I'd like to respond to that, because we're not talking about people who are in Canada or who are free to express themselves, and I certainly would not agree with anybody in Canada attacking either a civilian or a building or an embassy, but in this camp we're studying there are 3,400 unarmed people who are at the mercy of a government that has already previously attacked them and has supported attacks. It's very clear from the testimony we've heard that these people are at risk of being murdered.
Tom Ridge from Homeland Security would have had available to him in that position all the evidence necessary if he believed they should be sustained on the terrorist list. There was nobody else perhaps in the entire world who would have had the kind of access to information that he would have had. Again, the contradiction I'm talking about here is when persons of that rank in those positions—the colonel from the camp and all of the people who have come to the defence.... Even if they still are worthy of being on a terrorist list, if they're unarmed, they deserve the maximum protection that can be given to them, and we have to find a way.
I don't mean to be critical of you, because you're working from the evidence you have at hand.
The other gentleman, Mr. MacDonald, was going to explain.