Michael Dorosh
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 410
Britney Spears said:
Spill it, before the morning sickness overcomes you again....
"Whistleblower" on CTV
- Thread starter NavComm
- Start date
Spill it, before the morning sickness overcomes you again....
- Reaction score
- 4,255
- Points
- 1,160
Michael Dorosh said:
Shit ... I'll take the bait: kill a medic like that 17 year AQ op did in A'Stan?
Upon thinking about it, quite a bit. I remember being on the rifle range for the first time a few months ago, holding a C7 loaded with a 30 round magazine, and thinking "I wonder if one of the training staff by the MLVW has a loaded rifle on hand in case one of the recruits goes nuts?"
Speaking from my limited experiences only, if a 17 year old recruit (who was also an Al Queda operative) were in that position, he could potentially wipe out his senior course staff and impede the training of all those recruits who would follow him. Such an incident would surely be detriment to the Canadian Forces recruiting as a whole, and would give cause for the civilian population to reconsider their own safety, thereby affecting government foreign policy....
...or perhaps I think I too much.
- Reaction score
- 8,256
- Points
- 1,360
...no, I think your thought process, in this instance ;D, is fine.
Michael Dorosh
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 410
Good points, I appreciate the replies. Might keep the range safety staff on their toes though eh....
I guess I was thinking more of intelligence gathering rather than sabotage. I mean, backwards and forwards action of a C7, or how to do WW II frontal attacks on a Soviet trench system is stuff you can read on the internet anyway....
I guess I was thinking more of intelligence gathering rather than sabotage. I mean, backwards and forwards action of a C7, or how to do WW II frontal attacks on a Soviet trench system is stuff you can read on the internet anyway....
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
There've always been bottlenecks in the system, but they were exacerbated by the decree that CSIS would be the only agency to conduct the clearances (the CF had responsibility for our own until about 10 years ago - used to be an SIU job). Of course CSIS didn't get any extra manpower or budget. Add to that the difficulty of conducting the clearance process for those with less than 10 years landed in Canada. Unfortunately, a cookie-cutter legislation/regulation for this creates absurdities at the outside ends of the spectrum, like the 18-year old with 9 years in Canada who suffers because CSIS has difficulty investigating his activities 10 years previously - when he was 8.
Like the whole immigration process (or the CF entry medical process) that is much maligned, it requires nothing less than manpower, pure and simple.
Acorn
Like the whole immigration process (or the CF entry medical process) that is much maligned, it requires nothing less than manpower, pure and simple.
Acorn
George Wallace
Army.ca Dinosaur
- Reaction score
- 223
- Points
- 710
Another point for you Michael, is the fact that today one needs a minimum Security Clearance of Secret to operate some of our equipment. When you and I both joined, way back when, very few had Security Clearances above Confidential. Today, everyone needs a much higher clearance, and with the requirements of higher security Clearances to operate TCCCS, we are still doing those clearances with the same amount of people who did it twenty and thirty years ago.
I ask you to take someone you know, from outside of Canada, and try to research their past. How much time will that take you? Now stack your desk with six feet of files and try to sort them out. Unless we are going to drastically increase the staff to do this, there will be no end to the back logs and in a year or two we may see the waiting times increased two or three fold.
I ask you to take someone you know, from outside of Canada, and try to research their past. How much time will that take you? Now stack your desk with six feet of files and try to sort them out. Unless we are going to drastically increase the staff to do this, there will be no end to the back logs and in a year or two we may see the waiting times increased two or three fold.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
CBH99 said:
I seem to recall a W5 or similar type show earlier this year where 2 brothers from Ontario, raised in Ontario but holidayed in the "old country" annually. One of those boys is now a U.S. prisoner because he was implicated in the plan to bomb a commuter rail system in Manilla. Anyway, the long and short is, this kid and his brother were going to Al Quada training camps while their parents thought they were just visiting with relatives! Seems they had been identified at an early age by recruiters. His father was totally flabergasted that his 'good boy' could be involved. These kids had Canadian passports and that in itself made them very desirable to the terrorists.
I am glad we take the time to check these applicants out. Unfortunately the good ones suffer for the few bad apples, but that's the world we live in today.
Also, I totally agree with the comments of other posters here that this kid is just whining to the media. What kind of soldier is he going to make? Every time he gets a blister his Mom's going to call CTV and bitch?
As far as 17 year olds not waiting around 2 years for their clearance, there are plenty of things he can do while he waits....further his education, keep fit, get a job, join the cadets, etc. Lot's of 17 year old take more than two years to accomplish goals they set for themselves. Patience is a virtue.....
- Reaction score
- 3,104
- Points
- 1,160
Bruce Monkhouse said:
Swept of their feet? They'll never even get a reach-around... ;D
Kat
M
McAllister
Guest
I thought the 'whistleblowing' was gonna be about the grindng slow pace, not the foreign backround check.
C
c4th
Guest
I agree with Whistleblower, Scott Taylor and the kid and his family that 2 years is ridiculous. As for serving in the military being a right or a privilege, it's crap. Service is service. Look it up in the dictionary. Any youth in today's modern Canadian society who wants to do his duty by serving his country deserves a slight bit more consideration than "it's between crap and sympathy". Anyone stating that the system is working because his or her security clearance also took two years is simply reinforcing failure.
I, for one, hope that AQ is using operatives to infiltrate the Canadian Forces that were trained in European countries when they were under the age of ten. If that is their grand plan then we might have a chance of winning the war on terror.
Increasing a the bureaucracy of a system as a knee jerk reaction to a single terrorist attack on the US may look good to the press and public, but let us not forget that civilians are thick. Does anyone really believe that a recruit sworn in on 9/10/01 with a 5-year basic security clearance is any more of a "risk" than the one applying on 9/12/01 and having to fill out a 10-year history? I would be surprised if there was even one incident of an AQ operative being found in the recruiting system. The screening process seemed to be good enough through two world wars, and the cold war. Even though Britain and Ireland were targets for IRA terrorism, we kept letting the Irish in, and never changed our screening process. Even though we took no increased security measures not one of our recruits blew up a post office , tried to assassinate a member of the monarchy, or even once wipe out a firing point on a small-arms range.
I for one have run countless ranges, both conventional and field fire. Never have I felt a threat from any recruit I trained. In fact the most dangerous weapons handling I ever witnessed was in the hands of a reserve engineer Captain, who undoubtedly as a requirement of his rank had an enhanced security clearance.
The point: Bureaucracy does not serve national security or the public good. It serves only itself. Risk assessment should be more intelligent than a knee jerk reaction to watching CNN.
I, for one, hope that AQ is using operatives to infiltrate the Canadian Forces that were trained in European countries when they were under the age of ten. If that is their grand plan then we might have a chance of winning the war on terror.
Increasing a the bureaucracy of a system as a knee jerk reaction to a single terrorist attack on the US may look good to the press and public, but let us not forget that civilians are thick. Does anyone really believe that a recruit sworn in on 9/10/01 with a 5-year basic security clearance is any more of a "risk" than the one applying on 9/12/01 and having to fill out a 10-year history? I would be surprised if there was even one incident of an AQ operative being found in the recruiting system. The screening process seemed to be good enough through two world wars, and the cold war. Even though Britain and Ireland were targets for IRA terrorism, we kept letting the Irish in, and never changed our screening process. Even though we took no increased security measures not one of our recruits blew up a post office , tried to assassinate a member of the monarchy, or even once wipe out a firing point on a small-arms range.
I for one have run countless ranges, both conventional and field fire. Never have I felt a threat from any recruit I trained. In fact the most dangerous weapons handling I ever witnessed was in the hands of a reserve engineer Captain, who undoubtedly as a requirement of his rank had an enhanced security clearance.
The point: Bureaucracy does not serve national security or the public good. It serves only itself. Risk assessment should be more intelligent than a knee jerk reaction to watching CNN.
