‘White nationalism’ a threat the Canadian Armed Forces aren’t equipped for: watchdog

[ArmyRick]

Things I worry about more than the serious rise of "white nationalism"
1. Going bankrupt because the taxes have gutted most of us business owners;
2. Blizzards;
3. Sharks;
4. Trudeau;
5. Sharks with freaking lazers;
6. Cows getting out at 2 am;
7. Neighbour's dog;
8. The boogeyman;
9. Coyotes;
10. Freeland having to give up her Disney+ subscription;
11. Sharks from a Sharknado;
12. Extremist Mormons;
13. Zombie Apocalypse;
14. Zombie Shark Apocalypse;
15. DS Staff with a clipboard and red pen;
16. Recurring dreams of horribly long O groups that are pointless;
17. My sons gun taping me in the middle of the night;
18. My wife finding out I spend more than 20 minutes each day on army.ca;
19. A Sharknado hitting a blizzard; and
20. My chickens not laying eggs anymore.

You can see that although their maybe very FEW that are into white nationalism, I have bigger and more real things to worry about.

 

[Remius]

You're talking to someone who wouldn't have been classified as "white" 50 years ago. I'm not one to get my hackles up about what the mangiacake population is getting defensive about.

My point is that we have bigger fish to fry security wise than the potential for WNists joining the CAF. I'd be more worried about the fact Pte. Bloggins Int Op can't afford to sleep in a van in Ottawa; I'm certain China has noticed this all too well themselves.

That does not mean that you ignore or deny or get upset when a security threat gets identified? Or should it just be ignored? Again no one said this was existential, sure we have bigger fish to fry, no one here says otherwise.

 

[OldSolduer]

Things I worry about more than the serious rise of "white nationalism"
1. Going bankrupt because the taxes have gutted most of us business owners;
2. Blizzards;
3. Sharks;
4. Trudeau;
5. Sharks with freaking lazers;
6. Cows getting out at 2 am;
7. Neighbour's dog;
8. The boogeyman;
9. Coyotes;
10. Freeland having to give up her Disney+ subscription;
11. Sharks from a Sharknado;
12. Extremist Mormons;
13. Zombie Apocalypse;
14. Zombie Shark Apocalypse;
15. DS Staff with a clipboard and red pen;
16. Recurring dreams of horribly long O groups that are pointless;
17. My sons gun taping me in the middle of the night;
18. My wife finding out I spend more than 20 minutes each day on army.ca;
19. A Sharknado hitting a blizzard; and
20. My chickens not laying eggs anymore.

You can see that although their maybe very FEW that are into white nationalism, I have bigger and more real things to worry about.

Number 15 is especially scary. Closely followed by number 16.

 

[Navy_Pete]

The issue is that they are targeting the CAF. They aren’t actively trying to join environnement Canada or the food inspection agency.

Security clearance issues would be a good start. But our recruiting system is so bogged up I doubt there is much they can do about it.

Right, but that's the job of security clearance, which isn't even our department. And if they get through that we have all the tools needed to give them the boot if they do something.

What more would you suggest? Does someone at CSIS start actively monitoring all our social media posts? Emails? Maybe actively, randomly surveil people?

If the security folks that monitor extremist groups come across CAF members that are part of that, there is already a process to pull their security and punt them. Everyone gets periodic security updates anyway, and folks that are in sensitive spots get it more often. I didn't join up to be Gestapo'd by my peers though, so people that think we signed away all basic privacy requirements can get wrecked.

Why is that insufficient?

 

[Remius]

Right, but that's the job of security clearance, which isn't even our department. And if they get through that we have all the tools needed to give them the boot if they do something.

What more would you suggest? Does someone at CSIS start actively monitoring all our social media posts? Emails? Maybe actively, randomly surveil people?

If the security folks that monitor extremist groups come across CAF members that are part of that, there is already a process to pull their security and punt them. Everyone gets periodic security updates anyway, and folks that are in sensitive spots get it more often. I didn't join up to be Gestapo'd by my peers though, so people that think we signed away all basic privacy requirements can get wrecked.

Why is that insufficient?

Hey I don’t have the answers but I recognize it’s a problem.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

No one asked for excuses. But some people seem really sensitive and triggered by what is a legit thing.

People aren’t 'really sensitive and triggered'. They are tired of the government's lies, dis and misinformation and false narratives. This government has done nothing but lie, obsfucate and demonise people, to further globalist agenda. We are just pushing back from now on.

 

[Remius]

Your narrative came under fire. Stop trying to flip the subject to something else. People aren’t 'really sensitive and triggered'. They are tired of the government's lies, dis and misinformation and false narratives. This government has done nothing but lie, obsfucate and demonise people, to further globalist agenda. We are just pushing back from now on.

But you go ahead. Keep repeating their bullshit for them. They like people like you.

I said it existed. That narrative has not changed. Or switched to something else. And why do you feel demonized by this report?

 

[Fishbone Jones]

I said it existed. That narrative has not changed. Or switched to something else.

I edited my post to reflect your point.

 

[rmc_wannabe]

That does not mean that you ignore or deny or get upset when a security threat gets identified? Or should it just be ignored?

Not in the slightest. I just notice that this specific threat is getting a lot more political and media attention, while other more pressing issues are put on the back burner. I could care less if it were WNism or Islamic Terrorism; they are far less dangerous strategically than some of the far more widespread and widereaching security threats we should be paying attention to.

Distractions in and of themselves are security threats.

Again no one said this was existential, sure we have bigger fish to fry, no one here says otherwise.

Then when brought to this point, why are you cycling back to "oh so you don't think this is a big enough threat?"

I consider it a threat, but not at all the kind of threat we need to focus on right now.

It's like that scene in Monty Python's "The Meaning of Life" where in the midst of the Battle of Rorke's Drift, they stop everything to search for an officer's leg...

 

[Remius]

Not in the slightest. I just notice that this specific threat is getting a lot more political and media attention, while other more pressing issues are put on the back burner. I could care less if it were WNism or Islamic Terrorism; they are far less dangerous strategically than some of the far more widespread and widereaching security threats we should be paying attention to.

No one is denying your opinion or point of view on that. Neither does the article from the OP.

Distractions in and of themselves are security threats.

Then when brought to this point, why are you cycling back to "oh so you don't think this is a big enough threat?"

Where did I say that? My comment was in response to « This is all BS ». I disagree.

I consider it a threat, but not at all the kind of threat we need to focus on right now.

And that’s fine to think that way. No one here says or said otherwise.

 

[brihard]

Nice to see this thread got exactly as stupid as I figured it would…

 

[MJP]

Nice to see this thread got exactly as stupid as I figured it would…

Yup

 

[Jarnhamar]

I remember not so long ago our "top soldier" General Jon Vance and the Minister of National Defense Harjit Sajjan started talking about white supremacy in the CAF. Some of us commented that it didn't seem to be as big a problem as they're pitching and accused them of trying to distract us from something else (but what could it be?).

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Nice to see this thread got exactly as stupid as I figured it would…

Nice to see members call disenting voices "stupid"...

 

[Halifax Tar]

It's an interesting article. No doubt it exists, as it exists in our society so I would expect it to be present in our organization too. And we should work to identify and take action on those that are found.

But without out any empirical data in support of the prevalence of the threat being released it reads like a gossip piece.

 

[Ostrozac]

Similar things came up in the late 2000s - apparently OMGs were hiring former military to train them in weapons, tactics and explosives.

My own regiment has a bit of a history of serious criminality — but not much in the way of political activism. Criminal behaviour with a profit motive seems to be seen as much less threatening than extremist/violent political ideologies.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Nice to see this thread got exactly as stupid as I figured it would…

Agreed. There is no need for the emotional outbursts.

 

[Halifax Tar]

My own regiment has a bit of a history of serious criminality — but not much in the way of political activism. Criminal behaviour with a profit motive seems to be seen as much less threatening than extremist/violent political ideologies.

They can be mutually supportive. In a negative way of course.

Hence why bankruptcy can effect security clearances as it makes individuals possible targets for the devious.

 

[brihard]

It's an interesting article. No doubt it exists, as it exists in our society so I would expect it to be present in our organization too. And we should work to identify and take action on those that are found.

But without out any empirical data in support of the prevalence of the threat being released it reads like a gossip piece.

The article refers to an NSIRA assessment released with redactions. That assessment is derived from total access to Canada’s security intelligence infrastructure.

It’s been quite telling seeing how the strength of some opinions clearly inversely correlates with individuals’ understanding of what NSIRA is or does, what the CSIS act says about “threats to the security of Canada”, and what the rare public glance behind the curtain does not say about the rest of the stuff we don’t get to see.

We have people in this thread pretending like this report identifies a ‘biggest threat’, or like this is a sole a singular national security focus when it very much isn’t. Almost as if we forget that literally yesterday charges were announced against an alleged Chinese spy, or that a couple of weeks ago a pair of ISIS returnees were arrested by RCMP INSET.

It’s almost like the CAF/veterans community suffers the same Dunning-Krueger effect regarding national security as the general public does about CAF.

I don’t know a whole ton about it, but I know a little bit; enough to know a whole lot is hidden behind the curtains, and that we aren’t really seeing much when knowingly given a peek like this, while others think it’s a great reveal.

 

[brihard]

My own regiment has a bit of a history of serious criminality — but not much in the way of political activism. Criminal behaviour with a profit motive seems to be seen as much less threatening than extremist/violent political ideologies.

More a matter of they attract different apparatus. Theft is an ‘insider threat’ thing, and a security liability, but (unless evidence links it to espionage or some sort of national security concern) not a real security threat in the way that would attract attention from the security intelligence sector. While there can absolutely be an overlap between plain greed and security threats, most theft is just theft. That would be something an investigation would work to determine.