digg

Join DiggAbout

Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular Elections 2008 content on Digg.

Al-Qaeda warns Canada

canada.com — An al-Qaeda strategist has warned Canada to withdraw its troops from Afghanistan or face terrorist attacks similar to 9/11, Madrid and the London transit bombings.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • pevail, on 10/12/2007, -128/+37What is Al-Qaeda?-a C.I.A. creation,a boogieman invented in order to justify the
    "War on terror".
    The Canadian public is quickly realizing that the war in Afghanistan is unwinnable and just an excuse to permit the creation of a pipeline corridor the the major oil companies
    and to reactivate the drug trade which provides billions of dollars to the secret services.-
    Such as MI5,MI6,Mossad,CIA.
    That war is just a big scam and Canadians are starting to see through that BS.
    • IvanB, on 10/12/2007, -78/+24The Canadian mission in Afghanistan is a failure. I have no idea why the Liberals decided to send those troops there, even though the Russians miserably failed a few years ago.
    • DcaptdVermnMeat, on 10/12/2007, -21/+60@pevail
      You are an idiot
    • Mousse, on 10/12/2007, -7/+83"It also refers to Canada's "fanatic adherence to Christianity" as well as its purported attempts to "damage the Muslims" and its support for the "Christian Crusade" against al-Qaeda."

      Wow, al Qaeda is truly out of touch with reality.
    • Ignignokt01, on 10/12/2007, -6/+35Umm... you are aware that Al-Qaeda has existed LONG before the 'war on terror'? You are absolutely ignorant. Don't get me wrong, I have some big problems with the 'war on terror' myself (including the ***** name, it should be 'the war on religious extremism', because terrorism is used by all kinds of people, including our own political parties), but don't go saying idiotic things like 'the US gov made Al-Qaeda up so they could kill American, Spanish, and British people and get away with it so they could get political support'. No, thats just ***** stupid...
    • rogerbannister, on 10/12/2007, -17/+12@pevail

      Your satire is right on target!!! Everyone knows Canada just wants a secret oil pipeline from Afghanistan across the ocean to North America.
    • themastersb, on 10/12/2007, -7/+23Who can hate toast?
    • aristotle0dude, on 10/12/2007, -12/+9pevail, I'm afraid that you have been smoking too much of the Chronic.

      Al-Qaeda is a real organization. Fortunately, the CSIS has been working with other organizations including the CIA and FBI to shut down bank accounts used to fund their terror attacks.
    • masamunecyrus, on 10/12/2007, -4/+24@Mousse:

      Seriously, how can it possibly think that Canada is fanatical Christian? Heck, this is the same country that prosecuted some priests because they were preaching against homosexuality. They are truly out of touch with reality.
    • neoform, on 10/12/2007, -4/+12This threat is moot, Canada will not be attacked, just by reading the threat you can tell it's pure propaganda just to scare canadians and to inspire those in Afganistan to fight harder against us.
    • WomunOfColour, on 10/12/2007, -9/+6Correction: Canada prosecuted a preacher for spreading hate propaganda against homosexuals, i.e., encouraging attacks.
    • masamunecyrus, on 10/12/2007, -6/+4@WomunOfColour:

      I'll take your word for it. I don't know much about the case -- just read a headline a year or two back. Either way, it proves that they're not fanatical Christian. Fanatical Christian would support the spreading of hate propaganda against gays.
    • thespace, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4"and Canadians are starting to see through that BS. eh!"

      TAKE OFF HOSER!!!
    • atezun, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10Fanatic adherence to Christianity? We legalized same-sex marriage!
    • sanman, on 10/12/2007, -5/+20As a non-white Torontonian of immigrant background, I'll say that there are way too many ***** immigrants in this country, and I personally know people who express strong sympathies for Taliban, AlQaeda, Hamas, etc -- you name it.

      This is what happens when you don't have assimilation -- you end up with too many people having an "anything goes" mentality.

      What the ***** is the purpose of having a country -- just to make it a hotel?
      Well, hotels don't necessary last or endure the test of time. I've certainly never heard of anybody fighting to save a hotel or stick their neck out for it. Usually you just find another hotel to check into, rather than expend any effort.

      US & NATO soldiers (including Canadians) are being killed in Afghanistan due to Pakistan's continued support for the Taliban. Canada by itself doesn't have the political clout to compel Pakistan to stop its ugly game of trying to re-conquer Afghanistan, but Canada really ought to be working with NATO allies to rally their common action against Pakistan, the sponsor of the Taliban.

      http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/taliban/view/

      Harper's in a state of confusion or paralysis, as is every other Western govt in the War on Terror. And this is because Bush has set the tone for leadership vacuum. Certainly, the Taliban are a malevolent force who burn down women's schools and shoot female teachers, and are definitely the kind of bad guys worth killing. But Bush has distracted the entire agenda so badly with his misguided sidetrack into Iraq, that the entire War on Terror is in danger of imploding. Now every Islamic fundamentalist is able to latch onto the Iraq fiasco to claim vindication for their extremist views.

      The other problem is that white people won't fight for anything unless it's their pweciousss Europe under threat of invasion. If it's a protracted war on the Korean peninsula, if it's a war in Vietnam or any other part of Asia, or Somalia, then white people really don't want to show up to die helping out those funny-looking people. They only feel comfortable helping out the "old country", otherwise they don't have any stamina.
    • ICSU, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2People really believing that Al Qaeda is there to get every white person/Christian/Western citizen should watch http://www.archive.org/details/ThePowerOfNightmares
    • omaryak, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3"don't go saying idiotic things like 'the US gov made Al-Qaeda up so they could kill American, Spanish, and British people and get away with it so they could get political support'"

      He didn't say that; he said that they made it up so that they could have justification for a broader "war on terror." And strictly speaking, al-Qaeda is an American construct. In Arabic "al-Qaeda" means "the list." It is not an organization so much as a collection of loose affiliates. And since we invaded Iraq, independent groups have executed al-Qaeda-style attacks independent of the organization's leadership. The problem of terrorism is a hydra-headed one that isn't going to go away anytime soon. But if "al-Qaeda" is how people want to understand the terrorist threat, I generally don't bother to correct them. Same with the "war on terror" – I use the term myself because "struggle against violent extremists" just doesn't have the same ring to it.
    • omaryak, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2"What the ***** is the purpose of having a country -- just to make it a hotel?
      Well, hotels don't necessary last or endure the test of time. I've certainly never heard of anybody fighting to save a hotel or stick their neck out for it. Usually you just find another hotel to check into, rather than expend any effort."

      The long-term goal is to have enough peaceful democracies in the world that people will never have to "stick their neck out" or go to war to defend themselves. In a globalizing society, countries will become increasingly less relevant. And in the end, the world is just that – a place to live.
    • mdc10s, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0Check out www.infowars.com if you want the truth!
    • anonym41414, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"Al-Qaida" does not mean "the list," or anything like it.

      It means "the base" or "the foundation" (in the architectural sense) or, more loosely, "the strong thing upon which something large rests" or, even more loosely, "the start of something big."

      The people who founded al-Qaida (including bin Laden, of course) originally called their group "al-Qa'idat al-Jihad," which means "the foundation of the holy war." The abbreviated name "al-Qaida" came into use a little later.

      Arabic is a very poetic, highly figurative language. Saying that a nuanced term like "al-qaida" means "the database" or "the list" betrays nothing but an overwhelming ignorance of Arabic.
    • sanman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Omaryak, democracy is a pretty broad category under which a wide variety of countries and economic systems fit. You can talk about socialist democracies like South Africa, you can talk about capitalist democracies like the US. The fact is that democracy is necessary but not sufficient -- it's important to have, but by itself is not enough. Democracy also doesn't hold countries together.

      And if you're saying that nobody should have to stick their neck out, remember -- FREEDOM ISN'T FREE. When it comes to fight-or-flight, you can't take the Neville Chamberlain approach for everything -- sometimes you have to fight and not flee.
    • omaryak, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"sometimes you have to fight and not flee"
      Granted – I'm not a pacifist. I said it was a long-term goal. I just wonder how many cycles of history we have to go through before we see the same scenes play out again and again.
    • omaryak, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1"'Al-Qaida' does not mean 'the list,' or anything like it."
      Actually, it does. The phrase "Qa'edat al-Jihad" did not come about until April 2002, long after what we know as "al-Qaeda" existed.
    • anonym41414, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2That is simply untrue. The name "Al-Qa'idat al-Jihad" can be traced back to 1988, when the founders of the group (bin Laden, Mohamed Loay Bayazid and others) first met to discuss founding an organized Islamist militant group.

      In the spring of 2002, some news sources reported that al-Qaida had changed its name to "Al-Qa'idat al-Jihad," but those reports were inaccurate. "Al-Qa'idat al-Jihad" and "al-Qa'ida" are the long and short names for the same nearly-twenty-year-old organization.
    • omaryak, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1You might want to tell the folks over at Wikipedia, then:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_qaeda
      But they've already cited their sources.
  • stoops, on 10/12/2007, -13/+51As a Canadian speaking on behalf of Canada... Most of our land is flat, what are you going to bomb? Our corn fields? Well good luck with that, and by the way, if we pull out wouldn't that mean the terrorists win?
    • IvanB, on 10/12/2007, -28/+6The Olympic Stadium.

      They would probably fail, but the roof will fall and kill a few people. :(
    • ashester, on 10/12/2007, -2/+72Um... the CN tower, either that or a moose... definitely a moose
    • ChileanGoD, on 10/12/2007, -4/+43The Olympic stadium is falling by itself.
    • eplawless, on 10/12/2007, -15/+7I just walked by the parliament buildings :( I was nearly terrorist..ed.
    • JeremyBanks, on 10/12/2007, -1/+18The TTC? They bombed London's public transit, why wouldn't they do the same here? The TTC has more than two million passengers daily (close to the number that the London subway has), if you struck a busy downtown station, you'd do a lot of damage.
    • nkassi, on 10/12/2007, -2/+38In other news, the Quebec government ask Al-Qaeda to bomb the Olympic stadium to save money.

    • davidod87, on 10/12/2007, -3/+17You can't "beat" terrorists, because they'll always exist everywhere.
    • nixonrichard, on 10/12/2007, -5/+25Don't "cut and run" Canada. We love you down here in the US. Curling is such an awesome sport to watch when you're high.
    • trik, on 10/12/2007, -2/+37who the ***** makes threats on Canada? If Canada has troops in your country then your already completely ***** by the rest of the world!
    • BunnyWunny, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12As a Canadian, I'm surprised you've forgotten about the Air India bombing which killed hundreds. Offhand I can think of thousands of possible terrorist targets here, and unlike in most US states, we can't be armed to protect ourselves, so we're sitting ducks :-(

    • teddyrux, on 10/12/2007, -0/+13It would cost $100,000,000 to blow up the Olympic Stadium or $300,000,000 to fix it. It is a lose lose situation. If terrorists would blow it up for free (assuming no casualties of course)...Canada would win.
    • CBTF, on 10/12/2007, -7/+17I'd like to thank our lovely ***** of a prime minister for slowly sending my nation down the drain. He stepped up the Canadian force's role in Afghanistan to offensive as opposed to peacekeeping. Genius on his behalf.

      I still don't understand why everyone in Canada voted a neocon in. He's a Bush puppet.
    • rdoger6424, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Bunnywunny:
      Doesn't that huge mall in edmonton have a submarine? use that one for self defense
    • theanticrust, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5BunnyWummy:
      "and unlike in most US states, we can't be armed to protect ourselves"

      I'm not really sure how being armed would help against a terrorist attack. I doubt having a gun is going to stop a suicidal bomber.
    • rogerbannister, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1@CBTF

      "I still don't understand why everyone in Canada voted a neocon in. He's a Bush puppet."

      Since nobody could possibly vote for a neocon, it must have been Bush hacking all of Canada's Diebold voting machines.
    • Cl1mh4224rd, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0"It would cost $100,000,000 to blow up the Olympic Stadium or $300,000,000 to fix it. It is a lose lose situation. If terrorists would blow it up for free (assuming no casualties of course)...Canada would win."

      Ensuring that they target the stadium might be difficult. Well, if they can't get Al-Qaeda to do it, they could always just decorate the place with giant images of the Prophet Muhammad. ;-P
    • nogami, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6While it would suck if Canada gets attacked, I'm not going to lose sleep over it... If they figure that bombing my country is going to get our troops out of Afghanistan then they're sorely mistaken.

      While I in no way support Bush's invasion of Iraq (though I support the troops that got sent there and are just following orders from a fool and those who control him), I totally support Canada's place in keeping Afghanistan from returning to taliban rule - truly a type of religious extremism that the world can do without.

      I have to assume that they're getting desperate now - the longer Afghanistan goes without Taliban, the more difficult it will be for them to ever regain power. It may take a decade, but even if that's the case, I support our Government's action there.
    • BunnyWunny, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1from Anticrust:

      "I'm not really sure how being armed would help against a terrorist attack. I doubt having a gun is going to stop a suicidal bomber."

      No, not a bombing, but think of unarmed crowds, hockey games, mall or airport shooter.
      There is a reason they switched over to bombs in the Middle East. Would be shooters were taken out by armed civilians/off duty soldiers/cops, etc.
  • wmattison, on 10/12/2007, -4/+99***** the terrorists.
    • unstatusthequo, on 10/12/2007, -4/+71That might be the best digg comment ever. Why? It's not susceptible to fanboy attacks, it contains no technology preference, it was not said by Steve Colbert or Borat, it has no Bush supporting/bashing, and is not a top 10 list. Dugg.
    • Dustyb, on 10/12/2007, -3/+21ALL THAT and he has a 12 oz. mouse avatar. Dugg as well.
    • nixonrichard, on 10/12/2007, -2/+29Well, I actually DO take offense . . . just what is a terrorist? I think of them more as freedom fighters. Nah, just kidding, ***** 'em.
    • shadesfox, on 10/12/2007, -1/+19If crime fighters fight crime and fire fighters fight fire, what do freedom fighters fight?
    • Cl1mh4224rd, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1"If crime fighters fight crime and fire fighters fight fire, what do freedom fighters fight?"

      Digg for George Carlin. :-)
  • praisethelard, on 06/06/2008, -4/+62What has Canada ever done to anybody?!
    • ThunderIT, on 10/12/2007, -2/+76invaded the US and burned down the white house, but other than that, we are generally quite friendly
    • mrASSMAN, on 10/12/2007, -25/+10Canada took my virginity :'(
    • theredbicycle, on 10/12/2007, -6/+30"invaded the US and burned down the white house"

      Well, we know it wasn't the French part of Canada that did that...
    • EasY_TargeT, on 10/12/2007, -2/+20its because of Canada that 1601 Pennsylvania Drive is known as the white house.
    • nixonrichard, on 10/12/2007, -11/+3It's also because of Canada that the US is known as "America"
    • BunnyWunny, on 10/12/2007, -16/+7You're kidding, right?

      *For starters, how about handing out smallpox laden blankets to the Natives
      *Genocide of the Beothuks
      *Residential schools; forcing Native kids to attend White schools by taking them from their parents by the RCMP, subjecting them to pedophiles, torturing, medical experiments, and even sterilization in some cases.
      *Participating in the Boer War, where the British invented Concentration Camps.
      *Worked so well in fact they did it again in WWII with the Japanese Canadians, after stealing their homes and properties
    • Cl1mh4224rd, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5That sucking sound you hear is BunnyWunny's reply removing the light-hearted nature of this thread at tremendous speed...
    • Modulo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Yes, but what has Canada done to anybody LATELY???
    • Kniggit, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2Canada is the only country to have ever given a non-nuclear power the capability to create nuclear weapons - specifically India in 1974. See:

      http://archives.cbc.ca/IDC-1-75-104-898/science_technology/candu/clip4

      This, by the way, led to Pakistan panicking to get nuclear weapons which then went to North Korea as the result of Pakistani scientists. Hence, the nuclear mess in North Korea can ultimately be traced back to Canada's precipitation.
    • RandomSkratch, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@ Kniggit

      Which contains many movie filming sites that at one time filmed a movie staring Kevin Bacon.

  • Nick22, on 10/12/2007, -33/+2Lets pwn some noobs canada! :D I say bring it on
    • abbott75, on 10/12/2007, -3/+17You're a terrorist?
    • Yashu, on 10/12/2007, -6/+3www.purepwnage.com their Canadian! Them and Trailer Park Boys... who would want to bomb them?
  • incu_vamp, on 10/12/2007, -9/+15it was a stupid idea to send troops there in the first place. They should have just stuck with what Jean Chrétien said.
    • HotGore, on 10/12/2007, -2/+17What are you talking about? No one can understand him!

      Anyways he sent troops into Afghanistan, but not Iraq.
    • TrevorBradley, on 10/12/2007, -6/+5Chretien made a strong statement *not* to send troops to Iraq, and then turned around and sent troops to Afghanistan to keep the Americans from going *****.

      He could have done A and not B. It's not like the US could really treat us much worse without invading us (and that didn't work the last time)
    • cdnbaconwrap, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6Guys, Chretien sent Task Force 2 in November 2001 when America declared war on Afghanistan. We've been there long before that Moron Bush decided to invade Iraq on a bunch of trumped up lies. We did not go to Iraq because we knew that there where no WMDs and well.... the fact that the Liberal Government was underfunding the Armed Forces for over a decade.

      GO CANADA GO!

    • rogerbannister, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1@cdnbaconwrap

      "We did not go to Iraq because we knew that there where no WMDs and well.... the fact that the Liberal Government was underfunding the Armed Forces for over a decade."

      Why should any other country in the West have an army besides the USA?? After all, their rich Uncle Sam will provide shelter and protection for everyone free of charge. Go ahead, liberal countries, spend all your money on social programs. Who needs an army anyway?
    • Modulo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1People that don't understand how diplomacy works?
  • mrASSMAN, on 10/12/2007, -2/+47Nooo, not Canada! That's our happy place.. :(

    Attacking Canada is like throwing sand at a toddler's face..
  • seaner, on 10/12/2007, -2/+50As Jon Stewart once said "Hating Canada is like hating toast"
  • ChileanGoD, on 10/12/2007, -13/+6I would like to know how this al-Qaeda sended his warning. By email?.. did he called the prime minster's cellular?.. No... they just "received a warning"
  • bigbchew, on 10/12/2007, -20/+5Rephrased:
    "They will either be forced to withdraw their forces or face an operation similar to New York, Madrid, London and their sisters, with the help of alC.I.A.-da."
  • WomunOfColour, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15From the article:

    "[Canada's] fanatic adherence to Christianity makes it rush to the financial aid of any issue that will damage the Muslims and strengthen their enemies," the 66-page document claims.

    ... What?
    • JeremyBanks, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13Apparently 77% of our population claim to be Christians, though it doesn't seem to be that high to me. =
    • jamsea, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11I have atleast 1-3 people in EVERY ONE of my classes who is muslem. And ATLEAST half of my school is of arabic decent. I'm not even exaggerating.

      By the way, I go to a catholic school too.
    • WomunOfColour, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6@JeremyBanks

      I think most of our Christians are not the church-going kind.
    • aristotle0dude, on 10/12/2007, -12/+4Actually, contrary to popular believe, Canadians are quite religious. We just don't make a lot of noise about it. Unfortunately, the damn atheists here is Canada seem intent on making as much noise as they can while giving our country a black eye on the international scene and spreading FUD about religious people.

      Some friends of mine were detained for their peaceful activities in Morocco in the late 90's because they were smuggling in religious books in addition to school text books. The authorities there were not a tolerant towards diversity as us so-called "evil" Christians are in the west. They were only delivering what the local people had requested.
    • aristotle0dude, on 10/12/2007, -6/+11Digg me down all you like but what I say is true. Canadians generally do not make a big deal about things. Only the activists with an axe to grind or a book to burn or ban (bible) make an exorbitant amount of noise to draw attention to themselves.

      We do not have a separation of church and state in any formal manner simply because up till now, we have not needed to look at the issue. The majority of Canadians are sensible and tolerant of others.
  • Scotty562, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5"Christian Crusade" my goodness. Being pissed about us overthrowing a government I can understand. But they have to resort to pulling the religion card heh...

    Their goal is to get us out of their country. We have already said we're going to leave as soon as they can handle the country on their own. Why do they insist as making things more complicated?
    • aristotle0dude, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3They are running scared. In numerous "Moslem" countries, there are growing communities of Christians. They are spreading from actions by local people at the grassroots level and this has the extremists and Moslem ruling elite scared *****.
  • astrotrain, on 10/12/2007, -8/+3** The Dudley Do-Right" Theme **

    "Stop you terrorists.... in the name of good!"
  • shoeshine, on 10/12/2007, -21/+1About time somebody kicks Canada's smug ass. I hope Batman waits for them to do it before he goes and smacks Al-Quaeda in the whirligigs.
  • jownz, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Olympics in 2010; I can see these ***** targeting that.
    • alex.will, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3Nah, Al Qaeda will be gona by then.
    • MrSane, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Well... I hope not. As a resident of Vancouver, I will personally do my best to defeat them... but we do have a pretty crasy city. Maybe we'll have a bunch of people set of tents around them and protest the attack (obscure reference)? ... or ... ???
  • egarcia79, on 10/12/2007, -2/+17al-Qaeda refers to Canada's "fanatic adherence to Christianity". How is that any different then their fanatic adherence to their muslim beliefs. Who cares what religion anyone is. It's no reason to kill or dislike another person over.
    • RobynG7, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8If there's one word that describes religious extremists, it's "hypocritical".

      You have a good point; and furthermore, although they claim to be fighting for Islam, I doubt Allah would approve.
    • Herkimer56, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3In this part of the world it isn't a reason. In that part of the world killing people of other faiths is a command from Allah. Unless, of course, you can convert them, enslave them or force them to pay excessive taxes for the privilege of not being a Muslim.
    • aristotle0dude, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8People kill because of flaws in human nature. The lust of power, wealth and influence as well as the fear of the unknown are what drive people to kill.

      To say that it the fault of religion is to use a convenient scapegoat to drive a different agenda. If religion was not there, people would still kill each other.

      I'd suggest walking Equilibrium. It might be a real eye opener.
    • Frodo42, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"You have a good point; and furthermore, although they claim to be fighting for Islam, I doubt Allah would approve."

      Well...

      If you look into the Islamic scriptures (I have the Quran and the Sirat right here), I'm afraid that Allah would approve :(

      The Quran and the Hadith are full of examples of and incitements to, fighting unbelievers just for their faith. Al-Qaeda is on solid theological ground on this. Fortunately the're not on solid operational ground, and will probably not be able to throw so much as a matchbox at you guys :)

      For a tour demonstrating what's inside the scriptures, try Prophet of Doom (http://www.prophetofdoom.net). It's a big book, downloadable for free, and fortunately also available as audio book. It sets the Quran in order and combines it with the life of Muhammad for some startling conclusions.

      Good luck!
    • aristotle0dude, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Damn, I meant "watch Equilibrium". It points out that humanity will always find an excuse to kill and makes the comment that our faith, creativity, love and even our potentially darker emotions are what make us human.
  • Corrosionx, on 10/12/2007, -4/+11Bring it on!

    /fearing the terrorists is letting them win

    • freeagent99, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Al Qaeda can kiss the collective Canadian Ass.

      They are murderous cowards who waste their life in hiding, stewing in their own hatred.
  • EvilBaby, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6We have been on their hit list since day one. As of yet we are the only country that hasn't been hit on their list. They've been touting this for a fair while now. Assuming the largest targets are the CN tower, the TTC or the Montreal Subway system(sorry don't know their short form) they have a lot of realist ate to hit. Hopefully the RCMP will continue to do a decent job of protecting us.

    I'd find it a little odd if the terrorist were to hit Toronto though, considering how many Muslims we have in the area. 60% of Toronto's population are considered immigrants. That leaves a lot of room for non Christians.
    • RobynG7, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4Shiites don't mind killing Sunnis, and vice versa. These people are just messed up, I doubt they would lose sleep over killing other Muslims in the name of jihad.
  • weneedsound, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9Canada has been debating pulling out of Afghanistan due to losing support and not being able to sustain a full fledged foreign war without putting a strain on their resources.

    No doubt this is a propaganda ploy by al-Qaeda to gain more recruits through threatening a government that is on the brink of leaving anyways and then spinning it as a victory.
    • CBTF, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Do you really think Harper has even considered pulling out? Under the liberals.. maybe. Conservatives? fat chance.
  • xtremesniper, on 10/12/2007, -6/+8We shouldn't be in that country. Waste of resources, and all we accomplished is gaining our very first enemy. Very nice Harper.
  • Herkimer56, on 10/12/2007, -11/+10"Islam is a religion of peace."

    Complete *****.

    I hope the leftists, democrats and socialists are paying attention to this article. These are the people saying that al-Qaeda pays no attention to politics in any other country but their own. Of course they pay close attention just as the North Vietnamese did during that war. al-Qaeda wants the Democrats to win the mid-term elections.
    • rogerbannister, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5Nancy Pelosi will cut off military funding for the World War III Iraq battleground in a San Francisco minute!! Might as well call her Osama's woman in Congress...
    • j.carcinogen, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4yes the inquisition... I seriously doubt that the people responsible are still around. That was hundreds of years ago and we have since evolved.
    • aristotle0dude, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4Interesting that you bring up the Inquisition. That occurred in the wake of the re-conquering of Spain after centuries of Moslem invasions.

      Where do you think they got their ideas for the torture? Where do you think they learned their techniques. The Berbers with their "convert or die" methodology had a great deal of influence on Europe. It is a quite unfortunate part of our history.
    • mirzmaster, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1@Aristotle:

      So the explanation for the Spanish Inquisition is to blame the Berber Muslims? As if no apostate had ever been executed or tortured in Christian history prior to that? How absurd...

      At best all you can suggest is that the Inquisition was an extremist response to extremism, and this would still not reflect the reality of the situation.

      Your attempt to fault Islam for the Inquisition is terribly unbalanced.
    • aristotle0dude, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@mirzmaster: I'm trying to put what happened into context. The Inquisition was a horrible thing by our standards but none of us have lived in a society which was utterly crushed by an enemy only to fight back and drive them out. People in power took advantage of the situation to exact revenge on groups and individuals who they viewed as traitors. It was a manifestation of the dark side of human nature. The blame lies solely with the perpetrators and those who ordered them to do it. None of us can judge those people because we cannot say that we would not do the same if we felt betrayed by some of our fellow countrymen after decades of war.

      There is no doubt that so-called heretics were killed before and after but that is neither here nor there or related to the Inquisition. Some of those people were indeed heretics while others were martyrs trying to reform the church. Today was the anniversary for the beginning of the reformation btw.
  • Vouksh, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8Threatening Canada with terrorist attacks is like running in the special olympics, whether you go through with it or not, you're still retarded ^_^
  • sealteam, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2What you have been seeing, and what your going to see from Canada is an old school Donneybrook. No Tanks , No precision guided j bombs. Canadian generals never use the term "terrorist", cause that's not what they are. They respect the enemy, they agree to disagree with the Taliban. Canadian generals want to meet Taliban leaders, shake their hands, determine the rules, and get it the ***** on!
    • Avalontor, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2No tanks?, I'm pretty sure we just sent some. Had to borrow airlift capabilities but...
  • cdnbaconwrap, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12Guys it won't be Ontario or Quebec targets. The targets will be in Alberta - mainly Calgary.

    For the following reasons:
    1. Home to Canada's oil & gas industries, including American
    2. We have the largest expatriate American population outside the US (110,000)
    3. Home to Harper's riding. Many have similar political outlooks as Americans. Provincial government - LOVES BUSH and Cheney.
    4. Within a 1km radius in downtown Calgary there are 5 majour world oil companies that have interests in Iraq and the region.
    5. The construction boom in downtown Calgary is the best cover to bring in truck bombs to blow-out the bases of the towers that are the home of these companies.
    6. There is an increase of 'chatter' similar to pre-911

    ***** al-Qaeda! I hope its a fellow Canuck that gets that scumbag.
    • sbrown, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3:'(
    • SPARTACVS, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Let's just hope Calgary trades Kipprusoff to an NHL team that deserves the vezina winner BEFORE they get the ***** blown out of them.
  • Scotty562, on 10/12/2007, -5/+5"We shouldn't be in that country. Waste of resources, and all we accomplished is gaining our very first enemy. Very nice Harper."

    I look at it this way. We either fight them over there. Or we fight them here. What I mean by fighting there is there would be more events like 9/11 here. Comments like that make me believe that the people that say them believe if we leave them alone that they'll leave us alone. This simply isn't the case. Their goal is for anyone who doesn't believe what they believe to cease to exist. And the only reason all of the killing is going on over there is because there is an ocean separating us from them! If you and I were on a border with Iraq you can be sure the terrorists would be hitting a lot closer to home. Then you wouldn't believe it was such a waste of resources.

    It also must be realized that we aren't just trying to secure the world now. But we are also securing it for our children. The new generation of Iraqi's may just grow up in a government that doesn't support killing everyone just because of what religion they chose. If this is the case, the violence we see now will cease to exist because of all the hard work that is being done now. This will make all of our children's lives better.


    • rogerbannister, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8As the old saying goes..."You may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you."

      dugg
    • BunnyWunny, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1(Ronnie Reagan voice on) Well, there you go again...(voice off)

      First of all NATO troops are fighting the Taliban in Afghanistan, not al-Qaeda. The Taliban were some of the mujahideen who fought against the Soviet occupation, and benefited from US military aid to that purpose. For all intents and purposes they ran the country from 1996 to the US/UK invasion. Now they hold practically the entire country again save for Kabul and NATO armed camps. That is who the NATO troops are fighting, Afghan resistance forces, the prior government, they are not the 911 terrorists.

      But by all means Sport, if you feel that strongly about about fighting them "over there instead of over here" jump on the next plane available. The soon to be ousted Afghan "President" would like your help.
    • gtiness, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1whoa BunnyWunny.

      I think the line between Al Qaeda and the Taliban was sufficiently blurred when the Taliban first claimed Al Qaeda (Bin Laden) wasn't in the country...then, "Oh, he's here but, we'll keep him under wraps for you". Do you really mean to suggest there are no Al Qaeda in Afghanistan? In Pakistan? Where is Bin Laden?

      If the "Taliban" are a "government" and harbor and directly support Al Qaeda...how can one differentiate between the two? That's sort of like drawing a line between the Nazi party and the SS. In a few individual cases you can do it but, in general, one cannot exist (could not exist) without the other.
  • potdarko, on 10/12/2007, -9/+1Hope you all war $"#$"# got family @ war! Hope it pays off! No legs, no brother, no brains... but wtf... the car is moving... and you all hate bikes
    • rogerbannister, on 10/12/2007, -6/+4I could stoop as low as you and say "I hope your family gets blown up first in a terrorist attack", but I wouldn't wish DEATH on anyone.

      Mean Liberals suck!!
    • potdarko, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Hmmm... what's the difference? if an iraqui family dies... the peacekeerers did it... if an Occupation Army soldier dies... it was terrorism. Go watch Nodi
    • Vokas, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I have no idea what the parent is trying to say.
  • alirio, on 10/12/2007, -16/+2I can't wait for Quebec to separate so I don't have to worry about troops, or trade!

    ***** you America!!!!

    ***** you Clone of America (English Canada)

    Any more of this rediculous gingoism and I'll have to come over there and slap you mother ***** up-side the head!

    Occupation is wrong!!!!!

    Let's bring all the troops home!!!!
    • HotGore, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5You know when you make a argument you should back it up with facts, not a bunch of nonsensical banter.

      I love how separatist think they are isolated from the rest of Canada. Guess what, we really don't care. We have treated you better then any other province and all you can do is bitch and complain. You are the only province to be given special attention in the Charter of Rights. Maybe we should just make you equal to the rest of Canada? Oh ya you didn't like that either. Stop your bitching andif you hate Canada so much go back to France.
    • Herkimer56, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1If Quebec had separated that could have followed in the steps of their French ancestors and already surrendered by now. Cowards that always find a way to allow others to do their fighting for them.
  • rogerbannister, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Next, al-Qaeda will demand "protection money" from Canada.
  • grzelakc, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11National Post = FauxNews Canada.

    This drivel was published purely as a counterpoint to the mass of protest against the war in Afghanistan that took place on Saturday.

    FYI National Post is owned by Rupert Murdoch.
    • CountSessine, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Just to make things crystal clear, do you dispute the authenticity of the report? Perhaps you think that they invented it? Or are you just taking a cheap shot at a newspaper you don't like?
    • rogerbannister, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Maybe osama IS Rupert Murdoch IS Bush (Have you ever seen them all at the same time??)
    • grzelakc, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2@CountSessine
      Yeah, I dispute the truth of the article itself. I think that just like the previous "breaking" revelation from NationalPost (the one about Jews being forced to wear badges in Iran) will turn out to be a complete neocon fabrication.
    • Kniggit, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2The National Post is a NEWSPAPER. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Post

      According to Wikipedia, the National Post is also run by the Asper family who are historically supporters of the LIBERAL PARTY OF CANADA.

      Fox News is a CABLE AND SATELLITE TELEVISION STATION. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fox_news

      At least get your basic facts right before criticizing the political leanings of the news reporting organization.
  • CkMaverick, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8It is an empty threat. Attacking Canada would be the worst possible move for al-Qaeda. It would give the U.S. more support for the war and give them a chance to say "see we told you so." The last thing they would want is to increase support for the U.S. As an American I can easily say that we are digging ourselves a pretty big hole without the help of al-Qaeda, all they need to do now is sit back and watch... The last thing al-Qaeda wants to do is toss us a rope. They wouldn't be stupid enough to attack one of the most pacifist nations out there and risk increasing U.S. international support.
    • rogerbannister, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3"They wouldn't be stupid enough to attack one of the most pacifist nations out there and risk increasing U.S. international support."

      What? Yeah, they would never attack appeasers like, say, SPAIN!!

      After all, playground rules apply to World War III. "If we leave them alone, then they will leave us alone."

      Wait...that didn't work on the playground either. Doh!!
    • CkMaverick, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Huh? Spain has 1300 troops in Iraq and is much more outspoken for American policy regarding the "war on terror."
    • rogerbannister, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Spain has 0 troops in Iraq.
    • CkMaverick, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0You are right, I should have said Spain *had 1300 troops in Iraq. I was defending Spain's initial position on the "war on terror" compared to Canada's.
    • gtiness, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The fact is, Canada has troops in the field confonting the will of radical Islam. That is enough to warrant violent attack on non-combatants in their minds.

      Doesn't matter where. Doesn't matter why. The only salient point is, Canada is resisting. That is intolerable to them.
  • potdarko, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1don't thank me yet for double posting...

    but why do you think organizations such as Al-Qaeda exist in the first place? Terrorism is aka "USA's foreign policy"...
  • steeel, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6Al Qaeda Doesn't Exist


    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vBVVs9hcmRY
    • potdarko, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4If there was oil @ the moon... don't doubt that troops would be sent... to fight terrorism...
      Wanna free Tibet? Find some oil there too...and voilá!!
  • sabotank, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5attacking canada is like pissing into the wind.......doesn't make any sense
  • ChefQuix, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2I'd say a more likely target would be Winnipeg, at the grey cup.
    • cdnbaconwrap, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5No, I don't agree. Really, 'who' wants to go to Winnipeg?!! ;)
    • CkMaverick, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0I would if they would get a new hockey team.
  • DeadLikeMe, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8I think we Americans should be rightly pissed off that Canada is getting this attention! WTF. Who does AQ think we are - sissies, losers, a country not to be taken seriously about tracking them down and killing them?

    Oh wait. I guess after all these years and with little success to show for billions of dollars spent and thousands of lives lost in our AQ hunt, AQ is not too concerned about us any more.

  • DigitalBrian, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4who doesnt want a secret oil pipeline? *lol*
    • cdnbaconwrap, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Dude, Canada doesn't need a secret pipeline. We have 200 billion units of oil in Northern Alberta.
  • Comatose51, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5What morons. There's no better way to show the world you're on the side of wrong than to attack Canada. I mean who has any reason to hate Canada?
    • Jo9100, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6Everyone... Harper is doing just like Bush... they're creating terrorism by attempting to fighting it. Bad right... bad conservatives... go NPD!
  • TheKoopaBros, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Boy when you hate Canada, you pretty much have no allies.

    I'm not supportive of "The war on terror", but because of this biased christian crusade propaganda I really do hope that this gets resolved and over with.
  • lebaige, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3The idea is to isolate the United States politically by attacking countries who are sitting on the edge in terms of support. It worked with Spain, it's working in England, and it will likely work with Canada if they can pull it off.
  • cheekey_monkey, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1If Al-Qaeda attacks Canada they will be attacking fellow Muslims, fellow practicer's of Islam. Who are the morons?
    The terrorists have turned their cause to seem like a holy war to get young people to join them in their extremist ways. They use propaganda to make the west the place where infidels live (which is making the issue white and black). In reality the west is full of different people with multiple backgrounds.
    I think the west has learned from the terrorist attacks and the school shootings that we are not helpless when faced with a fatal situation. We have to fight back when our lives are at risk.(example: flight 93)
  • reflex, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Dear Al Qaeda: Here is a video showing Canadian troops kicking your Taliban pals butts in Afghanistan: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qaC-w2dIxZc
    • CBTF, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Thats some intense footage. Nice post.
    • Gunite, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1They had to call in the air force to help out:
      http://www.joe-ks.com/archives_oct2001/CanadaJetFighter.jpg

      Seriously though, why are they running and shooting out in the open with no cover? I was also thinking they throw grenades like girls, but I won't share that as it could be viewed as sexist. Maybe the target was a mosquito. I swear to God and Ala I hate mosquitoes, if I was the LT in that company I'd seriously call in artillery support.
  • NobleArc, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1but.. why Canada? What have we done to anyone? We go in, clean up, rebuild cities... nearly nothing more than that. =
  • P5ycHo, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1There is NO Al Qaeda.
  • form3hide, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Today's News!!!

    al-Qaeda warns [insert random country here]!
  • jellygraph, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Ok, just so you guys are clear about this...

    - Al-Queda _DIDN'T_ have anything directly to do with the London Tube Bombings.

    Ok, now that's over with, Al-Queda may be threatening Canada or not, it doesn't matter much really, because it sounds like a lot of bull and they obviously don't know the slightest thing about Canada.

    ================

    Al-Queda operative: "Rashid, it is zero hour, those Canadian infidels must pay for their tyrrany and intolerance to Islam."

    Rashid: "Ya... about that, boss, um... Canadians aren't exactly like that. They are actually really nice and tolerant of all races and creeds. They even allowed Sharia law to some extent."

    Al-Queda operative: "Oh... well... that's a bit embarrassing. After everything I said about it in the news. People must think I'm a right twit now. *grumble*"
  • drunkjack, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4They're gonna hit the Beer Store!
  • marsbar, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2My brother went to school at the University of Ottawa. On one visit to him in Ottawa the folks and I decided to take a tour of parliament. We went through security and were told to hang a right and go down some stairs to join the tour which had just started. We did as we were told but didn't see the tour so we started wandering looking for the tour. We never did find the tour but did manage to make it into a totally open house of commons. We had a seat where the members of parliament would sit and basically had the run of the place for a good 15 minutes until we got bored and decided to leave. On a way out we did meet a security guard who told us that we shouldn't be here. We said sorry and kept walking.

    The point of this whole story is that Canada is vulnerable to an attack from crazies. (Not that we were going to do anything that day but I'm just saying some one could if they wanted to) Our Prime Minister has on occasion been pied in the face, had his official residence broken into by a guy with a knife, etc. In fact in the 70's John Lennon drove up to the PM's house to have a chat, totally unannounced and unchecked, it could have been anyone.

    We are going to get attacked by Al-Queda/Taliban eventually. Why? Because they are fundamentalists who believe god has given them the right to be tyrants and they will resort to any form of terror open to them. Canada is larger than the U.S. and we have less resources to protect all of it. Again we are going to get attacked by them regardless of what we do. Our only hope for the long term is to stamp out fundamentalism by providing people across the world with hope, freedom from oppression, and knowledge and sometimes it takes force to accomplish this.
    • Modulo, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1"Our only hope for the long term is to stamp out fundamentalism by providing people across the world with hope,.." with it
      "freedom from oppression," sounds good
      "and knowledge" word
      "and sometimes it takes force to accomplish this." BZZZZZT Ohhhh.. so close.
  • TyRaNNOus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Honestly Canadians are to mellow. If we were attacked (which we won't be). 95% of us would be over it quick why? because half of us have a hard time speaking english and second we are progressive we don't get stuck in this ***** ass time warp and stand around and watch while ***** falls apart.
  • TritonX, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1As a Canadian what pisses me off mostly about the war in Afghanistan, is that the americans started the war with us and their allies, then went to iraq without securing Afghanistan first. Now there is two countries in that area that are artificially sustained. I don't know if they overestimated our military, but the situation is not improving.
  • GonzoLiga, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1As usual, al Qaeda gets it wrong in terms of timing and prose. It's "an almost fanatical devotion to the pope," fer cryin' out loud.
    http://people.csail.mit.edu/paulfitz/spanish/script.html refers.

    AQ has a history of providing free, complimentary warnings before launching attacks. They'll warn Muslims to leave an area, warn countries to withdraw forces from Middle East hotspots, and warn Chinese restaurant-goers to avoid the Number 37 on the menu -- too spicy.

    See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Toronto_terrorism_case
    for an unrelated, totally ficticious threat against Canada.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 57 of 57 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.