And ISIS claims they are acting against those oppressing Islam.
Yes the Kurds (and the Tamils) have drawn the short stick but their choice to embrace terror attacks against civilians is still unacceptable in my eyes.
PM Harper interferes in refugee selection process, nixes Syrian applicants
- Thread starter mandrill
- Start date
Yes the Kurds (and the Tamils) have drawn the short stick but their choice to embrace terror attacks against civilians is still unacceptable in my eyes.
Again highlighting the fact there are other nutjobs out there does not reduce the specific risk we are looking at right now.
Why can you not understand that ?
This situation can have very deadly consequences if not managed properly
Since the PM prefers not to take any risks with Canadian lives he prefer to be more cautious when it comes to opening the doors to thousands fleeing an area where religious fanatic killers are running amuck.
A card blanche approach is very risky & the price is very high in order to appear to be politically correct
Unless of coarse you can guarantee none of the would be thousands are ISIS sleepers
If Trudeau becomes PM maybe they will attack the House of Commons again. I hope not but you never know.
According to the CSIS, right wing extremists are as much a risk to this country as Muslim extremists.
Will you publicly call of Harper to take responsibility for these acts?
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/...upremacist-threat-ahead-of-radical-islam.html
Do you blame Harper for this act?
http://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/untold-story-justin-bourque/
In the last few years we have seen several Muslims arrested for plotting terrorism or committing terrorism in Canada, for example the Palestinian arrested for plotting to blow up a Via Rail commuter train in the GTA, the Toronto 18, and several others.
Can you name the recent plots in Ontario by any other terror group?
Let's not forget the 130 Canadians now fighting with ISIS. Unless they are all killed in the ME they will return to Canada because they are Canadian citizens and we can't revoke their citizenship because that would be racist.
That's the problem with Trudeau and Mulcair, they want to take away the tools the RCMP and CSIS were given that has stopped these potential attacks while they were in the planning stages.
AFAIK, no country anywhere can revoke the citizenship of people born in that country because that would essentially render the person stateless and without rights anywhere.
It's not so much racism as a principle. If a government can take away the rights of a selected pool of people for any reason it sees fit, you get a situation where the government can strip you of your rights for - for example - not paying HST on time or not paying your parking tickets.
And worse, since Harper is putting that power in the PMO's office, not through some official channels, it becomes political.
Harper would be free, if were to stay in power, to strip only those he disagrees with of citizenship.
Its bad enough he sics CRA on charities, but the power to strip citizenship is really taking it too far.
So, if those 130 Canadians fighting for ISIS aren't killed by Russian bombs in the ME we have to welcome them back to Canada. Maybe Omar Kadr can "re-educate" them back to civilize behavior.
Question: Since they are currently residing in Islamic State, wouldn't they be citizens of Islamic State? Ok, I'm being factious.
No one said we had to welcome them. And because they're native-born, there's no one but Our Harper Government to stand up for them. So if anything you should be anticipating a jolly field-day of vengeful retribution, not resenting that with no safe harbour anywhere else, they must come home to face us.
Further to oagre, if you don't want your own twisted and misguided citizens, just what other country do you imagine dumping that human refuse onto and how? Even opening the bomb-bay doors and 'forgetting' to distribute parachutes won't work. Unless you're ISIS.
Smart people — from parents to governments — focus on bring their charges up right and responsible from the start. Only the dolts think punishment accomplishes that.
Once again that does not mitigate the risk associated with the refugees in Syria.
Imagine you are sitting in your dentists office waiting for a root canal treatment and he comes up to and says
"According to CSIS , the pain from child birth is just as or more severe than from root canal"
"As such we will not administer the normal precautions (i.e. no freezing, no pain killers) and just pull that tooth as quick as we can"
If the root becomes a problem we shall deal it then
this is your messed up logic
Just find a comparable evil and use it to justify ignoring the risks of the issue at hand
You are dumb beyond imagination
Ok, genius! Pick out the logical flaw in Frankfooter's argument and explain it to us.
Your logic is really, really messed up.
So you give drugs for the root canal and you can give drugs for birth.
Treat them both.
Just as CSIS should be monitoring your every move, and a few others on this board, and you should be happily bending over to comply.
Right wing extremists like you are just as much a danger to this country as Islamic threats, so says CSIS.
Bend over and prepare to show CSIS you're not a threat.
And if you don't comply, it just shows that you are basing all these worries on racism.
Are you racist?
Don't you support CSIS's calls for security?
Bend over.
Don't be a dual citizen. Pick a country and stick with that country. The problem with the Mohamed Fahmy case was that he was in Egypt and Egypt said he was subject to Egyptian law because he is an Egyptian citizen. Egypt released Peter Greste because he is not an Egyptian citizen. I know, I know, Fahmy is not a terrorist but it highlights the problem with dual citizenship (of course he renounced his Egyptian citizenship late in the day and was finally released).
Don't get a new one. Stick with the old one? Dual citizenship rules are confusing. My German friend can't get his Canadian citizenship without relinquishing his German citizenship (dual German citizens are really rare).
Then there is the case of Conrad Black who renounced his Canadian citizenship so he could be a British citizen. When Conrad wanted his Canadian citizenship back that mean man Jean Chretien wouldn't give it back to him.
Did you know Ireland grants citizenship to citizens of Northern Ireland. BTW: I almost became a dual citizen when Quebec almost separated in 1995.
I wonder the same thing. Why would such a person stick with the old one? I think it makes travel back to the old country easier and there may be some benefits to continue to be a citizen of the old country.
In my case, I would have been automatically granted Quebec citizenship if Quebec had gone independent in 1995 but I would never give up my Canadian citizenship. Conrad Black gave up his Canadian citizenship and couldn't get it back.
