More, More Politics (Ot But Relevant)

[Guest]

Regarding Screening, I found the following article to be of interest, read it and draw your own conclusions.

Washington (CNN)Top U.S. national security officials said Thursday there are gaps in data available to screen Syrian refugees seeking to come to the U.S.

The chiefs of the FBI, Department of Homeland Security and the National Counterterrorism Center were testifying before the Senate Homeland Security Committee about the challenges of thwarting the number of young people trying to travel overseas to join ISIS. They said the U.S. has vastly improved its screening procedures after failures in the vetting of Iraqi refugees in recent years.

But NCTC Director Nicholas Rasmussen noted the war in Syria poses intelligence challenges that make vetting potential refugees harder.

"The intelligence picture we've had of this conflict zone isn't what we'd like it to be ... you can only review against what you have," Rasmussen said.

Unlike with Syria, U.S. authorities had access to significantly more information on Iraqi refugees because the U.S. was occupying that country at the time and could use Iraqi government data, as well as information from the U.S. military.

Read More

Failures occurred because not enough was done to check that data, U.S. officials said. In 2013, two Iraqi refugees were sentenced to decades-long sentences for terrorism charges. The FBI found their fingerprints on improvised explosives that had been used against U.S. soldiers in Iraq -- information that wasn't found before the men were admitted into the U.S.

The case was among several that forced the FBI to conduct new screening of refugees already in the U.S.

In light of the Iraqi experience, the prospect of admitting Syrian refugees has raised concerns among U.S. counterterrorism officials.

"There is risk associated with bringing anybody in from the outside, but especially from a conflict zone like that," FBI Director James Comey said. "My concern there is that there are certain gaps I don't want to talk about publicly in the data available to us."

RELATED: U.S. to take at least 10,000 more Syrian refugees

Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson said he was confident in the improved vetting procedures.

"It's better than it used to be and the good news is UNHCR (United Nations High Commission for Refugees) has already identified a number of suitable refugees for resettlement," Johnson said.

Comey reiterated concerns about encrypted communications, which allow ISIS recruits to disappear once they've been connected to recruiters via Twitter and other social media sites.

He also noted that the FBI has noted recruits getting younger, and more girls and women being lured by ISIS.

Sen. Ron Johnson, the committee's chairman, asked Comey how many people following ISIS social media accounts were being tracked by the FBI.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/08/politics/syrian-refugee-crisis-intelligence-gap/

[inchman]

And how exactly is this done.

. There must be at least one. Is there?

Not sure...and I hope they don't advertise it. But the same people processing these refugees are the same ones who would process Harper's.

Air India.

Doesn't take immigrants for terrorism.

FLQ.

[DEFCON]

tailwheel

You present as an intelligent thoughtful writer, but don't seem to appreciate the fact that your perspective on issues isn't the only one out there, nor is it necessarily always the correct one.

It's obvious that you'd like to participate, but quickly run into some difficulty when playing with others. Maybe it's only my perspective, but when you're clearly in the wrong, you will double down seemingly to prove you can turn a pigs ear into a silk purse regardless. I might be wrong, but I think that behaviour really pisses people off. A little humility may go a long way towards increasing your longevity as a member of this site?

[Guest]

tailwheel

You present as an intelligent thoughtful writer, but don't seem to appreciate the fact that your perspective on issues isn't the only one out there, nor is it necessarily always the correct one.

It's obvious that you'd like to participate, but quickly run into some difficulty when playing with others. Maybe it's only my perspective, but when you're clearly in the wrong, you will double down seemingly to prove you can turn a pigs ear into a silk purse regardless. I might be wrong, but I think that behaviour really pisses people off. A little humility may go a long way towards increasing your longevity as a member of this site?

I enjoy your comments / information but I echo Defcon's advice. I also encourage anyone who does not like a member's posts on this forum to use the ignore feature so as not to be further bothered by those posted by a particular member / members

[J.O.]

You can give the leopard a dye job, but eventually the hair's going to grow back and the spots will show through loud and clear.

[Moon The Loon]

tailwheel

You present as an intelligent thoughtful writer, but don't seem to appreciate the fact that your perspective on issues isn't the only one out there, nor is it necessarily always the correct one.

It's obvious that you'd like to participate, but quickly run into some difficulty when playing with others. Maybe it's only my perspective, but when you're clearly in the wrong, you will double down seemingly to prove you can turn a pigs ear into a silk purse regardless. I might be wrong, but I think that behaviour really pisses people off. A little humility may go a long way towards increasing your longevity as a member of this site?

Hey Defcon: Virtually identical pieces of advice were offered this poster in each of his/her previous manifestations. You might be pi$$ing into the wind.

[Moon The Loon]

You can give the leopard a dye job, but eventually the hair's going to grow back and the spots will show through loud and clear.

Leopard? You insult all leopards! Hyena's have spots too, y'know

[Guest]

You can give the leopard a dye job, but eventually the hair's going to grow back and the spots will show through loud and clear.

Perhaps the spots are on a cougar?

[Kip Powick]

Perhaps the spots are on a cougar?

Only if it is a baby, (cub), cougar !!

[Guest tailwheel]

Hey Tailwheel? Do you think you're on some kind of a stage here or something? It often sounds as though you're addressing your commentary to some imaginary audience rather than to whom you're conversing?

I don't think it is significantly different than other opinions that have been posted. Don Hudson has some very long posts that could easily be interpreted in a similar manner. But you seem to be questioning only me on this. Could it be that the reason is that you disagree with most of my posts and agree with most of his? Hmmm. I am sure the moderator, whoever, he/she is feels that I am posting within the rules of the forum.

Regarding Screening, I found the following article to be of interest, read it and draw your own conclusions.

Washington (CNN)Top U.S. national security officials said Thursday there are gaps in data available to screen Syrian refugees seeking to come to the U.S.

Looks like I am bang on when it comes to this particular subject.

tailwheel

You present as an intelligent thoughtful writer, but don't seem to appreciate the fact that your perspective on issues isn't the only one out there, nor is it necessarily always the correct one.

It's obvious that you'd like to participate, but quickly run into some difficulty when playing with others. Maybe it's only my perspective, but when you're clearly in the wrong, you will double down

I am quite aware that my perspective is not the only one actually. Otherwise, I probably would not be posting here as everyone would agree with me(which I am sure they will eventually upon closer consideration).

It is difficult to respond to a statement that says that...where I am clearly wrong, and then I double down when you give no examples. Please show where I am clearly wrong and have "doubled down" and I can comment further.

You are going to post an example aren't you?

Of course, opinions are just that, opinions. But talking about leopards and asking whether I feel I am on stage, mentions about previous manifestations, and other similar statements don't strike me as convincing arguments that my opinions are based on faulty information.

I am new to this forum though, so perhaps I am expecting a bit too much.

[cp fa]

[Guest tailwheel]

CP FA posted an image that I can't reproduce(I'm sure there is a way).

Ahhh, there we go. Checkmate. All my opinions have now been proven wrong beyond the shadow of a doubt.

The arguments against me keep getting more and more convincing.

Next.

[inchman]

Funny how you don't acknowledge the posts that prove points and provide examples opposite your point of view and prove you clearly wrong.

Harper was going to let thousands of those pesky muslims in using the same gaps as will Mr. Trudeau. Sure, Mr. Trudeau has pledged to let in more, but really, is there a real difference in the potential for terrorism while giving a true chance at peace for thousands more of our fellow humans?

[Guest tailwheel]

Funny how you don't acknowledge the posts that prove points and provide examples opposite your point of view and prove you clearly wrong.

Harper was going to let thousands of those pesky muslims in using the same gaps as will Mr. Trudeau. Sure, Mr. Trudeau has pledged to let in more, but really, is there a real difference in the potential for terrorism while giving a true chance at peace for thousands more of our fellow humans?

I'll acknowledge your post and show you to be wrong, of course....

Read the article below, which is accurate, and then ask yourself honestly what the risk of ISIS attacks from our newcomers(the most bona fide refugees) would be with this policy.

Tailwheel..... NEXT (roll eyes)

http://www.pressprogress.ca/does_stephen_harper_want_to_pick_and_choose_refugees_based_on_their_religion

"Stephen Harper’s recent comments on Syrian and Iraqi refugees suggest Canada could close the door on nearly three-quarters of the population of Syria, based on their religious beliefs alone.

Responding to questions on the Syrian refugee crisis Tuesday, the Conservative leader stated he wants to "make sure that we are selecting the most vulnerable bona fide refugees ... with a focus on the religious and ethnic minorities that are the most vulnerable."

And Harper's statement comes on the heels of a video and online petition promoting "religious freedom" circulated by the Conservatives on the weekend.

The Conservatives' website juxtaposes a graphic warning of the ISIS threat to religious minorities alongside a video of Harper shot in a Toronto-area Coptic church surrounded by Christian iconography.

The Conservative website indicates they will "accept 10,000 additional refugees from the region over the next four years who are facing religious persecution and death."

However, the website also provides a list of who the Conservatives consider to be a persecuted religious minority, specifically naming "Alawites, Bedouins, Christians, Druze, Ismailis, Shi'a, [and] Yazidis."

But which religious group does Harper and the Conservatives leave out? Sunni Muslims, representing 74% of Syria's population.

In December 2014, CBC News reported sources close to discussions at a conference on Syrian refugees convened by the UN High Commissioner for Refugees said Canada was interested in only resettling religious minorities.

At that time, an interfaith group responded with a statement calling on the Harper government "to resettle Syrian refugees without discrimination based on religion."

Then-Citizenship and Immigration Parliamentary Secretary Costas Menegakis called CBC's report "ridiculous," but would go on to reiterate they "will prioritize persecuted ethnic and religious minorities ... those at demonstrated risk, and we will make no apologies for that.'"

[Guest tailwheel]

Tailwheel....I can relate to Neo.

[flyinghigh]

Ummmm,

I assume that you have become THE ONE and the bullets are the arguments you face from the agents on this forum which are easily stopped and then fought off with one arm.

Then fighting 100 agents.

I liked that movie but not the sequel.

[Guest tailwheel]

Well, the last argument did come from someone whose information shows only as male and calls himself inchman.

[J.O.]

It's okay. He has a clear conscience, in spite of acknowledging what he truly is. So much for enlightenment coming from self-awareness.

[deicer]

A good post mortem.....

http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/andrew-coyne-conservatives-brought-down-by-their-own-cynicism

[J.O.]

Indeed it is. If the Conservatives who remain want any chance of resurrecting themselves to a position of respectability and electability, they should read - and heed - every word.

There are some excellent people in the party and many of them were re-elected on their own record as representatives of their constituents. Michael Chong is among them. He should get serious consideration for the leadership role (if he's interested). That he was willing to challenge the righteous indignation of the PMO should elevate his stance among his peers.

[DEFCON]

From the perspective of someone that's voted Conservative for over four decades, I have to say, the article was painfully fair in its analysis.

[Moon The Loon]

Spot on article. Well done, Andrew. Maybe the Post will reconsider how they treated your pre-election opinion.

[J.O.]

I was pleasantly surprised that the editorial board ran it. Maybe they actually agree with what he said.

[Guest]

Is the new government sleeping at the switch or ????

Pace of Canadian air strikes against ISIL picks up despite Trudeau’s vow to end mission

‎Today, ‎November ‎9, ‎2015, ‏‎41 minutes ago | Adrian Humphreys

The pace of Canada’s aerial bombardments against ISIL has picked up since Justin Trudeau became prime minister, a curious scenario given his campaign pledge to withdraw from the U.S.-led mission in Iraq and Syria.

Since Trudeau’s swearing-in five days ago on Nov. 4, Canada’s CF-18 jets conducted five air strikes, hitting seven targets identified as Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant assets, according to information from the Department of National Defence.

There were 14 air strikes in all of October, 10 in September and 11 in August. The busiest the CF-18 crews have been recently was in July, when there were six air strikes in a five-day period.

As of Monday, CF-18 Hornets have conducted a total of 184 air strikes as part of Operation Impact, a multinational coalition against ISIL in Iraq and Syria.

The military defines an air strike as an aerial attack intended to damage or destroy an objective.

DND said the frequency of air strikes are dictated by operational matters, not the politics of Ottawa.

“Yeah, in the last few weeks there have been more (air strikes) in the past week or so, but if you look back at the course of Op Impact, there’s been peaks and valleys where it’s gone up and it’s gone down. It mainly happens with regard to what’s going on in the coalition,” said Capt. Kirk Sullivan, a public affairs officer with Canadian Joint Operations Command Headquarters.

“It’s broader, it’s bigger than just even the Canadian Armed Forces because it happens at a coalition level,” he said.

“Many factors determine the frequency and location of air strikes in a coalition setting. Be it in Iraq or in Syria, aircraft are assigned on a daily basis by the coalition to targets where (ISIL) is known to operate with the ultimate goal of improving the security of Iraq and coalition nations.

“Coalition aircraft are assigned the targets by the coalition.”

He said Parliament decides the military’s missions, but doesn’t select its operational sorties. And the mission is set to continue until the government recalls its forces.

“It’s part of Operation Impact, which is continuing under the mandate given to it by Parliament until direction is provided otherwise.

“We don’t act on regime change, we act on direction, is basically what it comes down to,” said Capt. Sullivan.

“As far as the direction goes, we’re continuing on with our operations until directed otherwise. We are ready to implement any change when it comes from the government.”

Related

• Allan Levine: Canada should keep its fighter jets in the Middle East
• Matthew Fisher: Meet the woman leading Canada ’s war on ISIL
• Matt Gurney: Trudeau has the right to bring the jets home, but why is he?
• Canada has flown in 2.4 per cent of allied airstrikes in Iraq and Syria exactly one year after Parliament vote

In Trudeau’s first press conference as prime minister-designate, he reiterated his intention to end Canada’s participation in the ISIL bombardments.

He said he informed U.S. President Barack Obama of his plans in a phone call.

“I committed that we would continue to engage in a responsible way that understands how important Canada’s role is to play in the fight against ISIL, but he understands the commitments I’ve made about ending the combat mission,” Trudeau said.

Canada’s first anti-ISIL bombardment took place on Nov. 2, 2014, according to DND, with jets conducting six air strikes that month.

National Post

• Email: ahumphreys@nationalpost.com | Twitter:

[mo32a]

They are just getting rid of the ammo so they don't have to ship it all back.