Canada (terrorism speculation)

[Djinn Raffo]

Originally posted by Djinn Raffo: Now... are those of you who believe that some of the 9/11 terrorists came through Canada going to stop believing in and spreading urban myths and lies? Yes or no answer only please.

No replies yet? Should I take that as a yes? Morgeruat?

[Morgeruat]

haven't had time to read through it, so no comment until I do.

[Timber Loftis]

Originally posted by Djinn Raffo: Now... are those of you who believe that some of the 9/11 terrorists came through Canada going to stop believing in and spreading urban myths and lies? Yes or no answer only please.

I refuse the premise of your question. [img]graemlins/heee.gif[/img]

I'll answer yes or no once John Roberts does, is that fair? [img]graemlins/heee.gif[/img]

Can we move on to the 9/11 terrorists that came through New York and trained in Florida? Can we discuss letters to the FBI informing them of Arabian-type dudes in flight school who wanted to know how to fly but not land? Can we discuss the FBI being directed not to investigate? Can we discuss a theory know as Ignore, Agitate, Escalate? These are the things I'd like to discuss.

Obligatory rolleyes --->

[Djinn Raffo]

We can move on when posters like Morgeruat stop basing their opinions on BS. He has drawn a conclusion (that Canada has poor security) and then used an urban myth and a lie to back up his conclusion. Standard operating procedure for the GOP?

Originally posted by Morgeruat: Assuming both countries take the same precautions against unfriendlies landing and moving about, yes you are correct, but since several of the 9/11 hijackers came through Canada, and as the article touched upon, unfriendlies leave through Canada frequently, we can't base our security on the hope that a country that has shown it doesn't take our national security seriously will get with the program, and they likely won't until such time as they have their own version of 9/11, 3/11, the london bombings, etc etc.

Canada may have poor security standards, but using lies to back that up doesn't fly.

[Timber Loftis]

Hey, when I lived in Vermont, there was a steady stream of Muslim Extremists coming in through St. Albans. They wore terrorist placards so we could identify them more easily.

[Morgeruat]

Originally posted by Djinn Raffo: We can move on when posters like Morgeruat stop basing their opinions on BS. He has drawn a conclusion (that Canada has poor security) and then used an urban myth and a lie to back up his conclusion. Standard operating procedure for the GOP? quote: Originally posted by Morgeruat: Assuming both countries take the same precautions against unfriendlies landing and moving about, yes you are correct, but since several of the 9/11 hijackers came through Canada, and as the article touched upon, unfriendlies leave through Canada frequently, we can't base our security on the hope that a country that has shown it doesn't take our national security seriously will get with the program, and they likely won't until such time as they have their own version of 9/11, 3/11, the london bombings, etc etc.

Canada may have poor security standards, but using lies to back that up doesn't fly. [/QUOTE]Happy? asuming the article is accurate (and I haven't yet gone and verified to see if the article or similar ones to it were printed in other publications I retract my statement, the rest of my post however is accurate, at least factually, the opinion of course is completely subjective.

[Larry_OHF]

This is the Current Events Forum, and it has a history of having a more combative nature than in the General Discussions Forum.

None of you need/desire me to get preachy, so just keep in mind some things.

• Peoples' opinions are allowed to be shared.
• If a person shares an unpopular opinion on an international forum, expect some negative feedback if that opinion seems insulting.
• If the original opinion or the feedback is too hostile, the thread will have to be moderated more closely or the conversation will have to forcefully end.

I think moderators in the past have asked that no opinion nor reaction to that opinion be taken personally if no personal attack were ever intended, and I am seeing both sides of this argument becoming increasingly hostile to one another. So...cool it!

You are mature enough to handle this if you want to. The question will be who is the bigger man to let any offences slide.

Crap...you guys made me get preachy. I knew I could not resist it...


~Larry goes back to doing his homework report.

[Timber Loftis]

Well, I'd rather have terrorists coming through Canada than French Canadians. [img]graemlins/heee.gif[/img]

[Djinn Raffo]

Originally posted by Morgeruat: Happy? asuming the article is accurate (and I haven't yet gone and verified to see if the article or similar ones to it were printed in other publications I retract my statement, the rest of my post however is accurate, at least factually, the opinion of course is completely subjective. [/QB]

Marginally happy, sure. When you do make it around (if you ever do) to checking out and verifying the article or if similar ones were printed in other publications be sure to record that FACT (not to be confused with lies) with a post in this thread.

[img]graemlins/readingbook.gif[/img]

[Morgeruat]

*chuckles at Djinn*

The only place I've been able to find it mentioned other than that article was a Canadian travel agency website, but I'll concede the point because I have better things to do than spend more than an hour and a half verifying your information.

[ 10-12-2005, 04:10 PM: Message edited by: Morgeruat ]