Apparently I like addressing the controversial topics lately and I’ll carry it on today.
               Scrolling through Facebook I’m bombarded with my friends’ shares and likes of photos essentially saying Canada should limit refugee intake.
               On the refugee topic I’m divided because those people need help and they should get it, on the other hand ISIL has released statements that they will infiltrate these refugees and bring terror to the western world, which is a legitimate concern, however, people don’t have to be refugees to be terrorists.
               Canadian-born terrorism exists. On Oct. 14, 1982, an anarchist group called Squamish Five bombed a factory in north Toronto. They were activists who decided to go one step further because traditional passive methods weren’t working. They had bombed a BC Hydro substation on Vancouver Island earlier that year as well.
               In the 1920s the Sons of Freedom targeted Doukhobors and government buildings.
               The Front de libération du Québec (FLQ) was active between 1963 and 1970, while Quebec nationalist groups continue to come in and out of the limelight as domestic terrorists, resurfacing in 1984, 2000, 2001, and 2012.
               Yes, there have been issues surrounding Islamic extremists, but not just ones from overseas, a lot of time it’s people who have converted. Approximately a year ago, Michael Zehaf-Bibeau attacked people at a War Memorial in Ottawa killing Cpl Nathan Cirillo. Zehaf-Bibeau was a recent self converted Islamic extremist, he had grown up in Canada.
               In 2013 Canadian Muslims helped to foil a plot to derail a New York to Toronto train on the Canadian side of the border when Chiheb Esseghaier and Raed Jaser of Montreal and Toronto planned the attack.
               So, I don’t think looking at refugees as being the enemy is necessarily the right way to go. What is the right action to take? Do you deny the many in need to potentially prevent a few ISIL members or do you welcome refugees who have nothing and absolutely nowhere to go?
               The fear created is not something that just affects Canada either. Europe, Australia, and the United States are all currently living with this question: deny refugees to potentially protect the country or vet them well and welcome people in need?
               In the United States, Daryl Grisgraber, a senior advocate for Refugees International told Al Jazeera News, “The short answer is that the issue is overblown. The detailed answer is that the U.S. has been resettling refugees for over 50 years now, and ever since 9/11, there’s been an even more rigorous vetting process. It is slow and thorough, and, frankly, for the refugees, it can be quite painful.â€
               Refugees are registered and referred by the U.N. refugee agency, here biographic and biometric data is taken including iris scans for refugees coming from the Syrian crisis. Only once the U.N. feels their story checks out are they approved to be sent to a country taking refugees. The government of that country then conducts their own security checks, interviews with each family member, and if any doubt is cast on their story a red flag is put up.
               No one denies there’s a security risk, but to what extent can that risk be exploited? If we take in refugees and then a terrorist attack occurs will we automatically point fingers even if they weren’t responsible?