9

Napolitano and who gets in


 

It goes without saying that Canadians are frustrated by U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano’s bizarre remark, in that CBC interview, to the effect that the Sept. 11 attackers slipped into the States through Canada. (They didn’t, of course, but the myth persists, as myths have a way of doing.)

But beyond her alarmingly vague grasp of the how 9/11 really happened, I’m wondering about Napolitano’s less blatantly ludicrous comment, “The fact of the matter is that Canada allows people into its country that we do not allow into ours.”

I don’t doubt that’s true. For example, the Obama administration recently decided to stick with the Bush era policy of barring Tariq Ramadan, a leading European Muslim intellectual, from speaking in the U.S. The move suggests, at best, a rather unfocused policy of exclusion.

Ramadan is an interesting character. When he spoke in Ottawa a few years ago, I wrote about how local police were enthusiastic supporters of his visit. They told me he encourages Muslim immigrants in the Canadian capital (where they are a sizeable minority) to integrate with Western society.

Some Americans also apparently regard Ramadan as voice worth listening to. That hotbed of Islamist radicalism, University of Notre Dame, tried to hire him as a religion professor a few years ago, but he was denied the necessary visa.

So, yes, the U.S. definitely keeps out some people Canada allows in.

I know, I know—Napolitano didn’t mean talkers, she meant terrorists. But since terrorists don’t travel on legitimate papers and state their business at customs checks, like Swiss professors do, we have to wonder how effective the U.S. really is at barring them.

Harmless, unsophisticated illegal immigrants, the sort who work as domestics and vegetable pickers, after all, cross the U.S. border in huge numbers. I read here that illegal immigrants in America number nearly 12 million, more than the legal kind. Are the bad guys really less clever about getting in?

And Canada is supposed to be the weak link in continental security?


 

Napolitano and who gets in

  1. And vice versa…didn’t they let George Galloway in?

    • Dammit ,you stole my joke!

      I was going to comment on the Americans’ reckless disregard for public safety in letting a known terr.., I mean Parliamentarian, enter their country.

      • But Canada let Fidel Castro in to attend Trudeau’s funeral. Another known comm…, er, terr…, er, president of a sovereign nation.

  2. I watched the interview with this lady and you could see it in her eyes this was no gee whiz I made a mistake please forgive – no way it was like here is this weird mind set we americans suffer from and it doesn’t matter what you say or do we are going to engage in it! I say to hell with them okay let’s start building some walls and tightening the border why not? after all Harper has done a lot of leg work with preliminary EU deals so let’s make it known we are going shopping for new customers- we have 30 million people to be affected they have 380 million people to be affected – forgive me – never mind I’m just venting ridiculous of course but none the less – sometimes the yanks drive me crazy and then the other article with one of our MP’s letting State Dept flunkies comment on our system and not firing right back at them really gets me going!

    • That would be shooting ourself in the foot.

      • But sometimes you’ve got to take a stand, even with a freshly created hole in your foot.

  3. Well if we go back a decade or two, the US used to regularly bar entry to Gerry Adams and Ian Paisley, while Canada let them in (Clinton changed this policy after the Good Friday Accord).

    On the other hand, I think Ms. Napolitano is talking about this guy: http://tiny.cc/MSbTh

    I once attended a meeting with US Customs (as they were called then) about a year or so after 9/11. Those fellows certainly knew all about Ressam.

  4. Gotta love the Obama appointments, who are clearly idiots. Napolitano clearly does not have the slightest bit of background for her position.

  5. Is Napolitano implementing stealth protectionism on behalf of Pres. Owe? Everyone knows the Democrats would love to erect trade barriers to protect American jobs but they are frustrated by free trade agreements. But if the Dems can get Americans to see their northern border as a security threat, they will support measures that have the effect of gumming up the flow of goods across that border into the US. When that happens, American businesses will get fed up with the delays and turn to American suppliers instead of those in Canada. Voila! Protectionism is achieved without violating trade agreements. Is this Napolitano’sd goal?

    If it is, I hope my fellow Canucks still smitten by the hopey-changey, yes-we-can President, will have a reality check.

Sign in to comment.