[Pendergast]

Panic!

El Pais daily newspaper reported Tuesday that Spanish police found information about the Montreal subway system as well as data on Spanish trains and a map of the London system on Abdelhak Chergui's personal laptop computer.

It allegedly included detailed plans of Montreal's Metro, such as route information, station locations – even details on passenger capacity and the system that opens and closes the doors on the subway cars.

I say it won't happen.

Do you agree and why?

Ah! I forgot!

[froth]It's Bush' fault!!![/froth]

[James L]

Originally Posted by Pendergast

Panic!

I say it won't happen.

Do you agree and why?

Ah! I forgot!

[froth]It's Bush' fault!!![/froth]

I say it will happen at some point, and we have been on the "hit list" for quite some time now (several years). Not to mention we have had troops on the ground in Afghanistan since day 1 basically which has also made us a target.

Having said that, I am proud that we were smart enough to separate the war on terrorism (which we participate in) from the war in Iraq, and that we chose not to participate in that farce of an invasion.

[Spliffdaddy]

I'd bet if your country stopped being Western, then the terrorists would leave you alone.

Until that day, anything goes.

[Myriad]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

I'd bet if your country stopped being Western, then the terrorists would leave you alone.

It's true. There are no terrorist attacks in the middle east.

[Spliffdaddy]

Only in the countries that threaten to become Western.

[Pendergast]

Originally Posted by James L

I say it will happen at some point, and we have been on the "hit list" for quite some time now (several years). Not to mention we have had troops on the ground in Afghanistan since day 1 basically which has also made us a target.

In what way our participation to the war in Afghanistan made us a target?

Having said that, I am proud that we were smart enough to separate the war on terrorism (which we participate in) from the war in Iraq, and that we chose not to participate in that farce of an invasion.

I agree.

[Pendergast]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

I'd bet if your country stopped being Western, then the terrorists would leave you alone.

In what way does a country to "western"?

Could there not be other sets of reasons to explain the targetting process? Is it so broadly generalized, really?

Until that day, anything goes.

That is a very broad statement...

[jcadam]

Originally Posted by Pendergast

In what way does a country to "western"?

Could there not be other sets of reasons to explain the targetting process? Is it so broadly generalized, really?

If your system of government is anything other than an Islamic theocracy, you can be a target of Islamic terrorism. Islam fought a 'traditional' war of conquest against the west in the late first millenium - early second millenium A.D., and did quite well (they killed the great Byzantine Empire, after all). Now that they can't take us on in a traditional military sense, they resort to their current methods.

Of course, there are other forms of terrorism, such as the Irish variety. Nobody likes a foreign occupation of their homeland, after all.

[James L]

Originally Posted by Pendergast

In what way our participation to the war in Afghanistan made us a target?

Well, there is this:

http://www.canada.com/national/featu...d-c50f2705ddaf

and this:

National Post


Tuesday, July 09, 2002


Canadian snipers are being credited with more than 20 kills in Afghanistan, including one from 2,400 metres away -- almost a mile and a half.

If validated, the kill would be the longest shot made by a military sniper in combat, according to the latest issue of Soldier of Fortune magazine.

The U.S. magazine says the Canadian snipers from the Edmonton-based 3rd Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry battle group surpassed their U.S. counterparts, adding "Canuck snipers supposedly had the highest number of confirmed kills in the Shah-i-Kot Valley fight.

"A source in Kandahar working with the Canadian sniper teams estimated 'well over 20 confirmed kills at long ranges.'"

The magazine, known for its war-zone reporting, also said there were unconfirmed, but widely circulated reports, of a "2,400-metre kill [chest shot] against the driver of an enemy resupply truck" by a Canadian using a .50 BMG McMillan Long Range Sniper Weapon (LRSW).

It said the record for the longest shot by a military sniper in action was 2,250 metres by gunnery Sgt. Carlos Hathcock, USMC, near Duc Pho, South Vietnam, in 1967 with a Browning .50 HMG mounting an eight-power Unertl telescopic sight.

The magazine details how a three-man team of Canadian snipers went into the battle of Shah-i-Kot during Operation Anaconda alongside U.S. units, including the 101st Airborne's 3rd Brigade "Rakkasans."

"When the American grunts became pinned down, the three Canadians and three accompanying U.S. Army Special Forces shooters armed with M24 Remingtons went to work.

"Moving to a vantage point, they began picking off al-Qaeda fighters engaging the 101st infantrymen. For more than an hour they fought it out with heavily dug-in al-Qaeda fighters."

The magazine, which interviewed one of the snipers back at his base in Edmonton, said the Canadians attached to the 101st, "received a bit of a culture shock seeing the wealth of gear and support the U.S. Army receives, in contrast to the Canadian Army. They also experienced the U.S. infantryman's unique Hooah attitude and esprit."

It said the Canadian skills were well-known. Canadian snipers had won top honours at the U.S. Army Sniper School's first international sniping competition at Fort Benning, Georgia.

Canadian snipers learn their skills in the Sniper Cell of the Combat Training Centre's Infantry School at CFB Gagetown in New Brunswick, according to the magazine.

Canadian Forces spokesman Captain Paul Doucette said he could not discuss the number of enemy soldiers killed by the snipers or whether the number quoted by Soldier of Fortune was accurate. "We're in no position to release that information for reasons of operational security."

Shortly after Operation Anaconda in March, Vice-Admiral Greg Maddison, the Deputy Chief of Defence Staff, praised the Canadian snipers. "These sniper teams suppressed enemy mortar and heavy machine-gun positions with deadly accuracy. Their skills are credited with likely having saved many Allied lives."

Robert Brown, Soldier of Fortune editor and publisher, said, "The Canadians did a hell of a good job over there and we've got this from a number of sources. We felt we ought to give them, an 'atta boy.'"

Retired Canadian colonel Brian MacDonald said there appeared to be a reluctance in the Canadian Forces to acknowledge the fact that the country's soldiers do kill the enemy from time to time. "The Defence Department doesn't want to embarrass the government with the facts that deaths do take place," he added.

Col. MacDonald said Canadian military officials were equally reluctant in the early to mid-1990s to talk about combat missions in the former Yugoslavia, including fighting at the Medak Pocket in Croatia. During that operation Canadian troops killed or wounded more than 20 Croatian soldiers.

Col. MacDonald said there was no reason to doubt the report, adding, "I don't see any reason why it's not conceivable."

Several months ago a U.S. Army officer recommended five of the soldiers for a Bronze Star.

Then, there is stuff like this:

Canada Designated by al-Qaeda to be Top-5 Target (April 2004) U.S. researchers have issued a frightening warning for Canada. An online Arabic manual for the al-Qaeda terrorist network, called al-Battar Military Camp, now explicitly supports assaults on Canadians. It says Canada is the fifth most important "Christian Terrorist" target, coming after Americans, Britons, Spaniards and Australians. The disturbing guide encourages attacks on businessmen, politicians, scientists, soldiers and tourists. The 'al-Battar' publication first appeared in January 2004 and has produced several issues. It has been described as a How-To manual for islamic terrorists. Bin Laden himself has explicitly threatened Canada on at least two occasions in the past eighteen months. Of the countries that Bin Laden has personally ever singled out, only two have yet to be attacked - Canada, and Jordan. Security experts believe that Bin Laden intends to make good on those threats.

To think that Canada is immune to Al Qaeda attack would be naive I think. We have killed their people. They have stated we are a target. They have shown a willingness to act on threats. Just because we were smart enough to avoid Iraq doesn't negate the other stuff.

[Monique]

It won't happened we are not that important worldwide and the terrorists could not care less about us.

Unless there is an insurgeance of the FLQ there will be no bombs in any cities in Canada.

It is just sentionalism for naive people that will buy more papers. I hate the fact that papers now are so tabloid.

[Pendergast]

Originally Posted by jcadam

If your system of government is anything other than an Islamic theocracy, you can be a target of Islamic terrorism.

"can be" is a large sum of possibilities. Any specific ideas about why Canada, being a "western country" could be targeted?

(...)
Of course, there are other forms of terrorism, such as the Irish variety. Nobody likes a foreign occupation of their homeland, after all.

Good point.

How would you apply this in the context of extremist Islamism and Al Qaeda's actions? How would you connect that to the potential vicitmization of Canada?

[Pendergast]

Originally Posted by James L

To think that Canada is immune to Al Qaeda attack would be naive I think. We have killed their people. They have stated we are a target. They have shown a willingness to act on threats. Just because we were smart enough to avoid Iraq doesn't negate the other stuff.

Good points, I admit.

But would these be enough to justify an attack?

And how would you prevent one, hypothetically speaking?

[gradient]

Originally Posted by Monique

It won't happened we are not that important worldwide and the terrorists could not care less about us.

Unless there is an insurgeance of the FLQ there will be no bombs in any cities in Canada.

It is just sentionalism for naive people that will buy more papers. I hate the fact that papers now are so tabloid.

And to what do you owe your keen insight into the strategies and goals of the world's many terrorist organizations? The 'it could never happen here' attitude is a blind one and certainly doesn't help solve any of the problems that have led and will continue to lead to terrorism in the coming decades.

[James L]

Originally Posted by gradient

And to what do you owe your keen insight into the strategies and goals of the world's many terrorist organizations? The 'it could never happen here' attitude is a blind one and certainly doesn't help solve any of the problems that have led and will continue to lead to terrorism in the coming decades.

No country is immune to terrorism, especially a country that is actively participating in the "WoT' as Dubya so cutely called it.

Canada has been named in the Osama hit list. Canada has had troops involved in direct combat with Osama's people. Canadian troops have killed Al Quaeda "soldiers". Osama has hit almost every other country on his hit list except for Canada, showing that he is fully willing to carry out those threats.

I don't think we need a slide rule to figure out that it is a very real possibility that Canada will be hit. Honestly, in my mind, the only question is when. I wish people who felt otherwise could go talk to people in Bali, Egypt, Spain, England, NYC, etc.

Pendergast asked how we can prevent it. Well, there is the obvious, such as better surveillance, better border security, taking the fight to the terrorists in their world (and not in countries that had nothing to do with the WoT such as Iraq), etc.

Having said that, we will NEVER be able to prevent it from happening completely. There will ALWAYS be the people who fill a u-haul up with fertilizer and park it in front of a building. Hell, I was just in New York again recently, and while I was in a subway station I put my bag down while I was waiting for my train, a few minutes later got up to go to the bathroom, walked away from my bag, and then realized it and ran back to get it. Moral of the story? Even in the city hit the hardest by terrorism, I was able to put a bag down amongst a ton of people and walk away from it.

I personally think the biggest way we fight it is to not become so fearful and paranoid of it that it controls our lives. For some people, it is too late as this is exactly what they have done. Some people on this very forum as a matter of fact.

Sad, really.

There will always be bad people in the world. There will always be terrorists, drunk drivers, child molesters, etc. The only way our type of civilization goes on is to fight the bad people as best as we can within reason and laws, and to not let our fears control our day and our way of life.

Somebody, I think it was Lennin (not the beatle, that was Lennon!) said "the purpose of terrorism is to terrorize".

I will NOT allow my life to be conducted by fear. I know I have a multitude of things I may eventually die from.... terrorism is WAY down the list. And, I say this being a front line responder to a terrorist attack if one occurs in my city.

Terrorists will NEVER kill as many people as cancer does. Depending on which study you read, 1 in 3 people in North America will get cancer. Now, not all cancers are fatal, but look at that number. That is 10's of millions of people.

That is way more of a threat to me than terrorism is.

Cheers,

James

[Nicko]

As a Canadian I think it could happen. But I think the odds are more likely that the terrorists would use Canada as a base to attack the US (Remember the Millennium Bombers who were caught at the border...).

[RIRedinPA]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

Only in the countries that threaten to become Western.

You mean like Saudi Arabia?

[Spliffdaddy]

Originally Posted by RIRedinPA

You mean like Saudi Arabia?

Have you missed the news of al quaeda car bombs killing people in Saudi Arabia?

While not a Western nation - the terrorists don't exclude *any* country from their dumbass mission.

[James L]

Originally Posted by Nicko

As a Canadian I think it could happen. But I think the odds are more likely that the terrorists would use Canada as a base to attack the US (Remember the Millennium Bombers who were caught at the border...).

It possible, but remember that not one of the sept 11th terrorists entered the US through Canada (that is a common myth)... they all entered the US legally... most of them from Saudi Arabia if I recall, and many of them resided in the US for months, lived in apartments, obtained US drivers licenses, etc.

Honestly, except for the fact that the US is a larger target than we are, it would probably be easier for the terrorists to cross one border into Canada and attack a Canadian target, than to cross two borders to get into the US.

[Monique]

What will the Canadian targets?

[Dark Helmet]

Does Montreal count as part of canada?

[freudling]

Why do some think Canada is immune to this? It could go either way. We are not exempt from any of this. We are a Western Democracy that now, fully supports the US in Afghanastan. If this angers Canadians, then speak to your Government.

As much as we might not want to be like the US, we are. Are Coporate rubric is based on the same model and operates, more or less, upon the same principles. Part of me knows that our business practices are wrong in some cases, but to stay on top people have to be opressed (i.e. sweat shop labour). Going against these practices will bring down our economy. No easy answers.

[James L]

Originally Posted by Monique

What will the Canadian targets?

You are kidding, right? Every single one of the locations that the terrorists have attacked in other countries can be found in Canada. Major points of transportation, major business centers, major areas where people come together to socialize, etc.

Not to mention our airports, seaports, the second largest ferry fleet in the world, etc,

Canada has just as many targets as Spain did, as Britain did, as Bali did, as the US did, etc.

I am all for legitimate war on terrorism. Canada participates in that war. Osama tends to retaliate against people who participate in that war.

I don't know why this is such a hard concept to grasp.

As we debate this now, Canadian soldiers are patrolling areas in Afghanistan against many groups, including the Al Quaeda. To think that we are passive is to be incorrect.

[Monique]

It doesn't mean that because Canada finally gets involved in one conflict that suddenly you will see bombs go off everywhere.

There will be no bombs only in your imagination.

If you have proof send it to the government; warn them; do not loose one minute.

[James L]

Originally Posted by Monique

It doesn't mean that because Canada finally gets involved in one conflict that suddenly you will see bombs go off everywhere.

There will be no bombs only in your imagination.

If you have proof send it to the government; warn them; do not loose one minute.

Ok, let's turn it back on you Monique, and see if you can be constructive and provide input instead of just nay saying.

Tell me the difference between Canada, and the other nations the Al Quaeda have already attacked. Tell me why we should believe Osama is lying about an eventual attack on Canada, when he has fulfilled his promise to attack the other nations he has threatened.

You are very good at complaining and shooting things down, but let us now see your justifications for your thoughts.

[Monique]

The other nations are a lot more involved and there are a lot more at stake with them. For example, Saudi Arabia has little things call oil wells.

Spain is a lot more involved everywhere in the Middle East than the few hundred of soldiers we have provided in Afghanistan walking about the countryside.

Where did you hear that Osama thing; did he call you??

Canadian soldiers are patrolling so what; they have not done anything really did they??

[James L]

Originally Posted by Monique

The other nations are a lot more involved and there are a lot more at stake with them. For example, Saudi Arabia has little things call oil wells.

Spain is a lot more involved everywhere in the Middle East than the few hundred of soldiers we have provided in Afghanistan walking about the countryside.

Where did you hear that Osama thing; did he call you??

Canadian soldiers are patrolling so what; they have not done anything really did they??

Wow.... just... wow.

Canadian soldiers are patrolling now.... yes.

Monique, we have had Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan since the war started. We have had our military operating in the region since October 2001... Yes, since a month after 9/11 and for the last 4 years. The Princess Pat's Light Infantry Battle Group fought integrated into a US Army Task Force in combative, offensive campaigns directly against the Taliban and Al Quaeda.

As a matter of fact, the US military gave medals to our snipers for doing such a good job in combat with them.

At its height, our military component in Afghanistan included almost 2,000 troops, an airlift wing, and 6 naval frigates.

I think Spain currently has less than that in region (approximately 1,400 iirc), and Australia even less than that.

As to Osama's threats:

http://ottsun.canoe.ca/News/ChronicP...9/1209724.html

http://www.cdi.org/terrorism/binladen.cfm

You can search for more if you like... it is Friday night and I didn't feel like doing your homework for you.

I asked you for justification, and you came back with conjecture.

If you are only stating your opinion... fine. The facts go against what you say, however.