Canadian ISIS Sympathizer killed by police

[?Impact]

Whether they're effective or ineffective is, irrelevant.

Let me ponder that for awhile.

[Derek 2.0]

I find it very difficult to believe they couldn't get warrants based on the known threat, and if they tried and were refused I'd like to hear it, and the law would need to be changed in that case.

What "known threat"? The RCMP received the information from the FBI and responded right away......hence the killing of him in the taxi well he was on his way to commit his attack.......even ISIS after the fact said he shit the bed by posting his video too early........prior to his posting of the video there was no "known threat", hence there was no prior information indicating any Canadian authorities needed to apply for a warrant.

[Derek 2.0]

It's quite amazing how many opinionated individuals here don't know or don't care that the intelligence community is only allowed to monitor foreign threats, sharing information with their domestic partners in other countries. The apparatus worked exactly as it should have here,

That is subjective and open to debate.........if Driver had of waited to post his video to social media we would likely now be discussing the aftermath of his attack and the ensuing deaths and injuries of Canadian commuters.

[?Impact]

posting his video too early

When should a suicide terrorist post a video?

[betsy]

What "known threat"? The RCMP received the information from the FBI and responded right away......hence the killing of him in the taxi well he was on his way to commit his attack.......even ISIS after the fact said he shit the bed by posting his video too early........prior to his posting of the video there was no "known threat", hence there was no prior information indicating any Canadian authorities needed to apply for a warrant.

Thanks to the FBI.

What if......the FBI didn't know about it either?

Boy.....that doesn't give me any comfort.

[Bryan]

When should a suicide terrorist post a video?

You can schedule something to be automatically posted at a later time.

[Argus]

To sell the wares of the corporate masters that paid to get our leaders elected. Those security measures have been 100% failure other than to pad the pocket of big business cronies.

Oh boy....

[?Impact]

You can schedule something to be automatically posted at a later time.

If you schedule it on your desktop, you better do it before the police storm your digs. If you schedule it on a service, it may (most likely will) be scanned by the intelligence agencies before its scheduled post time.

Oh boy

I am [Am I] here test your critical thinking tools, or amuse you.[?]

[Argus]

What "known threat"? The RCMP received the information from the FBI and responded right away......hence the killing of him in the taxi well he was on his way to commit his attack.......even ISIS after the fact said he shit the bed by posting his video too early........prior to his posting of the video there was no "known threat", hence there was no prior information indicating any Canadian authorities needed to apply for a warrant.

He was a known threat for over a year, a strong ISIS sympathizer. He should have been monitored.

[Derek 2.0]

He was a known threat for over a year, a strong ISIS sympathizer. He should have been monitored.

Ahhh no, he wasn't even enough of a "known threat" to be charged and convicted with a crime, nor maintain the conditions of a "terrorist peace bond"......this demonstrates the Canadian authorities either/or didn't have enough evidence to demonstrate Driver was a "known threat", or any evidence they did have was inadmissible...........

As has been demonstrated, in the real world, Canadians can't just be monitored by the Canadian Government.

[Derek 2.0]

Thanks to the FBI.

What if......the FBI didn't know about it either?

Boy.....that doesn't give me any comfort.

This is a demonstration of the new reality.......a solitary person, anywhere in the Western World, could plan and execute a terror attack, as we've seen recently using numerous means, with the authorities not having the slightest clue.

[Bryan]

If you schedule it on your desktop, you better do it before the police storm your digs. If you schedule it on a service, it may (most likely will) be scanned by the intelligence agencies before its scheduled post time.

If you know what you are doing, the authorities will not know what you're posting or where you're doing it. There are more than enough public wifi spots, more than enough anonymous services, and more than enough ways to access devices that can be used for video and data. Hiding is EASY. The guy screwed up (thankfully).

[Argus]

Ahhh no, he wasn't even enough of a "known threat" to be charged and convicted with a crime,

If he was proven to have commited a crime then he'd be in jail. Anyone who expresses a dedication to ISIS is a known threat. Period.

[eyeball]

According to some prime ministers anyone who disses the government is also a threat.

[Derek 2.0]

If he was proven to have commited a crime then he'd be in jail. Anyone who expresses a dedication to ISIS is a known threat. Period.

Not in a Canadian court of law.........or he would have been charged as such, convicted and thrown in club fed last year. Period.

[betsy]

This is a demonstration of the new reality.......a solitary person, anywhere in the Western World, could plan and execute a terror attack, as we've seen recently using numerous means, with the authorities not having the slightest clue.

It is a new reality, indeed. I agree with you. It doesn't have to be a solitary person....they can be a team (just like in San Bernardino). It will get to new levels (like the attack in a church in France).

They might even go out and do them where it's least expected. Rural towns. Homes.

Home invasion takes on a whole new meaning.

Edited August 13, 2016 by betsy

[betsy]

According to some prime ministers anyone who disses the government is also a threat.

Not this Prime Minister.

Heck, he won't bomb Isis even if Isis attacks us! I suppose attacking us, still, isn't a threat.

Edited August 13, 2016 by betsy

[dialamah]

I find it very difficult to believe they couldn't get warrants based on the known threat, and if they tried and were refused I'd like to hear it, and the law would need to be changed in that case.

Next door neighbor nutcases regularly harass several neighbors, including threatening death to members of the strata council. They've verbally and physically attacked people while off the property, used their vehicle to chase people and scream abuse at them, and in one case forced a woman who was walking her dog into the ditch using their car. Police are called and have visited multiple times. They lie about everything, so police are left with a he said/she said situation. They advise us to keep records and keep calling them. But, if they visit these troublemakers too often, they run the risk of being accused of harassing them unfairly. In the meantime, if we go out our front door, we make sure we have our phones ready to record while we try to enjoy our yard. We also need to be ready in local stores and while on the road, so we can build a case against these jerks, so eventually they can be charged and/or forced to sell and move. Either can take months or years.

Yeah, I think the police should be able to do more to stop these people so I don't have to feel threatened. At the same time I do recognize that these sorts of laws also protect me from being unfairly targeted if someone held a grudge against me and wanted to use the law to get back at me. Kind of a double-edged sword: more power to them if I want the police to solve a problem for me, less if someone thinks I'm the problem that needs solving.

Btw, neighbors are White Canadians. I do wonder if the police would be able to do more if they were Brown Immigrants, especially from the ME.

[Argus]

Not in a Canadian court of law.........or he would have been charged as such, convicted and thrown in club fed last year. Period.

It's not against the law to be a 'threat'. Your position is ridiculous. We also don't know the police ever even tried to get a warrant. If they tried and failed that would be a great story and I would expect them to say so because it would put pressure on the government to change the law so they could have more power to intercept communications.

[Argus]

Next door neighbor nutcases regularly harass several neighbors, including threatening death to members of the strata council.

Start wearing a tape recorder or camera, then you can put them in jail.

[?Impact]

Being considered a threat, and making a threat are completely different. You can't be charged for someone's opinion of you, but you can be charged for your actions.

[Derek 2.0]

It's not against the law to be a 'threat'. Your position is ridiculous. We also don't know the police ever even tried to get a warrant. If they tried and failed that would be a great story and I would expect them to say so because it would put pressure on the government to change the law so they could have more power to intercept communications.

My position is the law......you suggested the various Canadian security agencies should have been "watching Driver", but for such agencies to "watch" Driver they require a warrant, but to obtain a warrant, they need evidence that Driver was a "threat"..........ergo, your position is devoid of reality in a modern Western democracy (minus perhaps Israel).

In this recent "incident" with Driver, after obtaining the information from the FBI, the RCMP had no need for a warrant, anymore then a policing agency responding to a domestic dispute or shots fired.

[Bryan]

In this recent "incident" with Driver, after obtaining the information from the FBI, the RCMP had no need for a warrant, anymore then a policing agency responding to a domestic dispute or shots fired.

When it comes to terrorism, by the time it looks like you have enough grounds for a warrant, that probably means it's time to kick that door down right this second.

[?Impact]

When it comes to terrorism, by the time it looks like you have enough grounds for a warrant, that probably means it's time to kick that door down right this second.

Under Trump rules, we would be kicking in the Whitehouse door (present occupant).

[betsy]

Under Trump rules, we would be kicking in the Whitehouse door (present occupant).

Not unless Obama can't be dragged off the office after his term is over.

That visual is funny!

Edited August 14, 2016 by betsy