It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

TA-THREATS: Canada Threatened with Bombing by Al-Qaida

page: 1
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 16 2004 @ 10:54 AM
link   
Has Al-Qaida announcing Canada as a legitimate target set up that country as the next "Spain" in its Jihad against the west? Canada has been a somewhat lackluster supporter in the war on terror with its public opinion much like that of Spain's; additionally, its lax immigration law has allowed many Middle Easterners with questionable backgrounds to reside in Canada.
 

Canada.com

"It is very simple," he said. "As Bush says, either you are a friend or you are an enemy. So if you are not my friend, you are our enemy. So it is very simple. When you are supporting the enemy [the United States] then you are a target."

If a large attack along the lines of the Madrid bombings occured in a major Canadian city, the outcry could result in another partner in the war on terror withdrawing its support of the U.S.


[Edited on 16-5-2004 by Banshee]

[Edited on 5-30-2004 by Valhall]




posted on May, 16 2004 @ 11:07 AM
link   
hahahahahaha


yes lets see what pacifism does for those who didnt want to get involved. sometimes you're not given a choice.

i think it was dumb the way bush gave his "you're for us or against us" speech but at least he wasnt going to perform terrorist acts on those in the "not" column.

i really hope this isnt true about canada. WTF have they done to anyone? nothing! but canada is a neighbor of america and they probably see canada in a whole different way than i do. as a nonmuslim country run by "infidels"...

but like i said...i hope i'm wrong and this doesnt happen.

if it does i'm really courious how the international community will act. will those who opposed this "war on terrorism" (i simply detest this phrase!) have a change of heart? what will happen? will canada "get its mean on" and go after some terrorists? will the UN grow a pair and take some initiative and act proactively for a change or will they just sit in meetings and talk while another country gets attacked.

this didnt bush AFTER bush terrorism has been going on befure bush, during clinton's tenture, while reagan was in charge, while carter was in charge...it certainly appears to me these terrorists are being less picky who they go after...in other words...anyone who isnt muslim or is part of "western society".

lets hope i'm wrong and this is just a falsehood we're talking about here.



posted on May, 16 2004 @ 11:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phoenix
If a large attack along the lines of the Madrid bombings occured in a major Canadian city the outcry could result in another partner in the war on terror withdrawing its support of the U.S.


Eeerr, Maybe I missed something here. Can someone point out for me what Canada's support for the war has been.



posted on May, 16 2004 @ 11:21 AM
link   
Like I said in a previous post ...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

"National Post is an ultra right wing "big money" publication that I do not put much stock in.

I think if any terrorists have a chance to hit somewhere on this side of the pond they will aim for the big prize not for the poor cousin.

Don't forget the world's longest undefended border is easily crossed by land or water (St-Lawrence River - Great Lakes). I know this for a fact.
"



posted on May, 16 2004 @ 11:24 AM
link   

yes lets see what pacifism does for those who didnt want to get involved


That's not true ThePrankMonkey. It wasn't that we didn't want to get involved. We supported you in Desert Storm, in Saudi, and we even landed all your planes here on that fateful day. The thing is that we didn't feel there was enough proof of the WMD to attack Iraq .. in the end we were right. And lets not even get into what has been happening over there lately. I'm glad we're not a part of that disgusting crap!

Re: Canada getting attacked. In some ways, I think it would be good. Of course I don't want us to get attacked but I think it would force us to look at some of our issues.
You can't really say that we haven't done anything to anyone. Sri Lanka has suggested that the fact that we don't take a stand against terrorism allows people to raise funds for it here ...

www.lankaweb.com...

Sometimes when you sit on the fence, you get a piece of wood up the butt.



posted on May, 16 2004 @ 12:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gools
I think if any terrorists have a chance to hit somewhere on this side of the pond they will aim for the big prize not for the poor cousin.


This may or may not be true. I do believe that the terrorists are seeking to cause a severing of ties between the US and its traditional allies. It may all be warped logic on their part, but then again, that's never stopped a terrorist from acting like an idiot.



posted on May, 16 2004 @ 01:20 PM
link   


It wasn't that we didn't want to get involved. We supported you in Desert Storm, in Saudi, and we even landed all your planes here on that fateful day. The thing is that we didn't feel there was enough proof of the WMD to attack Iraq .. in the end we were right. And lets not even get into what has been happening over there lately. I'm glad we're not a part of that disgusting crap!


I agree wholeheartedly
best decision Cretien ever made as PM. An election is coming up so if anything is gonna happen its gonna be before or during the election ala Spain. I don't think it will affect the results as much as it did in Spain but it could be a wake up call for many Canadians. My opinion is Canada should be and always remain the neutral bystandard and when the killing stops step in as a neutral mediator.



posted on May, 16 2004 @ 01:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by sardion2000


My opinion is Canada should be and always remain the neutral bystandard and when the killing stops step in as a neutral mediator.


By your own statement you indicate that Canada is insignificant on the world stage. Quite frankly, much like France - a wannbe world player. While I don't agree with the war, reading a statement like yours is exactly why the world finds itself with the problems its seeing now. You can't just stick your head in the sand and then expect to look like the hero "when the shooting stop".




posted on May, 16 2004 @ 01:50 PM
link   
*snicker* Canada? A hero? That's one I've never heard before. Canada maintains its status of "Hey, we haven't had a major civil war, terrorist act or other really bad thing caused by human idiocy except maybe GST, but that's more of a pain in the ass thing anyways" by not rushing in.

Frankly, I don't care much for the Post, or for this sitting on the fence nonsense. The way I see it, it wasn't Canada who messed the Middle East up so bad. We didn't have a colonial empire, nor did we decide to liberate folks who didn't want the liberation.

This isn't our fight, to be frank. Sometimes when I look at the board, it seems like I am the singular possesor of some semblance of empathy. Try looking at it from both sides. Hey, if Saudi Arabia was occupying the US, bombing population centers and cathedrals, I think neither Canada nor mexico would be particularly happy. Fighting causes more fighting, and we're not having any part of this.

As for the argument that Canada is a breeding ground and staging area for terrorists, let's see if you can follow my logic.

A) The IRA, KKK, FARC and various Aztlan guerrila groups are all terrorist groups, correct?

B) All three have free access to America, correct?

C) Pardon me if I'm wrong, but I do believe that one is based here, and the others draw their cashflow and weapons from America since , you know, narcotrafficantes are usually too lazy to smuggle any farther north than the US, and if you're dirt-poor you usually can't afford a big, nice old sack of blow.

D) Then why are Americans supporting them and yet only picking on the Middle Eastern folk?

That's my logic.

DE



posted on May, 16 2004 @ 02:04 PM
link   
I just dont want Canada to get too involved in a war that cannot be won with bullets and bombs like you americans are so fond of. REALITY CHECK. This planet is dying because we are pulluting it with Oil (which IMHO is what this war is all about NEway). The best way to win this war is by understanding the root cause and removing it. IMO The root cause is the Oil Industry and the Military-Industrial complex. I dont have anything to back up my opinions and speculations but all I'm saying every solution doesn't have to come from the end of an M16 or F16.




You can't just stick your head in the sand and then expect to look like the hero "when the shooting stop".


We aren't sticking our head in the sand for wanting a peacful solution. I am just preaching patients because people get tired of bloodshed eventually(even though its usually only to rearm
) And anyway we don't want to be heroes we just want to survive the next 100 years and taking the fight to them just gives them more reason to come after the west. By the way I have lived in the Mid-East and I know just how screwed up thier society is but I also know they will never accept our solutions to their problems(which are also our problem now thanks to western interferance throughout history). BTW Please don't flame cuz of my opinions on this matter because you will be flaming the Majority of Canadians(and the Majority of the WORLD) who want to stay out of it. DuesEx thx for the comments I totally agree with you


EDIT Removed excessive Quoting due to request

[Edited on 16-5-2004 by sardion2000]



posted on May, 16 2004 @ 02:09 PM
link   
We haven't been idle on "the War on Terrorism." We sent troops to Afganistan, lost soldiers there, it's that the gov. didn't think that Iraq was a target. I agree that they were right on both counts.

BTW, I think that it would be a bad tctical move to attack us. The countries of the world would rethink their position on this and think that any country could be attacked. Then the terrorist would have a multitude of enemies.

[Edited on 16-5-2004 by intrepid]



posted on May, 16 2004 @ 02:13 PM
link   
DeusEx .. excellent post, excellent points.

I agree wholeheartedly


I'm proud to be Canadian, especially now. And I'm relieved that I can travel abroad with a Canadian passport instead of an American one.



posted on May, 16 2004 @ 02:21 PM
link   
I think the whole issue of war in Iraq could have been avoided. The ones most responsible are in fact those who wanted to avoid war the most. As long as Saddam received the continuing support of France, Germany, Russia and Canada through their opposition to US actions and UN resolutions. Saddam took that support as tacit approval not to fully comply with inspections. He gambled, he rolled the dice and he lost. Had there been broader and more firm resolve to comply with the UN resolutions in place at the time, I don't think Saddam would have let it go to war.

Most of Europe had its head stuck in the sand while Hitler rose to power. The only way a dictator can be stopped is through firm, coordinated action. Done early enough, it doesn't have to include military action.



posted on May, 16 2004 @ 02:22 PM
link   
DuesEx and sardion I can understand the desire to be neutral but in reading the article originally posted it would seem to be to late for that and just wishful thinking at this time.

Excerpt,
According to a translation of an article written by Abu Ayman al-Hilali, a senior al-Qaeda leader and ideologist, the United States, Britain, France, Italy, Canada, Germany, and Australia are "enemies" and attacks against their civilians are justified. Since Western governments are engaged in a war against Islam, he argued, the civilian voters who elect those governments cannot be considered non-combatants and are legitimate targets for terrorists.

In an interview in Islamabad yesterday, Mr. Khawaja, who fought with bin Laden in Afghanistan and openly admits he supports jihad activities, provided a rare explanation of why terrorists wish to bring violence to Canada.

Suicide bombers are simply fighting back against the Western assault on their faith and Canadians should just learn to "take it," he said.

I would be very interested in our forum members living in Canada, commenting on what if any effect a large attack would have on your elections and policy.



posted on May, 16 2004 @ 02:24 PM
link   
I like being a canadian, but I just don't think that a plot of land is something that makes the man. I prefer to think of it in terms of an ideology. And as Sardion said, this is a clash of ideologies being fought with bullets and bombs. Too much fighting, not enough thinking.

Too much ignorance causing too much death.

As for Intrepid's comments, that is true as well. However, we aren't fighting anyone, more like keeping the peace. Canadians in Afghanistan clear mines and keep bandits from killing people.

I'm proud to be Canadian, namely because we don't have a big, fat target on our asses.

DE



posted on May, 16 2004 @ 02:27 PM
link   
Pre-election bombing or such, would result in the opposite to what happened in Spain. Whoever screamed the loudest to send troops would win the election, then our troops would go.



posted on May, 16 2004 @ 02:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phoenix
I would be very interested in our forum members living in Canada, commenting on what if any effect a large attack would have on your elections and policy.


I don't live that far from Toronto, which is probably one fo the bigger targets. I figure that our economy would take a massive hit, and the public outrage would be as immense as the American's at 9/11. Mindless rage would be channelled into horrible acts. Canadians are still humans, too.

DE



posted on May, 16 2004 @ 02:52 PM
link   
DE I would be interested in your comments re: whether an attack would change anything come election time. As we all know, an election is coming any day now. I personally don't like Paul Martin at all but I'm quite sure he'd be the first to go to war if an attack happened.

I live in Vancouver which is home of the upcoming 2010 Winter Olympics and has North America's 2nd largest port, second only to NY. I don't know if that puts us in more danger than TO but I find it interesting that TO was not one of the cities who got smart bomb equipment while Montreal, Halifax and Vancouver were.

Here is an interesting report as well for anyone interested ... www.iseas.edu.sg...



posted on May, 16 2004 @ 02:54 PM
link   
So you guys would gauge the reaction to be similar to ours after 9/11, that match's my take on it - I think Al-Qaida could easily misinterpret the results they got in Spain as transferable to the north american continent, big mistake on their part if they do.



posted on May, 16 2004 @ 03:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by MessedUpAnnie
DE I would be interested in your comments re: whether an attack would change anything come election time. As we all know, an election is coming any day now. I personally don't like Paul Martin at all but I'm quite sure he'd be the first to go to war if an attack happened.



See above. However, I think an attack could keep the Liberals in power. My family is French Canadian, who voted to keep Quebec in Canda. We're traditional Liberal voters. But now, with Paul martin as PM, I question that. Don't trust him. Too deep in this sponsorship stuff.

DE



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join