Western Standard

The Shotgun Blog

« Mr. Bateman is learning quickly. Unfortunately. | Main | Conclusion »

Saturday, May 19, 2007

Bring Sohail Qureshi Home

Members of Calgary’s Muslim community are calling on the Canadian government to bring home the alleged Canadian Taliban from Afghanistan to face a possible trial here. Sohail Qureshi was captured in Kabul last week and there is already a growing tide of impatience in Calgary’s 60,000 strong Muslim community or at least from the chair of the Muslim Council of Calgary - Nagah Hage.

I agree, after intelligence is done with him to find out what the hell he was doing over there in the first place and if he is connected with the jihad movement to possibly kill Canadian soldiers then he should be brought back to face trial here. If not, put him back on his bus in Kabul.

In regards to the idea that Sohail Qureshi’s expedition overseas has cast a shadow over Calgary’s Muslim community Nagah Hage is slightly defensive:

“It happened, so big deal … it doesn’t mean the faith has to be hijacked. …”

It actually is a big deal and if the allegations prove out Nagah Hage should take note that maybe his faith has been hijacked and he should know better.

After 1,000 pro-Palestinian demonstrators–”angry and chanting,” according to the Calgary Sun–”surged” towards the Harry Hays federal building and then the U.S. Consulate April 5, march organizer Nagah Hage pleaded with them. “Islam means peace,” he said. But “Islam” does not mean “peace,” and it was reported that the mob chanted “Death to the Jews.”

In addition, his own Imam (featured by the media as pleading with Sohail not to go Jihading) and anti-terrorism counselor, Alaa Elsayed is on record as referring to Israel’s attack against the terrrorist regime Hezbollah as a junior Holocaust and a new-age genocide (#).

It is a big deal.

(c/p Dust my Broom)

Posted by Darcey on May 19, 2007 in International Affairs | Permalink


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Bring Sohail Qureshi Home:


A trial in Canada with a Liberal judge....i don`t think so! The Afgan Govt should hold a trial and if he is guilty...hang him!

Posted by: Al W | 2007-05-19 11:15:15 AM

Typical bs from the Muslim community. Let's face it their religion has not been hijacked (ironic use of words by the way), there are far too many Muslims in this world who believe that these terrorists are right.

The Muslim communities first reaction to anything about them is always, "hey don't look at us we're peaceful". Yet all of these events are being done by Muslims screaming "Allah Akbar!"

Contrast the woe is me attitude of Muslims with the Korean community. In the US last month a Korean student killed 33 people in the University of Virginia, the Korean community worldwide expressed regret, sorrow and shame for the fact that this insane fool was Korean.

Muslims worldwide only threaten with, and more times than naught carry out their threats anytime someone questions their stance on Islams radical doctrine.

If the Muslim community is truly to be believed that it is peaceful, then it must grow up on its own and take care of all of the problems it's created worldwide. Muslims should go to Darfur and stop the ethnic cleansing, Muslims should go and clean up the messes they have stirred up everywhere they live, stop pointing the finger everywhere but at themselves.

How can we take this community serious when they parade for Hezbollah and chant death to Jews, to me it sounds like a community deeply involved spiritually or physically in terrorism.

Posted by: niv | 2007-05-19 11:30:55 AM

Their marches sound like a target rich environment to me.

Posted by: obc | 2007-05-19 12:35:14 PM

If he has gone to Afghanistan and he has and if he has engaged against the government and the coalition, he should be handled by the Afghans. The Muslim community, indeed the Canadian Public should be told that such individuals will neither be supported nor protected by the Government of Canada. They create their own misery: let them wallow in it.

Posted by: D.M.Leigh | 2007-05-19 1:09:06 PM



Since this kid drew insipration from Qur'anic text, let the Calgary community deal with why these things continue to happen over the past 1400 years.

Couldn't be they're trying to emulate Muhammad, could it?

Naw. He would never provoke his enemies, wait for a reaction, label it offensive, then go on a killing rampage using the ‘offensive' reaction as a rationale for murder.

Naw. That never happened in the Qur'an.

It's a religion of peace, after all.

Posted by: set you free | 2007-05-19 1:38:56 PM

"Bring Sohail Qureshi Home"

. . . in a pine box!

Posted by: obc | 2007-05-19 2:42:41 PM

It comes down to how one defines "home" this Muslim fanatic has an address with a postal code in Alberta
Canada - that does not define him nor his family as Canadian -he has not taken an Oath of Allegiance to
Canada -his loyality if indeed it ever in fact existed will be suspect into eternity. The Security and Justice resources of Afghanistan have the mandate and duty to ensure this individual is exposed first hand to an Afghan Court. Professors
Attaran the "Iranian Canadian" and Byers the twisted
member of the Socialist Horde will write their "shocked and appalled missives to the Globe and Mail" but they don't get the Globe on a regualar basis in 'The "Ghan"{ - the SOB went to a War Zone
to Maim and Kill allied and Nato troops. His fate will de determined by the Government of Afghanistan and Allah -he is probably waiting for his reserved spot in "Paradise" MacLeod

Posted by: Jack MacLeod | 2007-05-19 3:18:48 PM

He'll get his 72 virgins. alright. But he doesn't realize they will be nuns!

Posted by: obc | 2007-05-19 3:21:02 PM

He is Afghanistan's problem. They need to provide the evidence and try him there. By all means let the canadians have someone monitor the trial, but if he is aiding the Taliban, and it is proven, then let the Afghanis deal with him in their own manner.

After all, his muslim community wouldn't want the Cdn. government to tell those good muslims in Afghanistan how to run their judicial system would they?

Posted by: MarkAlta | 2007-05-19 3:35:35 PM

About this group, I would repeat: lies, more lies.

Posted by: Rémi Houle | 2007-05-19 4:16:22 PM


I'm flattered that you remember the nun cartoon thing I posted.

Every time one of these homicidal maniacs speaks of 72 virgins, it will be difficult to stifle my laughter and what misguided fools they are.

It's a good thing Parliament is in recess now. The NDP, Libs and Blocheads would have been shedding crocodile tears about this clown's fate every day in Question Period.

Posted by: set you free | 2007-05-19 4:30:37 PM

Why are these half-assed "Canadians" constantly running back and forth to their "Homelands"?
They get in trouble and we are supposed to rescue them when they are up to no good and taking actions against us in our fight against terrorism.

Let them take responsibility for their own exploits in spite of the rants for action by the Liberals and Dippers who never met a terrorist sympathizer they couldn't go to bat for.

We have as citizens the notorious Khadr family and we still allow them to remain here, the mother stating she would be proud to sacrifice her sons to a terrorist act.

Any nation worth it's salt would revoke their citizenship but not Canada with her Trudeau Charter, they have a right to think and act that way, that's how far down we've gone and sinking further to a Country that stands for nothing.

Posted by: LizJ | 2007-05-19 5:09:15 PM

set you free~

Another version is the cartoon where these Islamofascists leave this world and are met by George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, John Madison, James Monroe, Patrick Henry, and Robert E. Lee.

The Muzzies seem confused as they are severely beaten by these VIRGINIANS!

Posted by: obc | 2007-05-19 5:13:55 PM

To paraphrase the poet Dryden on the death of his wife, this should be this Islamofascist's epitaph:

'Here lies Qureshi, here let him lie!

Now he's at rest, and so am I'

Posted by: obc | 2007-05-19 6:03:16 PM

Religon of peace, religon of peace, gawd I'm Soooo sick of hearing that at my wonderfully culti-multural workplace. None of the muslims I work with will enequivocably condemn suicide bombers or the dysfunction which is Palestinian politics- which, of course, mirrors politics elsewhere in the muslim world.

Every time I think that one of 'em is about to do so, they have to qualify their condemnation with an anti-US/ Israel/ Jews slam; "Yes, the whole suicide bombing thing is horrible, but then they have no other weapons to use against the Israelis/ US/ Jews" or words to that effect. Sickening.

This is why I have such a hard time believing even one of them is a Canadian first. I;'ve seen absolutely no evidence that they are. They sure do love the health care though.........

Posted by: Hoser | 2007-05-19 8:05:31 PM

...when a mother happily sends her offspring to blow himself up in the name of religion, something is seriously wrong.

Posted by: tomax7 | 2007-05-19 9:47:08 PM

I hear the 72 virgins prunes have Unionized.

And 72 fruitcakes have requested they be included in on the Union, as if not, it is discrimination.

Posted by: Lady | 2007-05-20 12:23:38 AM

Oh, and one more thing, if they don't like 1,400 year old prunes, let them eat cake!

Posted by: Lady | 2007-05-20 12:35:40 AM

Islamic (radicals?) are anything but members of a "religion of peace". Everywhere they exist in the world and now beyond is strife and terror. They've taken their fight through terrorism to peaceful, stable Democracies in their mission to control the world.

Their extreme hatred starts with the Jews and spreads to our Western Democracies.
Sure we know they are not all in on the crusade, but far too many are and far too many are not condemning what is going on among their own brethren. If it can't be stemmed from within, doing it from the outside means trouble.

To define oneself by a religion above all other ethnicity tells us nothing else in their minds is above that religion including life itself including sacrificing their own children. That is when it's a sickness, be it religion of any stripe.

Religious fanaticism of all sorts has caused many wars throughout history. Today we are all dealing with one of our most terrifying ones which continues to mess with peoples minds to the point of insanity, leading to insane acts against humanity itself.

We really must demand people come to Canada, practice whatever religion they wish, OBEY OUR LAWS, and integrate into our society just as our forbears did centuries ago to build this great country.
It's become an uphill battle due to the Charter, created by Trudeau, the worst PM we've ever had. Added to that was Multiculturalism, which even he admitted was a mistake,alas too late.

Posted by: LizJ | 2007-05-20 7:57:50 AM

Well said, Liz!

Posted by: obc | 2007-05-20 8:02:59 AM

I can't help think that the so-called "moderate Muslims" are mostly silent on the actions of the terrorist Islamic factions for several reasons.

1. Dissent and debate is forbidden and enforced with the threat of death and in many cases, resultant death.

2. I believe that many Muslims (and left-Libs) are in awe of the ability of the radical Islamists to have succeeded in: tying the lone superpower into security knots; conquering the UN; and, harnessing anti-US and Israeli sentiment worldwide. This is likely a great source of pride for the Muslim world.

3. It appears that great numbers of Young Western Muslims won't assimilate because the cultural vacuum created by Left-Lib multicultural policies can't compete with 1 and 2 above.

As to the question of whether or not "moderate Muslims" will save Westerners from the demographic reality of eventual beheading, conversion to Islam, or slavery, I'm stuck on a parallel question from an earlier time and for basically the same reasons, How many Germans were truly Nazis? Answer: enough to allow the resulting deaths of 50 million people including the majority of European Jews.

Solutions? Nothing easy and nothing pretty.

Posted by: John Chittick | 2007-05-20 12:13:23 PM

"Nothing pretty" ~

You're right about that. Another major attack on North American soil and Muslim blood will be pouring through the streets, long before the police can get their act together to investigate and arrest the perpetrators.

At that point, the "moderate" Muslims will have discovered they should have spoken up when they had the chance.

Posted by: obc | 2007-05-20 12:27:06 PM

I'm think you may be a bit off on that one, obc. It will take several attacks on Western soil before the majority sees this for what it is. Until, that happens, the next one will be blamed on Bush, et al. Not in the conspiracy form, more in the form of: in you had not gone into Iraq and stirred up the hornet's nest...

Posted by: Brent Weston | 2007-05-20 12:46:02 PM

That would be "if you had not..."

Posted by: Brent Weston | 2007-05-20 12:47:09 PM

"It will take several attacks on Western soil before the majority sees this for what it is."

Not if it's a chemical or a dirty nuclear with tens of thousands of casualties. You may be right if they are just "pinpricks", but the US citizenry is armed - and getting fed up, what with the amnesty and open borders that are now being passed into law. It won't take more than one major attack to set them off IMHO.

Posted by: obc | 2007-05-20 1:01:22 PM

. . . and the first attacks will be on the mosques that are often also armories. The secondary explosions will reveal them to be what they are.

Posted by: obc | 2007-05-20 1:27:58 PM

. . . and the second wave will be against those protesting these attacks on their arsenals - oops, I mean their houses of worship - protesting in the streets, while waving their "DEATH TO AMERICA & ISRAEL placards.

Posted by: obc | 2007-05-20 1:35:46 PM

As Oscar Wilde said on the Death of Little Nell
it would take a heart of stone, not to laugh.
Now this fellow will be asked skill testing questions by a number of Afghans -most of whom will
be somewhat annoyed and lacking in gentility. I wonder how the fellow got there, via a flight from Vancouver to Pakistan and then by foot? don't think so. Muslims in Alberta will continue to rant. After all he is a fellow "Canadian" more or less - MacLeod

Posted by: Jack MacLeod | 2007-05-20 4:02:29 PM

Brent Weston, shhhhh, don't think it will take more than one attack on our Country, the people are already fed up and are in no mind to tolerate any bullshit from radical Islamics.

Our good men in the military are part of the NATO mission in Afghanistan fighting the bastards and we've had about all we're going to tolerate.

Why ever would you want to spread the idea we are all Jack Laytons and Pansies like Coderre and Dion in the Liberano Party.

If the best they can do to make political points is go to bat for Taliban terrorist detainees, THEY ARE BANKRUPT IN EVERY SENSE OF THE WORD.

Posted by: LizJ | 2007-05-20 4:46:55 PM

". . . and the first attacks will be on the mosques that are often also armories. The secondary explosions will reveal them to be what they are."

Do you have any proof of your statement that the mosques are armories, obc? In Canada, that is.

BTW, what do you think about the validity of the rumour of a W-80 in Mecca?

Posted by: Brent Weston | 2007-05-20 4:48:11 PM


I am just making a comment about the way I see things. I did not say that that is the way I want things to be...

Posted by: Brent Weston | 2007-05-20 4:50:33 PM

Brent, the Mosques may not be armories in the true sense of the word but inciting hatred comes a close second.

The only way the people of Canada would tolerate more than one attack or attempted attack on our Country is if they all become Lefties, drink the Cool Ade.

Jack, I too wonder how the fellow got there. Most hard slogging Canadians are having a hard time keeping bread on the table let alone making flights to far off lands several times a year.

Could it be the supreme stupidity of our lenient system of covering all bases for immigrants from health care to employment insurance to education and on and on and bring your granny and grandpa on over?

We have a pretty concerning happening in Hamilton Ontario where a School Board will be offering total immersion Arabic schooling. Only in Dalton McGuinty's politics of desperation in a country with two FOUNDING official languages.
If this continues to creep along aided by desperate, stupid politicos, we are lost as a Country. Hello to Balkanization.

Posted by: LizJ | 2007-05-20 5:22:09 PM

Many of the mosques in Iraq, Lebanon and the West Bank have been found to have armaments in them. Why would anyone think if it's acceptable there, it wouldn't be acceptable elsewhere?

The interview from Frontline rings true. I have read similar sentiments in several other sources.

Whether Mecca is the home of one of these nuclear devices, I don't know. It seems doubtful to me that it resides there. The Saudis wouldn't want to accidently have it explode in their "holiest" of cities. That it resides in an American, English or Australian mosque seems far more plausible to me. Then again, a dirty nuclear bomb is even more likely, IMHO.

Posted by: obc | 2007-05-20 5:58:10 PM


I had thought your statement about Canadian mosques was conjecture. It is understandable on your part; I just wanted to know if you had evidence.

Now on the W-80. Perhaps you only skimmed the article I linked to. From the article:
"No pro-American thought it weird during the Cold War that we had nukes aimed at Moscow in response to the Soviets aiming them at us. It’s what prevented the Cold War from becoming nuclear hot. The threat to nuke Mecca may be the one reason we haven’t had another 9/11 or worse.

As Mecca is of ultimate value to the Jihadis, targeting Mecca is an ultimate deterrent for us. Whether the story that some Pentagon friends of mine hinted at -- that a W-80 warhead is already buried in Mecca equipped to recognize a unique signal generator from a satellite for detonation – is true or if it’s Psy-Ops, I don’t know. The important thing is that the Jihadis don’t know either."

Therefore, the story is that the Americans have buried a W-80 in Mecca as a deterrent; the story is not that Islamists have it buried in Mecca. However, the story is almost two years old now...

Posted by: Brent Weston | 2007-05-20 6:06:51 PM

Last I heard, no infidels are permitted even to visit Mecca. If you are saying some Muslims buried it there on behalf of the US, I find that implausible since they'd be blowing up their own "holiest" site. Not impossible - just improbable.

As far as Canadian mosques being used as armories, that can be done overnight - if & when they think it's necessary. It's not like CSIS has them under 24-hour surveillance.

I'd bet London's mosques already have them - based on the extreme radicalism of their imams. Psria too. The US ones are next in probability, seeing that Iran keeps threatening the US mainland with mayhem if it is attacked by the US or Israel. Australia is 3rd in likelihood - for the same reason as London having them.

Posted by: obc | 2007-05-20 6:16:31 PM

"the story is that the Americans have buried a W-80 in Mecca as a deterrent"

Another reason this doesn't ring true to me is that with the US carriers in the area, Mecca can be destroyed from the air within an hour of the White House ordering it. It seems too "Hollywood" to bury it there for future use, IMHO.

Posted by: obc | 2007-05-20 6:19:51 PM


I do not doubt that there is some plausibility to the Canadian mosques having prohibitted materials within them; I was simply asking if you had evidence.

On the W-80: agreed, yet the "story" is out there...

Posted by: Brent Weston | 2007-05-20 6:25:33 PM

If I had evidence, I'd be calling CSIS as I type. But there is a pattern among these Jihadi Islamofascists worldwide that cannot be safely ignored.

Posted by: obc | 2007-05-20 6:31:50 PM

"On the W-80: agreed, yet the "story" is out there..."

And the story is out there that man-made Globull Warming will kill us within 10 years - I mean 5 years - I mean. . . Get my drift?

Lotsa stories out there - most must be taken with a grain of salt. Oh, have you heard thee one about George Bush planting bombs in the Twin Towers in NYC before 9/11?

Posted by: obc | 2007-05-20 6:39:53 PM

I'm not sure there will be another major terror attack on the US, by which I mean something on the scale of a 9-11 type atrocity. There will almost certainly be small-scale attacks due to Sudden Jihad Syndrome - we've seen plenty already - but no dirty bombs. (Although, as Dennis Miller would say, that's just my opinion - I could be wrong.)

And the reason is simple. A repeat of 9-11 would be utterly counterproductive. Islamic radicalism (and terrorism) was cooking along quite nicely through the 90's, thanks in large part to Bubba's lack of concern with anything not involving his zipper), and would likely have continued in that vein under GW. I can't see where he would have initiated any sort of "war" on Islamic radicalism, although he may have done more in the way of retaliation against al Qaeda for USS Cole-type attacks than Clinton did.

As it was, 9-11 was a disaster because, as with Pearl Harbour, it awoke the sleeping giant. Bin Laden thought that a catastrophic attack would strike terror into the weak Americans, but all it did was piss them off. So AQ lost its base in Afghanistan, and they lost a major supporter in Saddam (and yes, there was a relationship there), and they are in the process of losing Iraq (the MSM notwithstanding).

The Islamic extremists behind the jihad may be nuts, but they're not stupid. They learned that they can't defeat the US by attacking it directly, and they will never defeat the US military in a straight-up fight. So they have learned to rely on their allies in the media and the Democratic Party (to the extent they can be distinguished). The highest skill in warfare is letting the enemy defeat himself, and that is what AQ and the rest of the jihad are content to do. Attacks on US troops in Iraq are not intended to demoralize the military (and won't). They are meant for CBS and NBC and ABC and the NY Times and Washington Post, who will do anything to attack a Republican President, and damn the consequences.

And in the event I'm wrong, and someone does pull off another big one, then I'm also not convinced that there will be "Muslim blood running in the streets". Remember that after 9-11, with emotions running pretty high and a desire to "get the bastards" virtually universal (or at least the Dems pretended to be on board) there were exactly ZERO attacks on Muslims in the US, and that number hasn't changed. I would expect that this basic restraint against attacking innocents would be retained. However, that doesn't mean things would stay the same.

Remember the Japanese during WWII? Same thing, but not run by the government. Western governments don't have the spine for that sort of thing any more, but ordinary people do. (I mean the sort of ordinary people who tend to do things like own guns, so they CAN do what they have to do when the chips are down, government cowardice notwithstanding.) Muslim trouble-makers will very likely find themselves decorating lamp-posts, along with their ACLU-style bum-lickers. The media will express their outrage, but only once - black eyes and split lips don't look so good on camera. The politicians who normally pander to the multi-culti scam artists will suddenly realize that if they don't lead, they will be shunted aside (perhaps gently, perhaps not). Your standard limp-wrist liberal will discover the blessings of silence. (Not that they will be convinced that terrorism is real – they’ll still believe it’s a Jewish conspiracy – but they will be too scared to do their usual routines.) And the much-heralded moderate Muslim majority will become very cooperative very quickly as they realize that jihad can run two ways.

And forget the courts preventing any of this. Inter armes, silent leges - In the face of arms, the law is silent.

No-one wants to see another major terror attack on the US or any other western country (or anywhere at all for that matter). But in a perverse way, as others have mentioned, that's what it will take for the gloves to come off. Without it, it's the slow surrender we're seeing now.

Posted by: Doug | 2007-05-20 6:52:10 PM

LOL, obc

Posted by: Brent Weston | 2007-05-20 6:55:04 PM

"I would expect that this basic restraint against attacking innocents would be retained."

While that might be true at first, the mosques and any radicals that choose to defend them will pay the price. The "moderates" had better choose sides quickly - or else what might follow won't be pretty. CAIR must be disbanded and their leaders deported, although strung up seems to me to be an acceptable alternative.

On the whole, Doug, your last missive is dead on. BRAVO!

Posted by: obc | 2007-05-20 6:59:25 PM

Thanks, Brent. I'll leave you a poem:

Nature calls, Niagara falls. (a la Ogden Nash)

Posted by: obc | 2007-05-20 7:01:39 PM

There's a famous story about the British explorer Richard F. Burton. He traveled to Mecca & Medina, disguised as an Arab. He had a guide with him who kept his secret, for the penalty for an infidel caught in these holy cities was death.

On one occasion, he was forced to kill an Arab who saw him doing something that gave away his infidelity. What did he do that exposed him for what he was?

Posted by: obc | 2007-05-20 7:42:36 PM

Actually, obc, to return to the story, there is a serious side to it. There are two ways to look at it. There is the tactical side to it - is a W-80 or other similar American nuclear device somehow covertly buried in the city? Let us say, for the sake of argument, that there is no device actually buried but that the story about certain sources within the Pentagon saying it is so are true.

That leads us to the strategic or "Pysch-Ops" part of the story. I am quite sure that in the planning of the Pentagon, they come up with several scenarios. Some of those will include the use of their most powerful weapons - the nukes. Clearly, the Pentagon will have plans for nuking certain Middle Eastern cities. The fact the Mecca is on the list and that this is (or at least might be) being communicated to the Islamists is quite significant. It is the most honest admission we have seen so far. From the one side, this has always been a "religious" war. To pretend otherwise is foolish. To include Mecca in the planning stages is simply being prudent and honest.

For the "Pysch-Ops" part to have some credibility, there has to be the possibility that the story is true, though...

Posted by: Brent Weston | 2007-05-20 7:59:06 PM

No argument here. The Pentagon has many plans on the books, one is for the invasion of Canada. They must be prepared for any eventuality.

Posted by: obc | 2007-05-20 8:02:56 PM

The Muslim community of Calgary is most likely emboldened by the Arar scam and payola. After that and the great effort and expense to bring back Arab (Canadians?) from Lebanon for whom Canada means little or nothing until they are in trouble, one cannot blame Muslims living here for expecting to get their demands met. I only hope the government does not cave in on this one.

Not only is he a prisoner of war, he is a traitor and should be tried in a military court abroad.

Posted by: Alain | 2007-05-20 10:11:13 PM

Home to what?

Away from what?

The following story is not for the faint at heart.


I say, if this is what he wanted, then he does not belong here.

Posted by: Lady | 2007-05-20 11:37:56 PM

"Bring him home", a fine lefty refrain, so typical and predictable. Where the hell does he really call home? If he's going to keep on trekking to the land of his heart and soul like so many other half-assed Canadians, let him and his ilk quit crying about the predicaments they get into, it's their choice, their responsibility.

We forget so quickly the cost and thankless job it was to rescue Lebanese Canadians of convenience, that has to stop. YOU ARE EITHER CANADIAN OR YOU ARE NOT. YOU CAN'T BE A CANADIAN AND LIVE YOUR LIFE IN ANOTHER COUNTRY.

Posted by: LizJ | 2007-05-21 7:45:21 AM

Oh, oh, more Islamic terrorism rearing in Lebanon, Our Foreign Affairs has warned those who can get out of affected area safely to do so, otherwise stay in a safe place.

That should put the responsibility on those who choose to live there and also be Canadians of convenience to deal with the problem themselves.

Living in a tinderbox of the world for whatever reason, while holding the passport of a safe Haven like Canada is a choice. It's not the responsibility of Canada to rescue people who make their own choices freely.

Posted by: LizJ | 2007-05-21 9:46:28 AM

The comments to this entry are closed.