Canada admits: "We're terror haven"

[jimnyc]

The world's "most notorious" terrorist groups continue to operate in Canada, says a classified intelligence report written two years after Parliament gave police new powers and money to dismantle the country's deadly terror networks, reports the National Post.

In a 22-page assessment of the security threats facing the nation, the Canadian Security Intelligence Service said international terrorists are still using the country as a base for waging worldwide political and religious violence.

"Terrorism of foreign origin continues to be a major concern in regard to the safety of Canadians at home and abroad," says the Oct. 10, 2003, report, titled 'Threats to Canada's National Security.' "Canada is viewed by some terrorist groups as a place to try to seek refuge, raise funds, procure materials and/or conduct other support activities. ... Virtually all of the most notorious international terrorist organizations are known to maintain a network presence in Canada."

The threat from terrorist groups using Canada as a staging ground was first reported in Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin last September.

The document obtained by the National Post is classified "Secret: Canadian Eyes Only," but the paper got a copy under the Access to Information Act.

The CSIS report confirms a recent U.S. Library of Congress study that said Canada's welfare system, immigration laws, infrequent prosecutions and light sentences had turned the country into "a favored destination for terrorists."

Dozens of those who trained at Osama bin Laden's camps were citizens or residents of Canada. Unlike the United States, which has prosecuted American al-Qaida trainees, Canada has not brought criminal charges against those who attended bin Laden's terrorism schools.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=37376

 

[Said1]

"The document obtained by the National Post is classified Secret:Canadian Eyes Only," but the paper got a copy under the Access to Information Act."

Hahahaha, which would mean it has since been DECLASSIFIED HAHAHAHA, otherwise it would not be available through the Access to Information Act.

Although I don't doubt much of this information, it's old, and there have been many things done to change the situation - remember Maher Arar??? The National Post is a paper which sensationalizes everything. I'm sure I can find the same article in another paper which is not so one sided and absent of facts. Can't you find a better paper to post from?

 

[jimnyc]

By all means, post something else if you desire. I didn't have anything at all to do with the writing or quoting from the National Post, those words are 100% from the article I linked to.

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by Said1
"The document obtained by the National Post is classified Secret:Canadian Eyes Only," but the paper got a copy under the Access to Information Act."

Hahahaha, which would mean it has since been DECLASSIFIED HAHAHAHA, otherwise it would not be available through the Access to Information Act.

Not necessarily. The act has a section specifically about access to government records and it doesn't make a distinction between classified and regular documents. Anyway, I don't think they were saying the document was "classified" in the manner you're thinking. They just said it was called "Secret:Canadian eyes only".

 

[Said1]

Originally posted by jimnyc
Not necessarily. The act has a section specifically about access to government records and it doesn't make a distinction between classified and regular documents. Anyway, I don't think they were saying the document was "classified" in the manner you're thinking. They just said it was called "Secret:Canadian eyes only".

I know how they were using the word "classified" since I have worked with documents that were classifed as: secret, super top secrect, Canadian eyes only or all three - meaning the word "classfied" was not stamped in red on the documents, but the level of security was. Then there were other documents that did have "declassified" stamped on them, as well as the above mentioned. Anyway,your missing the point - they did not clarifiy if the document had been "released", or if was just available through that act, to anyone who requests the information. Anyway, I don't want to argue about that. My point is, the information was not new, (the media road that horse a long time ago), it was very one sided, and the Post is a crappy paper :

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by Said1
My point is, the information was not new, (the media road that horse a long time ago), it was very one sided, and the Post is a crappy paper :

I know nothing about the Canadian media. That's why I figured I would throw this out there to see what others thoughts were.

Do you have alternative links you can provide? I'd like to see the other side, and maybe what has been done since to lessen the problem.

 

[Said1]

I'm not refuting the information, not by a long shot, although I do feel it's the paper's responsibility to write about things that have been done in response to the situation. Here is a link to some of the biggest papers in Canada www.world-newspapers.com/canada.html. I like the Montreal Gazette, Globe and Mail, I get the Citizen. You may find the Prairie provinces to be a little more conservitive, but, if your in the mood for liberal spin, I would highly recommend anything out of Ontario or Vancouver - remember, it's election time around here. The Alberta papers are fairly good too, and don't forget Frank Magazine - always good for a laugh

 

[Isaac Brock]

If you're looking for a credible source I was suggest the Globe and Mail. It's a bit dry, but has some of the world's greatest journalism. For a more down to earth, I find my paper, the Winnipeg Free Press to usually have a very accurate, low biased view on Canadian events.

As for the assessment itself, I truly am not surprised. What do you expect what you have the longest, most open border in the entire world. This is on top of the fact that CSIS is inept not because they are qualified as an organization, but because there budget it a mere pittance of the US counterparts.

 

[Said1]

Originally posted by Isaac Brock
If you're looking for a credible source I was suggest the Globe and Mail. It's a bit dry, but has some of the world's greatest journalism. For a more down to earth, I find my paper, the Winnipeg Free Press to usually have a very accurate, low biased view on Canadian events.

As for the assessment itself, I truly am not surprised. What do you expect what you have the longest, most open border in the entire world. This is on top of the fact that CSIS is inept not because they are qualified as an organization, but because there budget it a mere pittance of the US counterparts.

I agree, like I said, I didn't have a problem with the info itself, just the sensational presentation - however dated.