Believe it: Canada is in al-Qaida gunsights

Believe it: Canada is in al-Qaida gunsights

RORY LEISHMAN, London Free Press
December 7, 2004

In an address welcoming President George Bush to Halifax last week, Prime Minister Paul Martin said: “The terrible events of September 11th have redefined many realities in the world and on our own continent. We are in a war against terrorism and we are in it together: Americans and Canadians.”

Some Canadians would challenge that statement. They suppose that Canada is safe from terrorist attack, because Al-Qaeda is targeting only members of the United States-led coalition that have taken part in the liberation of Iraq.

Martin, however, is undoubtedly right. In a report released last month, the Integrated National Security Assessment Centre – the body responsible for collating the information gathered by Canada’s various intelligence agencies – noted that Al-Qaeda has ranked Canada as “the fifth most important Christian country to be targeted, following the United States, the United Kingdom, Spain and Australia."

Al Qaeda especially hates Canada for having dispatched a few hundred crack troops to help free Afghanistan from the Taliban. While most Canadians honour our troops in Afghanistan as brave liberators, Muslim fascists throughout the world denounce them as foreign occupiers.

In a bid to appease Al Qaeda, the socialist government of Spain hastily pulled Spanish troops out of Iraq following the terrorist massacre at the Madrid railway station last March. Some Canadians think the Martin government should do the same: Unilaterally withdraw all Canadian troops from Afghanistan and all other participation in the overseas dimensions of the war against Muslim terror.

Bush noted in his Halifax address that isolationists in the United States advocated much the same approach at the beginning of the Second World War. They insisted that by keeping out of the conflict overseas, the United States could best avoid attack by the Nazi and fascist powers.

In contrast, Canada, under the leadership of Mackenzie King, promptly entered the war in September, 1939, and dispatched troops overseas to take the fight to the Nazis.

Bush recalled that this brave decision was not universally popular in Canada. King warned his critics: “We cannot defend our country and save our homes and families by waiting for the enemy to attack us. To remain on the defensive is the surest way to bring the war to Canada.”

“Mackenzie King was correct then,” said Bush, “and we must always remember the wisdom of his words today.”

Martin, for his part, observed that military dominance will not suffice to make the world safe from terrorism. “We believe that security can only be ensured through freedom of choice, education, individual endeavour and equality of opportunity,” he said. “That has been the philosophy behind our actions – in Bosnia, in Afghanistan, in Haiti; and, we hope soon, in elections in the Middle East and Iraq.”

Isn’t that wonderful: Martin said he supports elections in Iraq. When will he apologize for having opposed the war of liberation that has made these elections possible?

While Martin grandly affirms: “We are in a war against terrorism and we are in it together: Americans and Canadians,” he knows full well that thanks to years of neglect by a succession of Liberal and Conservative governments, the Canadian armed forces are now so pitifully small and ill-equipped that they cannot effectively defend Canada from terrorists at home, let alone fulfil Canada’s responsibilities in helping to fight the enemy overseas.

Altogether, Canada now has a grand total of just 1,400 troops deployed overseas, including 700 in Afghanistan. The United States has close to 258,000 military personnel on active duty in foreign countries, including about 18,000 in Afghanistan and more than 210,000 in and around Iraq.

Under these circumstances, one can only admire Bush’s magnanimity in praising Canada’s contributions to the war on terror. “Canada's leadership is helping to build a better world,” he told his Halifax audience. “Canadian troops are serving bravely in Afghanistan at this hour. Other Canadians stand on guard for peace in the Middle East, in Cyprus, Sudan, and the Congo.”

True enough, but Bush was too polite to state the obvious: Canada, having made heroic contributions to the defence of freedom in two earlier world wars, should be contributing a lot more now to the world war on Muslim terrorism.

It may interest some that, prior to an editor inserting the headline above, Rory initially summitted his article under the pro President Bush working title "Magnanimous praise for Canada".

Personally, I believe Canada is considerably lower than 5th on al-Qaida's hit list.
Given the Martin government's tepid - at best - support for the War On Terror and its plainly lax security and immigration policies, it seemingly goes against the basic nature of even terrorist dogs to crap in a locale where they're permitted to sleep.

or they are taking OBL at his video word that he will not attack blue states or neutral liberal countries. Very
foolish!

While Martin grandly affirms: “We are in a war against terrorism and we are in it together: Americans and Canadians,” he knows full well that thanks to years of neglect by a succession of Liberal and Conservative governments, the Canadian armed forces are now so pitifully small and ill-equipped that they cannot effectively defend Canada from terrorists at home, let alone fulfil Canada’s responsibilities in helping to fight the enemy overseas.

Yup. Here we go again. Protecting the rest of the world; including our Northern "neighbors."

I respectfully disagree. I understand your viewpoint, but I think that al-Qaida is out to destroy Western civilization. And Canada is a part of the West. To al-Qaida, there are no neutral countries. Only Islamic countries and the infidels.

The reasons that you state make Canada a easy target. Also, the next best thing to attacking America is to attack a country on the USA's border. If al-Qaida members were rational, they wouldn't attack Canada for the reasons that you state. However al-Qaida is a bunch of fanatics who are only looking to kill and destroy. So I think Canada is at risk.

That could be true. However, ALL of North America could be a staging area for them, regardless of where they come in ... even the US.

I think that I would describe Canada as a staging area for Al-Quida!
====

You have that right.

Vancouver, B.C., al-Qanada is an AQ & Hamas stronghold.

muslim terrorists call the shots there.

The Qanadian government supports muslim terrorism against the U.S.

Why would Islamic Terrorists attack Canada? That would be stupid given that all they have to do is move in and play the political correctness game? Given that Ontario is considering allowing Islamic law to be practiced in that province why attack when Canadians are willing to hand over the keys?

The Qanadian government supports muslim terrorism against the U.S.

We Canadian Conservatives may not like the libs up here much, but that is quite the leap. How do you feel about FBI employees celebrating the attacks on 9/11?

I don't know if Canada would be a priority for al Qaeda, ceteris paribus. But the real al Qaeda of today finds its reach shortened and its teeth blunted by a vigorous and ongoing campaign to engage its elements in the Middle East. As such it must strike where it can, if at all.

The question is whether the assets it has in place in Canada (1) are sufficient to the task, and (2) have a target in mind that will benefit al Qaeda more than cost it. But as time goes on it becomes more and more important to al Qaeda to assert itself somewhere or lose the terror it has tried so hard to make its name evoke. That means that it may just take whatever it feels it can. That is something to worry about whether you're Canadian or American.

It really doesn't make political sense for al-Qaida to attack Canada. It makes more sense for them to play on the anti-American, anti-Iraq war sentiments and nurture the divisions between the France/Germany/Canada/UN bloc and the and US/UK/AU/Italy/Poland alliance.

That's not to say that some overzealous Imam might do something irrational in Canada. But that would be couterprodutive and probably trigger a Dutch-like wake up call to the Canadians who think they're immunized against Islamofacists (and missiles too, because they're so darned 'nice'. ). Al-Qaida has it's hands full right now, it wouldn't make sense to add to turn Canadian government opinion against them.

It would be funny were it not true. Canada has a pretty insane refugee policy (as in 'no ID required'), and its hypersensitivity to multculturalism essentially makes it a safe haven for Islamofacsists. An attack on Canada would only result in (potential) clampdowns that would hinder their cause more than hurt it.

Sharia Law in Ontario:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1240302/posts

Al Jezeera in Canada (fortunately, Fox has since been uncensored for a small ray of hope):
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1190006/posts

I'll admit we're living a glass house when we come down on Canada. We in the US have similar blinders on with our illegal immigration incompetence, ACLU, and Micheal Moore kool-aid drinkers. But nonetheless, two wrongs do not make a right.

An attack on Canada would only result in (potential) clampdowns that would hinder their cause more than hurt it ...

... two wrongs do not make a right.

I agree ... and thank you. Canada is far from perfect by any measure of the imagination. However, we are also not the root of all evil, just as the US is not. A lot of work needs to be done here, starting with the ouster of the lib government.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.