RCMP stopping 'Al-Queda' Plot.

[GostHacked]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2013/07/02/bc-rcmp-terrorism.html

Police said the threat was real but at no time was the public at risk, as the threat was detected early and disrupted. Police added they were in tight control as the devices were constructed.

I was expecting this to happen down south, but interesting none the less. Another plot in total control of the RCMP and CSIS.

No real threat, but Al-Queda is out to kill us! Well as long as they keep this up we wont have to worry about it.

Good job??!??

[Bryan]

Our close relationship with the US makes us a target. Thankfully, the our law enforcement is doing a good job of tracking and stopping them. Looks like money well spent, even if the AG can't itemize it.

[The_Squid]

It wasn't Al Qaeda.

[waldo]

Looks like money well spent, even if the AG can't itemize it.

nice try! You meant to say... even if Harper Conservatives can't account for it (it... being the missing and unaccounted for $3.1 billion)! Right?

Edited July 3, 2013 by waldo

[kimmy]

As I listen to this being discussed on the radio right now, they are describing it as "Al Qaeda inspired". The dude isn't an Al Qaeda member, although he is a Muslim convert. "Al Qaeda inspired" apparently means they saw the Boston bombing and said "cool, we could do that!

He apparently has a long history of drug abuse and violence, and from what I am listening to, he sounds more or less like a burned-out heavy metal musician.

I'm fascinated that like the kids from London Ontario who decided to become Muslim terrorists abroad, this guy is a guy with no previous connection to Islam or the Arab world who seems to have looked at the terrorists and said "you know what? That's for me. I'm signing up."

-k

[bush_cheney2004]

I'm fascinated that like the kids from London Ontario who decided to become Muslim terrorists abroad, this guy is a guy with no previous connection to Islam or the Arab world who seems to have looked at the terrorists and said "you know what? That's for me. I'm signing up."

Not so unusual....thousands of Canadians volunteered to fight (and die) in Vietnam as well.

[Topaz]

The Boston bombers, wasn't the FBI watching them too but they ended up killing and hurting people and with csis and the RCMP, seem to stop anything before it happens. Of course, if a government wants a reason to bring in stronger security measures, they could let it happen and then have their reason for changes.

[GostHacked]

The Boston bombers, wasn't the FBI watching them too but they ended up killing and hurting people and with csis and the RCMP, seem to stop anything before it happens. Of course, if a government wants a reason to bring in stronger security measures, they could let it happen and then have their reason for changes.

Well I have my suspicions about the Boston event. Never let a crisis go to waste.

[roy baty]

No surprise here. Get ready for more home-grown Jihadists.

And Bryan, IMO in their mind it's us being a Western nation still full of "Infidels" is what makes us a target and not our "close relationship" w/the US. I blame these religious fanatics themselves and their warped agenda for us being a target.

Edited July 3, 2013 by roy baty

[GostHacked]

Wonder how far this plan would have been taken if the RCMP had not gotten involved.

There was no threat of bombs going off.

[Boges]

These "suspects" sound like real space cadets.

Edited July 3, 2013 by Boges

[GostHacked]

These "suspects" sound like real space cadets.

Stereotype time ... It's B.C. !!!

[Boges]

Stereotype time ... It's B.C. !!!

Dude!!! wouldn't it be cool if we became radical Jihadists?

I'll buy the rice cookers, you buy the nails.

Edited July 3, 2013 by Boges

[GostHacked]

Dude!!! wouldn't it be cool if we became radical Jihadists?

I'll buy the rice cookers, you buy the nails.

..... hours pass.

Dude what kind of nails did you get?

- Damn, I got Doritos instead.

[Boges]

Wonder how far this plan would have been taken if the RCMP had not gotten involved. :DThere was no threat of bombs going off.

I've heard that this dynamic duo can use entrapment as a defense as clearly the RCMP could have stopped them before they did anything illegal.

[GostHacked]

I've heard that this dynamic duo can use entrapment as a defense as clearly the RCMP could have stopped them before they did anything illegal.

I would argue they could use entrapment. Possibly string them along for as long as possible in order to have more charges applied for a better possibility of something sticking when court proceedings take place.

Clearly the intent was there, and they could have been charged with something with the evidence gathered early on.

Edited July 3, 2013 by GostHacked

[GostHacked]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2013/07/03/bc-legislature-plot-suspects-neighbours-surrey.html

Boges, you might be right that these two were not capable of carrying out this plot.

[scribblet]

I've heard that this dynamic duo can use entrapment as a defense as clearly the RCMP could have stopped them before they did anything illegal.

I'm not clear on why this is being stated. How did the RCMP involve themselves with this, other than monitoring their activities ? Are they saying simply because they didn't step in sooner it's entrapment ?

[Topaz]

I wonder if they were monitoring their cellphones, or should I say the US, since Canada said it only monitors foreigners like the US, so that means they are monitoring us now online too.

[Bryan]

Now I'm starting to wonder if this was the exact opposite of my first impression. Could this whole thing have been more PR ("See? We are on the job fighting terrorists") than actually addressing a legitimate threat?

[guyser]

Now I'm starting to wonder if this was the exact opposite of my first impression. Could this whole thing have been more PR ("See? We are on the job fighting terrorists") than actually addressing a legitimate threat?

You mean diverting the eyes and ears of Canadians away from the complete clusterf**k that is the High River B&E's?

Could well be. It appears these two terrorists couldnt even manage a kitty litter box never mind a two person sit -in.

[kimmy]

I would argue they could use entrapment. Possibly string them along for as long as possible in order to have more charges applied for a better possibility of something sticking when court proceedings take place.

Clearly the intent was there, and they could have been charged with something with the evidence gathered early on.

There seems to be a widespread misconception about what Entrapment actually means.

In the legal sense, entrapment means that the police *induced* someone to commit a crime. Let me provide some examples so that you can see the difference.

Entrapment: An undercover officer is standing on the street corner dressed like a hooker, and says "hey, you wanna date? You looking for a date? How 'bout a date?" Somebody attempts to offer her money for sex, and she arrests him for soliciting. He has an entrapment defense, because he can make a credible argument that he wouldn't have attempted to solicit her services if she hadn't encouraged him.

Not entrapment: An undercover Officer is standing on the street corner dressed like a hooker, and says nothing. Somebody attempts to offer her money for sex, and she arrests him for soliciting. He has no entrapment defense.

Entrapment: An undercover officer approaches you and offers to sell you some drugs. You have an entrapment defense.

Not entrapment: you approach an undercover officer and ask him to sell you some drugs. You don't have an entrapment defense because he didn't invite you to commit a crime; you decided to on your own.

Entrapment: an undercover officer says "hey, wouldn't it be cool if we stole that car over there and took it for a ride?"

Not entrapment: you attempt to steal a "bait car" . A bait car is intended to capture would-be car thieves, but the act of parking a car on the street is not an inducement to commit a crime. The fact that it turned out to be a bait car doesn't change the fact that you attempted to steal a car. You chose to do it; the police just put a car on the street.

Entrapment: an undercover CSIS agent joins your circle of friends and convinces your group that you should "stick it to the man" by planting a bomb near a pipeline. It's entrapment because you and your friends can make a credible argument that none of you would have even thought of bombing a pipeline until the undercover agent convinced you to do it.

Not entrapment: you and your circle of friends decide to blow up a pipeline, and you buy 2 tons of fertilizer from someone who happens to be an undercover CSIS agent, and the purchase of the fertilizer is used as evidence at your trial. This is not entrapment. You and your buddies came up with the plan on your own. You wouldn't have been attempting to buy 2 tons of fertilizer from the undercover agent if you hadn't already decided to commit a crime.

These two buffoons made the decision to build a pressure cooker bomb on their own. There's no entrapment. End of story.

Now I'm starting to wonder if this was the exact opposite of my first impression. Could this whole thing have been more PR ("See? We are on the job fighting terrorists") than actually addressing a legitimate threat?

Are you saying these two hapless clowns have been framed?

I am reading several people saying that "these two idiots weren't capable of pulling this off." I'd suggest to all of you that, first off, they *didn't* pull it off. They were caught, probably in large measure because they're not very smart. Secondly, I'd suggest that the same would have been said of the Tsarnaev brothers if they had been nabbed prior to the Boston bombing.

-k

[Big Guy]

^{Does anybody really think we would have “home grown” or any other terrorist activity on our soil if we had stayed out of that debacle in Afghanistan? The USA and the Taliban are currently beginning negotiations on ending the conflict in Afghanistan. Basically the Taliban have won that war and will be there and probably in control in a few years after winning the coming civil war. It was a mistake for Canada to go in, a mistake for Canada to escalate our involvement and a mistake for Canada to stay in for as long as we did. Unfortunately, we will continue to pay for those mistakes. Maybe we will think twice the next time we decide to stick our noses into something that is none of our business. Maybe we won't.}

[jacee]

^{Does anybody really think we would have home grown or any other terrorist activity on our soil if we had stayed out of that debacle in Afghanistan? The USA and the Taliban are currently beginning negotiations on ending the conflict in Afghanistan. Basically the Taliban have won that war and will be there and probably in control in a few years after winning the coming civil war. It was a mistake for Canada to go in, a mistake for Canada to escalate our involvement and a mistake for Canada to stay in for as long as we did. Unfortunately, we will continue to pay for those mistakes. Maybe we will think twice the next time we decide to stick our noses into something that is none of our business. Maybe we won't.}

Maybe it will depend where Canadian resource extraction companies want to operate.

Good post.

Really sums it up well.

[jacee]

I wonder if they were monitoring their cellphones, or should I say the US, since Canada said it only monitors foreigners like the US, so that means they are monitoring us now online too.

Of course.

Ever wonder how many posters are agents on here?

Ever notice people provoking reaction, testing limits?

You could tell the cops monitored their google searches. I wonder if they had a warrant, and if so what grounds.