuming one in 25,000 might be a violent religious nut job is to be ignored?????

Now you're scared shitless of immigrants bringing in infectious disease AS WELL as being scared shitless that half of a hundredth of a percent of them might be violent extremists?

Your cowardice is unbelievable!!!!!

You do not get that others might get hurt so you can say you am not afraid from a thousand miles away

Has it dawned on your scared little pea brain that there's a greater risk of terrorism where I am than where you are? There's a *much* higher probability of a terrorist attack against the United States than against Canada. There have been attacks. People like me have been killed in them. So fuck you--you go cower under your desk and run from your shadow. I'm not afraid.

A couple of simple questions for apparently a very simple moron
Do you lock your door at night?

Not always.

However when it comes to the risk you want others to assume, the sky's the limit as long as you get to be politically correct and call others cowards

I take the same risks along with everyone else nitwit. In fact, given how terrified you are of shadows, my guess is that I take many more risks than you. I travel to lots of places and go out and about in countries where there's people who might want to kill me. But that's something I do just because I would rather live my life than live in fear of my shadow like you. I don't expect others to share that sentiment.

I *do* expect others to share this sentiment: The price for freedom is always high, and we must always pay it.

You don't live in an open democratic society because generations of Canadians (or Americans) were chickenshit. You live in an open and democratic society because we have always paid the price for freedom. We paid it in war after war. We also pay it every day on our streets, where we chose to accept a higher rate of crime and violence that we could stop by giving up our freedoms. We limit our courts to guilty until proven innocent and demand that our police have probable cause before making an arrest because we want to be free. Giving up those things would make us safer--but less free.

We have always, and always will, paid a high price for our freedom--and proudly!

 

[bver_hunter]

NO way

Your opinion without evidence.

 

[JohnLarue]

Let's see what chicken little has to say this time

You despicable swine

Now you're scared shitless of immigrants bringing in infectious disease AS WELL as being scared shitless that half of a hundredth of a percent of them might be violent extremists?

No you moron
I am pointing out you would not hesitate to exclude someone who shows signs of an infectious disease, yet you are more than willing (for someone else ) to accept the risk of admitting a terrorist sleeper(s)

half of a hundredth of a percent of 25000 is 1.25 too many
It only takes one

Has it dawned on your scared little pea brain that there's a greater risk of terrorism where I am than where you are?

That does not give you the right to assume risk that others will have to bear, nor judge / dictate how Canada should deal with this issue

There's a *much* higher probability of a terrorist attack against the United States than against Canada. There have been attacks. People like me have been killed in them.

Are the states bring in 25,000 driven by a politically motivated schedule?
Of coarse they will not
Their priority will be security first and foremost

You are a piece of shit, know it all, coward telling us we need to be brave and we have to import possible trouble, while you are a thousand miles a way

So fuck you--you go cower under your desk and run from your shadow.

POS assholes like you eventually get what they deserve
Life has a way of correcting such arrogance

I'm not afraid.

I bet you are not as a boarder separates you from these 25,000
Do not confuse your stupidity with what you think is b**********y

Not always.

If you ever have then it was to reduce risk

I take the same risks along with everyone else nitwit.

You are not assuming the same risks as you want all of Canada to assume with this open door policy for 25,000
The nutjobs in this group are not going to seek you out in the US , no they will target a café or public transit in Toronto , Montreal or Ottawa

In fact, given how terrified you are of shadows, my guess is that I take many more risks than you.

You do not get it
this is not about me, this is about the safety of any and all Canadians

I travel to lots of places and go out and about in countries where there's people who might want to kill me.

That is not surprising if you are 1/2 as irritating in real life as you are here

But that's something I do just because I would rather live my life than live in fear of my shadow like you.

Again , it is not about me

I don't expect others to share that sentiment.

But you do expect them to assume the risk, so you can appear politically correct

I *do* expect others to share this sentiment: The price for freedom is always high, and we must always pay it.

The price of stupidity is ever steeper, as the price was avoidable

You don't live in an open democratic society because generations of Canadians (or Americans) were chickenshit. You live in an open and democratic society because we have always paid the price for freedom. We paid it in war after war. We also pay it every day on our streets, where we chose to accept a higher rate of crime and violence that we could stop by giving up our freedoms. We limit our courts to guilty until proven innocent and demand that our police have probable cause before making an arrest because we want to be free. Giving up those things would make us safer--but less free.

This is not a issue about rights, it is about importing a problem because you place your need to appear politically correct ahead of the safety of others

We have always, and always will, paid a high price for our freedom--and proudly!

So you are proud that you are too stupid to apply common sense before idealism?

 

[bver_hunter]

Oh Great,
Policy decisions as determined by public opinion and the media absolutely


Your confusing speeding up the process with security
That is the heart of the issue as those two are incongruent


nobody is infallible
However stupidity at the top job is not acceptable,
That is why if this goes wrong Justin will forever be "Not ready & never will be ready........"

Policy decisions meant Harpo was backtracking on his 3 year deadline. So it is okay for him to do so in your opinion.
Harpo does not personally go through the security files of each and every refugee. These are professionally trained security experts who do so irrespective of the Government in power. Show us some evidence that they were more detailed under the Conservative Government as you are displaying an opinion again.

I agree Harpo was the most stupid PM when he had the top job. Obviously, those flaky ads about Trudeau not being ready for the top job seems to have created a permanent image in your mind. It is water under the bridge, as the Canadians had their say and Harpo is History

 

[JohnLarue]

Your opinion without evidence.

Please provide the evidence to support this statement then

Ridiculous statement. In fact it will give the police more resources and attention to focus on the actual terrorists rather than on things which compromise the privacy of law abiding citizens.

How does watering down the bill give police more resources ????

 

[fuji]

I am pointing out you would not hesitate to exclude someone who shows signs of an infectious disease, yet you are more than willing (for someone else ) to accept the risk of admitting a terrorist sleeper(s)

If someone SHOWED SIGNS of being a terrorist I would exclude them too. Try thinking critically.

half of a hundredth of a percent of 25000 is 1.25 too many
It only takes one

That is just you being a fucking coward.

Are the states bring in 25,000 driven by a politically motivated schedule?

The US has FAR more Muslims, moron. In absolute numbers far, far, far more.

You do not get it
this is not about me, this is about the safety of any and all Canadians

No, this is about you being scared shitless that a single terrorist might get through and the thought of that if so scary for you that you are hysterical with fear.

Your cowardice is so ingrained you think "OMG OMG OMG ONE MIGHT GET IN! ONE MIGHT GET IN!" is an argument.

Let me be clear: I'm not afraid of one terrorist getting in. You are, because you are a coward. I'm not. If we can find that one terrorist, let's kill him, but I'm not going to shut the country in fear and turn away good people because I'm scared of terrorism.

This is not a issue about rights, it is about importing a problem because you place your need to appear politically correct ahead of the safety of others

This has nothing to do with being politically correct you scared little girl, this has to do with what we stand for, and not backing down from it because something went bump in the night.

You had effectively NO REPLY to the point that we routinely give up safety for freedom and democracy, that we have based our whole society on paying a high price for a high idea.

When we choose to let a murderer walk free because we can't actually prove guilt we know he may kill again, but innocent until proven guilty is worth more than the life he may take.

Stop being a fucking coward.

 

[bver_hunter]

Please provide the evidence to support this statement then



How does watering down the bill give police more resources ????

Precisely, everyone are only expressing their opinions, and that is precisely what this board is all about.


Hardly, "watering down" and more realistically amending it to reflect what it is meant to be.
It is because they will spend more time focusing on very specific threats, rather than spending the resources on unnecessary stuff.

 

[SkyRider]

One day Fuji will exercise his "freedom" and demonstrate his "courage" by holding a placard showing a cartoon of the Prophet Mohammed in Time Square.

 

[fuji]

One day Fuji will exercise his "freedom" and demonstrate his "courage" by holding a placard showing a cartoon of the Prophet Mohammed in Time Square.

Might very well do that, though I don't want to become a bigot myself so perhaps you can suggest something to put on the placard that would offend only the terrorists and not good honest Muslims?

Thought experiment: if you guys who cringe in terror at the thought of a single terrorist getting into Canada actually lived in Israel, where terrorism occurs DAILY, would you be running screaming to the Knesset demanding that the government immediately and unconditionally give in to every single one of Hamas's demands?

I just want to understand the extent of your cowardice.

 

[JohnLarue]

Precisely, everyone are only expressing their opinions, and that is precisely what this board is all about.


Hardly, "watering down" and more realistically amending it to reflect what it is meant to be.
It is because they will spend more time focusing on very specific threats, rather than spending the resources on unnecessary stuff.

In your strange world maybe
However if they are unable to properly monitor the movements and communications of the nutjobs because " the nutjobs rights would be violated", then you theory of how things work is pretty useless.

What you deem unnecessary could very well be critical to prevent a nutjob from completing his mission
What you really understand about this issue would not fill a thimble

 

[JohnLarue]

Might very well do that, though I don't want to become a bigot myself so perhaps you can suggest something to put on the placard that would offend only the terrorists and not good honest Muslims?

Thought experiment: if you guys who cringe in terror at the thought of a single terrorist getting into Canada actually lived in Israel, where terrorism occurs DAILY, would you be running screaming to the Knesset demanding that the government immediately and unconditionally give in to every single one of Hamas's demands?

I just want to understand the extent of your cowardice.

And we want to try and understand the extent of your stupidity.
apparently it is without limits


Israel's security issues are not a suitable justification for placing idealism ahead of common sense and applying proper security measures in Canada

 

[fuji]

And we want to try and understand the extent of your stupidity.
apparently it is without limits


Israel's security issues are not a suitable justification for placing idealism ahead of common sense and applying proper security measures in Canada

This is what it boils down to: you are such a fucking coward that you ACTUALLY THINK it is reasonable to say our policies are wrong if even one terrorist gets through.

That is just how chickenshit you are.

You are 100% risk averse. There is nothing you stand for that you are willing to take a risk for. You are just a coward.

 

[bver_hunter]

In your strange world maybe
However if they are unable to properly monitor the movements and communications of the nutjobs because " the nutjobs rights would be violated", then you theory of how things work is pretty useless.

What you deem unnecessary could very well be critical to prevent a nutjob from completing his mission
What you really understand about this issue would not fill a thimble

This is precisely that the amendment will enable the internal security and RCMP to focus on the "nutjobs" and not the Law abiding Canadians. Now your opinion is that the law as it stands is ideal. I think that it was a rushed through bill and most Canadians believed went too far. The Liberals thought so too and are amending it as per their platform, without compromising the security checks on real terrorists. The Government are in a far better position to do so than you, however, if you can tell us precisely what part of the amendment will be unsafe then spell it out.

 

[Frankfooter]

This is precisely that the amendment will enable the internal security and RCMP to focus on the "nutjobs" and not the Law abiding Canadians. Now your opinion is that the law as it stands is ideal. I think that it was a rushed through bill and most Canadians believed went too far. The Liberals thought so too and are amending it as per their platform, without compromising the security checks on real terrorists. The Government are in a far better position to do so than you, however, if you can tell us precisely what part of the amendment will be unsafe then spell it out.

C51 should be struck down entirely.
There is nothing in that bill that police and security agents couldn't do before, the big difference was allowing oversight into policies and spying, as opposed to giving free reign to agencies spying on Canadian citizens.

 

[JohnLarue]

This is what it boils down to: you are such a fucking coward that you ACTUALLY THINK it is reasonable to say our policies are wrong if even one terrorist gets through.

no what it really boils down to is it is reasonable to expect our leaders to apply risk mitigation and ensure their policies do not increase the risk for Canadian citizens.
The approach to get x# here before Christmas clearly demonstrates the political agenda primary and risk mitigation is an after though or in your case dismissed out of hand (because you are stupid)

That is just how chickenshit you are.

Says the weaseling cheating untrustworthy weasel hiding behind his computer screen
If in the real world you were half the triumphant hero you claim to be or 1/10 the argumentative, provoking asswipe that you are here, you would get filled in by someone

Being called a coward by a someone of your character is well..... worth as much as your credibility here (zero!)

You are 100% risk averse. There is nothing you stand for that you are willing to take a risk for. You are just a coward.

The opinion of a worthless POS like you is also worthless

 

[JohnLarue]

This is precisely that the amendment will enable the internal security and RCMP to focus on the "nutjobs" and not the Law abiding Canadians.

Are you an expert in inturpupitating legislation?
How can you know exactly what the amendment will be. has it been presented yet?

Now your opinion is that the law as it stands is ideal.

Do not tell me what my opinion is
Arrogant jerk

I think that it was a rushed through bill

We all know the value of your opinion

and most Canadians believed went too far.

Since the Paris & San Bernardino incidents?

The Liberals thought so too and are amending it as per their platform, without compromising the security checks on real terrorists.

easier said than done

The Government are in a far better position to do so than you, however, if you can tell us precisely what part of the amendment will be unsafe then spell it out.

Has the amendment been table ???

 

[bver_hunter]

Are you an expert in inturpupitating legislation?
How can you know exactly what the amendment will be. has it been presented yet?


Do not tell me what my opinion is
Arrogant jerk



We all know the value of your opinion


Since the Paris & San Bernardino incidents?

easier said than done



Has the amendment been table ???

Not sure what you mean by "interpupitating". Must be a new word in the larue dictionary.
As if the value of your opinion is respected in any way!!!!
You are the one who put the cart before the horse when you criticised the amendment to the C51 legislation.
Obviously, it was an ignorant criticism as you did not know the true facts, as it did not exist.
Once we ask you for the evidence it is because you come out with random biased statements like that.

 

[SkyRider]

Not sure how true this is but, apparently, a gun store (in California?) said they are refusing to sell guns to Muslims. Isn't this unconstitutional and unAmerican and racist? How would the storekeeper know that the purchaser is a Muslim? A burqa would be a hint. Maybe the name "Syed Farook" is also a hint. However, they can always hire an Anglo to buy the guns for them.