Clarence,
People are gullible and want to believe the Government and its allies will look after them and they can live in a safe world that Society has created for them. Many do not want to know the truth and those that do would wish they didn't. People within a Society allow themselves to be manipulated. It's better to walk through their lives with a smile on their face oblivious to reality.
One case that comes to mind is the U.S. invasion of Iraq. The President's reason for invasion changed to suit the needs at various times. If you questioned that the invasion may not have been warranted, the retort question was often "Don't you support our troops?" A twisted line of reasoning that allowed large numbers to go along with what many considered to be a bad decision (but not at the time). The Twin Towers is a whole new kettle of fish...
The real truth is often never to be revealed for the good of Society. Many of us have our suspicions, but even holding a high security clearance, you never know many of the details. I worked Intelligence and the order of business was based on 'need to know.' You could have 100 people working on a project and one or two would have the complete picture, The others would have knowledge of their piece, but know nothing of what the guy in the next office knew.
People outside the location could guess all they wanted, but without the pieces, it would be just a guess. Being a trained intelligence professional offers little more incite than the average informed adult. At the most, we have a few pieces to any one puzzle.
None you improvise, one (or more) is luxury.
Clarence,
Your supporting link debunks your claim lol. Here is another.
Clarence,
Your supporting link debunks your claim lol. Here is another.
Yep, noticed that one as well.
Happy prepping
Clarence,
People are gullible and want to believe the Government and its allies will look after them and they can live in a safe world that Society has created for them. Many do not want to know the truth and those that do would wish they didn't. People within a Society allow themselves to be manipulated. It's better to walk through their lives with a smile on their face oblivious to reality.
One case that comes to mind is the U.S. invasion of Iraq. The President's reason for invasion changed to suit the needs at various times. If you questioned that the invasion may not have been warranted, the retort question was often "Don't you support our troops?" A twisted line of reasoning that allowed large numbers to go along with what many considered to be a bad decision (but not at the time). The Twin Towers is a whole new kettle of fish...
The real truth is often never to be revealed for the good of Society. Many of us have our suspicions, but even holding a high security clearance, you never know many of the details. I worked Intelligence and the order of business was based on 'need to know.' You could have 100 people working on a project and one or two would have the complete picture, The others would have knowledge of their piece, but know nothing of what the guy in the next office knew.
People outside the location could guess all they wanted, but without the pieces, it would be just a guess. Being a trained intelligence professional offers little more incite than the average informed adult. At the most, we have a few pieces to any one puzzle.
Wayne, your bang on about sometimes not wishing to know what you do! It’s a capital B at times. And yes need to know is almost always in play. I hate it but understand it’s place.
I have always preferred knowing or at least having a good hunch I am on the right track.
New Years resolution I made to myself is to post less and avoid getting into the weeds.
Happy prepping, clarence out
...Maybe I am wrong and there are no preferential treatments for the top. I must be wrong
You are, but don't beat yourself up over it. 🙂
Oh and I am FARRRRRRR from some social justice warrior. Staunch conservative but also honest enough to know I am not going to get treated as equal as someone with more financial or political clout then me. That’s life
French Canada has been shown preference. This could be argued for other groups as well. Federal and Provincial politics allot resources as they see fit. People get the government they elect. In this way they get what they deserve.
It shouldn't surprise you that high ranking political decision makers don't sit beside the police leadership who direct their departments. If they did, you may however be astounded that the police leaders don't jump when the telephone rings. S/He has a job to do and they do it as they see fit. A leader isn't a yes man..
Similarly the officer on the street doesn't jump for his boss. If I was in the process of charging someone (for example) and some Staff Superintendent told me not to because the perpetrator was the son of the Mayor. I'd likely remind the SS that he was in danger of being arrested for obstruct justice. The system protects the police officer and insures that how he does his job is without influence.
There are situations where police action is focused, but protecting the wealthy over others in greater need just wouldn't fly. So we will have to agree to disagree on this point Clarence.
None you improvise, one (or more) is luxury.
National Post 26 Jan 19
( https://nationalpost.com/news/we-disrupted-the-act-accused-in-kingston-terror-arrests-had-started-process-of-building-bomb-rcmp-say )
‘We disrupted the act’: Accused in Kingston terror arrests had started process of building bomb, RCMP say
...“It is also clear that Canada’s refugee screening process needs to be seriously examined,” he added. “We’ve recently learned of several examples of dangerous individuals entering the country due in part to lax screening procedures.”
...Scheer cited a 2017 audit of the Canada Border Services Agency that found 39 cases in which Syrian refugee claimants admitted to Canada didn’t receive proper screening. The agency acknowledged the error but said a review afterward found that none of the 39 people was inadmissible.
None you improvise, one (or more) is luxury.
National Post 26 Jan 19
( https://nationalpost.com/news/we-disrupted-the-act-accused-in-kingston-terror-arrests-had-started-process-of-building-bomb-rcmp-say )
‘We disrupted the act’: Accused in Kingston terror arrests had started process of building bomb, RCMP say...“It is also clear that Canada’s refugee screening process needs to be seriously examined,” he added. “We’ve recently learned of several examples of dangerous individuals entering the country due in part to lax screening procedures.”
...Scheer cited a 2017 audit of the Canada Border Services Agency that found 39 cases in which Syrian refugee claimants admitted to Canada didn’t receive proper screening. The agency acknowledged the error but said a review afterward found that none of the 39 people was inadmissible.
From a preppers perspective, what also ticks me off is how they never mention, let alone prosecute the support network these nutbars have. Where there is one, rest assured there are many others who know of their beliefs and support them. They are mini sleeper cells just waiting to take advantage of a crisis. They will be an issue during any large and enduring event. Inconvenient truth that no one wishes to discuss. How it affects ones preps is a subject worth exploring. The politics is sickening.
So... is this thread about prepping, or about immigration laws and politics?
Unfortunately it has devolved into a political thread. I'm going to give it one more chance to get back on track.
Obviously, the possibility of terrorists entering Canada through immigration and refugee channels exists, but we also have to keep in mind that terrorism was a fact of life here before the recent increase in immigration. We all remember the Parliament Hill attack in 2014 which happened on Stephen Harpers watch. Terrorism is going to happen here regardless of immigration policy.
With the majority of immigrants settling in major metropolitan areas, wouldn't strategic relocation to less densely populated areas help mitigate any security concerns?
I'm going to assume that none of us here have any direct influence on immigration laws. With that in mind, how do you plan on dealing with any security concerns you have?
So... is this thread about prepping, or about immigration laws and politics?
As noted within my original post: "I don't want to discuss the politics behind immigration." I do believe that immagration of political refugees from a war zone does in-fact effect national security. Moreover, in the case of a SHTF scenario, it has a very real effect to survivors.
I also find it useful to explore alternatives to bringing these people into this country. We are each part of Society. Prepartation includes what we can do before the SHTF to mitigate the results after the fact. In my way of thinking, immigration is one of these areas of concern that preppers should be mindful of and not be oblivious to.
None you improvise, one (or more) is luxury.
So... is this thread about prepping, or about immigration laws and politics?
Prepartation includes what we can do before the SHTF to mitigate the results after the fact. In my way of thinking, immigration is one of these areas of concern that preppers should be mindful of and not be oblivious to.
Fair enough. So how would you recommend prepping for those instances? As I’ve mentioned before, steering clear of large population centres, which caters for immigrants, seems like a logical prep. If not also to stay away from all the other inconveniences to prepping that is residing in large population centres. But then again, i see more risk in those locations in the form security from desperate, hungry people of all kinds, sanitation, ability to growth own food, obtaining water, transportation....
Bringing up news articles about would-be terrorism adds little to preparedness and resiliency, but could be conceived as fear mongering while fueling an anti-immigration agenda. Believe me, and I’m sure you know this, there are also a heck of lot of crazies with last names of Smith and Johnson born and raised here too.
Fair enough. So how would you recommend prepping for those instances? As I’ve mentioned before, steering clear of large population centres, which caters for immigrants, seems like a logical prep.
That would seem to be reasonable. Unfortunately, not everyone can (or desires) to live in a rural area. The first step in mitigating any negative situation is to identify the likelyhood of its existance.
Bringing up news articles about would-be terrorism adds little to preparedness and resiliency, but could be conceived as fear mongering while fueling an anti-immigration agenda. Believe me, and I’m sure you know this, there are also a heck of lot of crazies with last names of Smith and Johnson born and raised here too.
Certainly at the beginning of this thread, there were not many who seemed to recognize this as a potential threat. The purpose of the articals about terrorism were to increase awareness, as it seemed to be appropriate.
Your comment about crazies is well taken. This underlines the requirement for each of us to be aware of who the crazies are in our community. Personally, I want to know if a motorcycle gang has a clubhouse down the street, or if a child mollester lives next door. It has nothing to do with fear mongering, but common sense. Developing local intelligence is a required prep in my opinion.
None you improvise, one (or more) is luxury.
No, I think HP nailed it.
Bringing up news articles about would-be terrorism adds little to preparedness and resiliency, but could be conceived as fear mongering while fueling an anti-immigration agenda. Believe me, and I’m sure you know this, there are also a heck of lot of crazies with last names of Smith and Johnson born and raised here too.
Wayne,
I agree with your need to develop intel on our surrounding. I believe this is preached at length in any preppers realm. Not just intel on who the bad guys are, but also those who would be useful in crisis situation (the police officer, the nurse, the carpenter... who live in your area).
This thread has been squarely on immigrants, especially from war torn countries. Up until this point, it was not really approached as part of identifying potential “vulnerabilities”. I see no threads titled “Hell’s Angels - increased or decreased security risk” anywhere on this forum, nor is there one called “welfare dependents - increased [...]” or “Entitled rich millennial brats - increased [...]” or even “fundamentalist extreme right wingers - increased [...]” From a day to day perspective, I face a much greater statistical risk to die from a reckless, jacked-up F350-driving redneck than I do of a terror attack perpetrated by a PTSD’d immigrant from a war-torn nation. Maybe we should have a thread on defensive driving?
Points have been made that the focus should be on finding out preparedness gaps and then finding solutions. So far, the immigration issue could only account for a tiny fraction of the overall issues of preparedness, regardless of the spin that is put on it. Yet, this has only been discussed as a concern and no tangible “solutions” are being proposed. Therefore, this discussion continues to read as an anti-immigration thread.
I think this forum has been able to allow a wide range of freedom in discussion, but certain topics, like every where else, are taboo and sensitive and therefore, better left untouched. Religion, politics... would be better left out of this forum IMHO. I hope the tone of this thread will change into something a heck of lot more productive.
Wayne none of this is about immigration, no matter how hard you contort yourself or the subject matter to make it appear so. Those twisted up over this are from one group of people who pretend to know things they don't know, and cant know, not wanting their major competitor in the field of pretending to know things they don't know, and cant know, from becoming more established, isnt that right Wayne? be honest! I say lets all quit pretending...
Give a man a gun, and he can rob a bank. Give a man a bank, and he can rob the world.