Twin Brothers Facing Terrorism Charges

[On Guard for Thee]

To Michael - "Intending to commit crime and plotting to commit crimes are chargeable offences" yes if they are done on Canada. What if Putin names certain Canadians on their way to fight in Ukraine on the Kiev side? What if Kiev names certain Canadians on their way to fight in Ukraine for the rebels? What if we find certain Canadians planning to go to Israel to join the Jewish Defence League? What if we find certain Canadians on their way to Gaza to join Hamas? What about in Chechnya? Somalia? Nigeria?

When you start to keep Canadians from leaving their country based on the immediate foreign policy of the current government then we are looking for real problems.

It also appears to me that many here are not familiar with the new antiterrorist laws. A good summary can be found at:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/8-things-to-know-about-the-new-anti-terrorism-bill-1.1413346

As long as the Canadian government has not deemed the group you are planning to enlist in as a terrorist entity you can "fill your boots". Totally legal.

[WIP]

Twin brothers have been arrested on terrorism charges at an airport in Montreal.

http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/ottawa-twins-24-facing-terrorism-charges-1.2182235

I can understand if they are planning some terrorist action in Canada then prosecute them and throw them in jail but these guys are also charged with attempting to leave Canada for terrorist activity.

Why are we stopping them from leaving? Let them go and do their thing and join their ancestors if they so choose. What right do we have to keep them from leaving? The last country to have that policy was East Berlin with their wall.

Now if they try to enter Canada then we judge what they have done and refuse them entry if appropriate - unless we admit that we have no idea who is coming into Canada.

I guess the main risk is that you can have a battle-hardened, well trained terrorist to deal with if they come back home! That point was made by more than a few military analysts of those early crude videos that showed the Charlie Hebdo attack in Paris. From the video feed after they left the building, they calmly returned back to their car....one calmly shot and killed a policeman moving towards the area (likely heard the shots but was unaware of the situation) and went back to the car and left the scene.

The typical terrorist attacks have been someone with a gun that's all nerves and has little if any weapons training. The Canadian and other governments seem to be allowing people to join foreign wars that they agree with (for now). But, what happens after Canadians who've run off to fight with the Kurds against ISIS, bring all of their weapons and killing experience back home for a different battle?

Someone coming from a war scene is already experienced at using the weapons, and more importantly - at using weapons to kill! This is something that the west has to consider with all of their returning veterans from Iraq, Afghanistan, and in France's case - West Africa. Some of the vets may have other issues and want to take part in their own private wars...Timothy McVeigh if anyone recalls. Some of the bomb-disposal personnel learn a great deal about how to make a bomb. And prior to the Boston Bombings, there was an unnoticed story from the west coast, about a backpack bomb that was noticed and disposed of prior to detonating at a MLK rally. It later turned out that the bomb had been made and armed by an Iraq vet who joined up with a right wing white supremacist militia. With all the alarm about foreign Muslim terrorists, the greater threat may come from disgruntled veterans of war who want to fight new wars after they've come home!

[PIK]

There is not enough disgruntled vets to worry about.

[WIP]

There is not enough disgruntled vets to worry about.

Then why doesn't the same thing apply with this Muslim terrorists phenomena? We've got Harper already licking his chops planning to "protect us" with new security legislation that he thought would sail through after the Ottawa Attack earlier. But, it never really took off and led to mass panic among the Canadian public...as it seems to do regularly in the U.S., where both governing parties write a blank cheque for whatever surveillance intrusions and exhorbitant costs the new security regime requires!

I've heard Juan Cole for one...who doesn't get access to MSM in the U.S., but on the fringe public/alternative media sources I turn to, I've heard him say a few times in the last few years that Americans are more endangered by their homegrown terrorists - i.e. the yahoos at the Bundy Ranch, than they are of foreign terrorists coming over to attack them. I know most of the Bundy Ranch clowns are morons who don't even know how to handle a gun, but there are lots of returning veterans, and many of them have a lot of grievances about the way they are being treated by V.A. hospitals and the Veterans Administration regarding disability claims. The cost-cutting starts with them/ not military brass or the contractors who enrich themselves by selling weapons to the government.

As we have seen with the Paris Shootings, two guys who are well trained and battle-hardened, can do a lot of damage in a surprise attack. It doesn't take a lot of disgruntled vets to be a problem! A sensible government would be doing everything they could to return vets to regular life again, rather than tossing them out with the trash, like thousands of homeless vets that are becoming an increasing issue in Florida and some other southern states.

[PIK]

Lets wait until something really bad happens before we do anything. Very good lefty plan. To scare to say boo to anyone. And that attitude will give harper another majority.

[Keepitsimple]

Then why doesn't the same thing apply with this Muslim terrorists phenomena? We've got Harper already licking his chops planning to "protect us" with new security legislation that he thought would sail through after the Ottawa Attack earlier. But, it never really took off and led to mass panic among the Canadian public...as it seems to do regularly in the U.S., where both governing parties write a blank cheque for whatever surveillance intrusions and exhorbitant costs the new security regime requires!

I've heard Juan Cole for one...who doesn't get access to MSM in the U.S., but on the fringe public/alternative media sources I turn to, I've heard him say a few times in the last few years that Americans are more endangered by their homegrown terrorists - i.e. the yahoos at the Bundy Ranch, than they are of foreign terrorists coming over to attack them. I know most of the Bundy Ranch clowns are morons who don't even know how to handle a gun, but there are lots of returning veterans, and many of them have a lot of grievances about the way they are being treated by V.A. hospitals and the Veterans Administration regarding disability claims. The cost-cutting starts with them/ not military brass or the contractors who enrich themselves by selling weapons to the government.

As we have seen with the Paris Shootings, two guys who are well trained and battle-hardened, can do a lot of damage in a surprise attack. It doesn't take a lot of disgruntled vets to be a problem! A sensible government would be doing everything they could to return vets to regular life again, rather than tossing them out with the trash, like thousands of homeless vets that are becoming an increasing issue in Florida and some other southern states.

Sorry Pal but Canada is NOT the US. We're a civilized lot up here - take steps carefully - that's why contentious new security measures inevitably have sunset clauses built in.

[Smallc]

I'm actually very opposed to some of the new measures in the bill. I don't think we need to overreact to these situations. The chance of being killed in a terror attack in Canada is less than being hit by lightening. We should definitely take it seriously, but I don't like our privacy rights being violated in the name of protection.

[WIP]

Sorry Pal but Canada is NOT the US. We're a civilized lot up here - take steps carefully - that's why contentious new security measures inevitably have sunset clauses built in.

We are in a period of rapid Americanization because of Harper. Previous Liberal and Progressive Conservative governments tried to keep some distance, especially regarding U.S. foreign policies, because they were smart enough to realize we become stained by the same brush if we agree with every Neocon strategy the U.S. creates. A lot of our Americanization is out of our control because of these trade agreements we're signing on to. But, as long as we have Harper as Prime Minister, we're going to end up a de facto 51st state!

[Smallc]

We are in a period of rapid Americanization because of Harper.

There's absolutely no credible non conspiracy nut evidence of this. In fact, the opposite has very much been true under Harper, who has celebrated our very unique Canadian history like no previous leader.

Edited January 15, 2015 by Smallc