Harper is taking a page out of the US propoganda book

[AndrewL]

Here is a quote from Harper in regards to the terror arrests:

"We are a target because of who we are and how we live, our society, our diversity and our values," Prime Minister Stephen Harper said.

Does anybody actually beleive this nonsense? I guarantee these people are inspired by the war and death being waged in Iraq and Afghanistan and not some 'they hate our freedom' bullshit that the brainwashed like to spew.

Let me be more clear: I have no doubt that some muslims hate liberalism and secularism. I have no doubt they always have. But this is not the reason they are planing attacks now. The spain and london bombers were motivated by the death in Iraq, their religion was only used to facilitate those murders, not unlike George Bush consulting God before unleashing hell on Iraqi civilians.

As every day goes by i am distrusting Stephen Harper more and more.

Congrats to the RCMP and CSIS for nabbing these guys. (hopefully this was not a staged entrapment for political gain)

Andrew

[Johnny Utah]

Here is a quote from Harper in regards to the terror arrests:

"We are a target because of who we are and how we live, our society, our diversity and our values," Prime Minister Stephen Harper said.

Does anybody actually beleive this nonsense? I guarantee these people are inspired by the war and death being waged in Iraq and Afghanistan and not some 'they hate our freedom' bullshit that the brainwashed like to spew.

Let me be more clear: I have no doubt that some muslims hate liberalism and secularism. I have no doubt they always have. But this is not the reason they are planing attacks now. The spain and london bombers were motivated by the death in Iraq, their religion was only used to facilitate those murders, not unlike George Bush consulting God before unleashing hell on Iraqi civilians.

As every day goes by i am distrusting Stephen Harper more and more.

Congrats to the RCMP and CSIS for nabbing these guys. (hopefully this was not a staged entrapment for political gain)

Andrew

Using the Wars in Afghanistan and Iraq is nothing more then an excuse by the Terrorists and their apologists. Harper's comments are not US propganda or nonsense. How do you know the Madrid and London bombers were inspired by the Iraq War? Where's you're proof?

Sounds like you're already making excuses for the 17 Terrorist suspects who wanted to kill Canadians..

[August1991]

"We are a target because of who we are and how we live, our society, our diversity and our values," Prime Minister Stephen Harper said.

Does anybody actually beleive this nonsense? I guarantee these people are inspired by the war and death being waged in Iraq and Afghanistan and not some 'they hate our freedom' bullshit that the brainwashed like to spew.

Andrew, you are entitled to your opinion but your opinion or theory does not explain the following facts:

The World Trade Center bombing was the February 26, 1993 attack in the garage of the New York City World Trade Center. A car bomb was detonated by Islamist terrorists in the underground parking garage below Tower One. It killed six, injured over 1,000, and presaged the September 11, 2001 attacks on the same buildings.

Wikipedia

The USS Cole bombing was a suicide bombing attack against the U.S. Navy guided missile destroyer USS Cole (DDG 67) on October 12, 2000 while it was harbored in the Yemeni port of Aden.

Wikipedia

In the 1998 U.S. Embassy bombings (August 7, 1998), more than 220 people were killed and over 4,000 wounded in simultaneous [1] car bomb explosions at the United States embassies in the East African capital cities of Dar es Salaam, Tanzania and Nairobi, Kenya.

Wikipedia

Theo van Gogh (July 23, 1957 – November 2, 2004) was a controversial Dutch film director, television producer, publicist and actor. A descendant of the brother of the famous Dutch painter Vincent van Gogh, he was murdered by Mohammed Bouyeri.

Wikipedia

On November 16, 2005, Hirsi Ali reported being seriously threatened by the Imam Sachemic FAA. This Imam, who worked in a mosque in The Hague, announced on the Internet that Hirsi Ali would be "blown away by the wind of changing times" and that she could anticipate "the curse of Allah".

Wikipedia

(Salman Rushdie) is best known for the violent criticism his book The Satanic Verses (1988) inspired in radical Muslims. After death threats and a fatwa by Ruhollah Khomeini, calling for his assassination, he spent years underground, appearing in public only sporadically. Between 2004 and 2006 he served as president of PEN American Center.

Wikipedia

Ken Livingstone is a well-known Leftist in the UK who is Mayor of London. Here is what he had to say after the London bombings:

I want to say one thing specifically to the world today. This was not a terrorist attack against the mighty and the powerful. It was not aimed at Presidents or Prime Ministers. It was aimed at ordinary, working-class Londoners, black and white, Muslim and Christian, Hindu and Jew, young and old. It was an indiscriminate attempt to slaughter, irrespective of any considerations for age, for class, for religion, or whatever.

....

Finally, I wish to speak directly to those who came to London today to take life.

I know that you personally do not fear giving up your own life in order to take others - that is why you are so dangerous. But I know you fear that you may fail in your long-term objective to destroy our free society and I can show you why you will fail.

In the days that follow look at our airports, look at our sea ports and look at our railway stations and, even after your cowardly attack, you will see that people from the rest of Britain, people from around the world will arrive in London to become Londoners and to fulfil their dreams and achieve their potential.

They choose to come to London, as so many have come before because they come to be free, they come to live the life they choose, they come to be able to be themselves. They flee you because you tell them how they should live. They don't want that and nothing you do, however many of us you kill, will stop that flight to our city where freedom is strong and where people can live in harmony with one another. Whatever you do, however many you kill, you will fail.

LondonOnline

I happen to think that Afghanistan and Iraq are rather symptoms of a larger problem. Harper's characterization strikes me as more accurate than your opinion or theory.

[Johnny Utah]

Islamic terrorism Record:

1993 (Feb.): Bombing of World Trade Center (WTC); 6 killed.

1993 (Oct.): Killing of U.S. soldiers in Somalia.

1996 (June): Truck bombing at Khobar Towers barracks in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, killed 19 Americans.

1998 (Aug.): Bombing of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania; 224 killed, including 12 Americans.

1999 (Dec.): Plot to bomb millennium celebrations in Seattle foiled when customs agents arrest an Algerian smuggling explosives into the U.S.

2000 (Oct.): Bombing of the USS Cole in port in Yemen; 17 U.S. sailors killed.

2001 (Sept.): Destruction of WTC; attack on Pentagon. Total dead 2,992.

These attacks were before the Afghanistan and Iraq War..

2001 (Dec.): Man tried to denote shoe bomb on flight from Paris to Miami.

2002 (April): Explosion at historic synagogue in Tunisia left 21 dead, including 14 German tourists.

2002 (May): Car exploded outside hotel in Karachi, Pakistan, killing 14, including 11 French citizens.

2002 (June): Bomb exploded outside American consulate in Karachi, Pakistan, killing 12.

2002 (Oct.): Boat crashed into oil tanker off Yemen coast, killing 1.

2002 (Oct.): Nightclub bombings in Bali, Indonesia, killed 202, mostly Australian citizens.

2002 (Nov.): Suicide attack on a hotel in Mombasa, Kenya, killed 16.

These attacks were before the Iraq War, so Andrew you're reasoning falls flat..

[SirSpanky]

The only thing that strikes me as detrimental is the rather broad generalization that statements such as this make.

The entrapment statement you made is absolute nonsense.

[AndrewL]

Here is a quote from Harper in regards to the terror arrests:

"We are a target because of who we are and how we live, our society, our diversity and our values," Prime Minister Stephen Harper said.

Does anybody actually beleive this nonsense? I guarantee these people are inspired by the war and death being waged in Iraq and Afghanistan and not some 'they hate our freedom' bullshit that the brainwashed like to spew.

Let me be more clear: I have no doubt that some muslims hate liberalism and secularism. I have no doubt they always have. But this is not the reason they are planing attacks now. The spain and london bombers were motivated by the death in Iraq, their religion was only used to facilitate those murders, not unlike George Bush consulting God before unleashing hell on Iraqi civilians.

As every day goes by i am distrusting Stephen Harper more and more.

Congrats to the RCMP and CSIS for nabbing these guys. (hopefully this was not a staged entrapment for political gain)

Andrew

Using the Wars in Afghanistan and Iraq is nothing more then an excuse by the Terrorists and their apologists. Harper's comments are not US propganda or nonsense. How do you know the Madrid and London bombers were inspired by the Iraq War? Where's you're proof?

Sounds like you're already making excuses for the 17 Terrorist suspects who wanted to kill Canadians..

The videotape put out by one of the london bombers blamed the invasion of Iraq. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4206708.stm

The spanish government went to iraq against the massive demonstrations against this warin spain. They got bombed by local terrorists right before an election and then they pulled out.

Im not saying these are the only reasons for the attacks on london and spain and the allegedly foiled attacks on Canada, im just saying that I do not accept as any reason at all that we are a target because islamicists just hate us and our values. That is stupid. And AQ has never once claimed any attack on the west has anything to do with our values. It is about our foreign policy primarily, and the use of religious rhetoric just reveals the secondary factors that help facilitate murder and mayhem. Which of course is true of any religion. (except perhaps some of the eastern mysticisms which are more philosophies than religions anyway).

Im not making excuses for these alleged terrorists, I want Canada to look at the issue realisitically and not just repeat the simplified and useless mantras that are common in the US government and conservative think-tanks when they talk about terrorists. Does Stephen Harper think Canadians are stupid? Are Canadians stupid....???

Unless we actually recognize the real causes of terrorism we have no hope of solving it. And if we go the path of the US and start to actually partake in terrorism than this whole thing is just hopeless.

Andrew

[AndrewL]

deleted post

[AndrewL]

"We are a target because of who we are and how we live, our society, our diversity and our values," Prime Minister Stephen Harper said.

Does anybody actually beleive this nonsense? I guarantee these people are inspired by the war and death being waged in Iraq and Afghanistan and not some 'they hate our freedom' bullshit that the brainwashed like to spew.

Andrew, you are entitled to your opinion but your opinion or theory does not explain the following facts:

The World Trade Center bombing was the February 26, 1993 attack in the garage of the New York City World Trade Center. A car bomb was detonated by Islamist terrorists in the underground parking garage below Tower One. It killed six, injured over 1,000, and presaged the September 11, 2001 attacks on the same buildings.

Wikipedia

The USS Cole bombing was a suicide bombing attack against the U.S. Navy guided missile destroyer USS Cole (DDG 67) on October 12, 2000 while it was harbored in the Yemeni port of Aden.

Wikipedia

In the 1998 U.S. Embassy bombings (August 7, 1998), more than 220 people were killed and over 4,000 wounded in simultaneous [1] car bomb explosions at the United States embassies in the East African capital cities of Dar es Salaam, Tanzania and Nairobi, Kenya.

Wikipedia

Theo van Gogh (July 23, 1957 – November 2, 2004) was a controversial Dutch film director, television producer, publicist and actor. A descendant of the brother of the famous Dutch painter Vincent van Gogh, he was murdered by Mohammed Bouyeri.

Wikipedia

On November 16, 2005, Hirsi Ali reported being seriously threatened by the Imam Sachemic FAA. This Imam, who worked in a mosque in The Hague, announced on the Internet that Hirsi Ali would be "blown away by the wind of changing times" and that she could anticipate "the curse of Allah".

Wikipedia

(Salman Rushdie) is best known for the violent criticism his book The Satanic Verses (1988) inspired in radical Muslims. After death threats and a fatwa by Ruhollah Khomeini, calling for his assassination, he spent years underground, appearing in public only sporadically. Between 2004 and 2006 he served as president of PEN American Center.

Wikipedia

Ken Livingstone is a well-known Leftist in the UK who is Mayor of London. Here is what he had to say after the London bombings:

I want to say one thing specifically to the world today. This was not a terrorist attack against the mighty and the powerful. It was not aimed at Presidents or Prime Ministers. It was aimed at ordinary, working-class Londoners, black and white, Muslim and Christian, Hindu and Jew, young and old. It was an indiscriminate attempt to slaughter, irrespective of any considerations for age, for class, for religion, or whatever.

....

Finally, I wish to speak directly to those who came to London today to take life.

I know that you personally do not fear giving up your own life in order to take others - that is why you are so dangerous. But I know you fear that you may fail in your long-term objective to destroy our free society and I can show you why you will fail.

In the days that follow look at our airports, look at our sea ports and look at our railway stations and, even after your cowardly attack, you will see that people from the rest of Britain, people from around the world will arrive in London to become Londoners and to fulfil their dreams and achieve their potential.

They choose to come to London, as so many have come before because they come to be free, they come to live the life they choose, they come to be able to be themselves. They flee you because you tell them how they should live. They don't want that and nothing you do, however many of us you kill, will stop that flight to our city where freedom is strong and where people can live in harmony with one another. Whatever you do, however many you kill, you will fail.

LondonOnline

I happen to think that Afghanistan and Iraq are rather symptoms of a larger problem. Harper's characterization strikes me as more accurate than your opinion or theory.

I never said terrorism began after the invasion of Iraq. But what is unique is the homegrown nature of the two attacks and one fioled attack. Are you sure these would have transpired had the botched Afghnaistan and fabricated Iraq invasion created all the loss of innocent life for no reason whatsoever.

OBL has consistently stated american foreign policy as his main motivation, long before iraq. He listed the Saudi Arabia bases and the one sided treatment of the palestinian issue as his two main causes. Why is this always ignored in favor of 'they just hate freedom' which is a complete non-starter as far as understanding these people.

The USS cole was a military target and entirely justified given americas past crimes in the region. The targets on 9/11 were military and economic targets as well, the loss of innocent life pales in comparison to the 'collateral damage' america causes in its wars for oil.

Ken Livingstone reveals that the attacks in london were very unique in that they were meant to terrorize purely and were commited by localas who have stated on videotape that they wanted revenge for all the innocent death caused by Tony Blair in Iraq. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4206708.stm

Yes I canot deny that radical islamicists are a dangerous and twisted group of people who sometimes want to kill westerners. But this cannot be the full explanation (if it was the only answer would be to kill them all). These people have always existed, yet london, canada and spain have never ever had homegrown islamicists wanting to kill people just crawl out of the woodwork. Yes they can become radicalized by religion, but their cause is political and it is often as a result of western foreign policies that are also radical, terrorizing, murderous, and based on lies and deception.

I reject Stephen Harpers simplification of this and think Canadian are smart enough to take a more abstract, honest, and realist view of these issues. I am worried that Stephen Harper will use this to further a militant neo-con agenda.

Andrew

[AndrewL]

The only thing that strikes me as detrimental is the rather broad generalization that statements such as this make.

The entrapment statement you made is absolute nonsense.

Entrapment is probably an overstatement. But we do live in a society that still has habeus corpus. My one concern with this case is that they were some angry young kids on the internet who were offered weapons and explosives by CSIS. The kids then began to escalate their plans facilitated by the CSIS and RCMP involvement. There was probably one or two older guys who are dangerous and should be charged, but i feel that most ofthe arrests will prove unwarranted as there would be no proof these kids would have done anything if not offered the chance by CSIS and the RCMP in the first place. (i dont really know since not all of the details have been released, so i am certainly just speculatiing here).

Perhaps Harper needed an excuse to make Canada a militant nation. And now he has an excuse to invade some random Arab nation with the Americans..... Think Iran....

Andrew

[Johnny Utah]

Perhaps Harper needed an excuse to make Canada a militant nation. And now he has an excuse to invade some random Arab nation with the Americans..... Think Iran....

Andrew

Where do you get these ideas? Harper has no intention of making Canada a militant nation, that sounds like Liberal Fear Mongering. The same kind of Liberal Fear mongering Liberals used in the TV Ad against Harper using the Canadian Military which backfired..

[Machinations]

"We are a target because of who we are and how we live, our society, our diversity and our values," Prime Minister Stephen Harper said.

Reducing it to a simplistic meme like this (they hate our values, they hate us) is disingenuous. The true situation is far, far more complicated than that. I find this kind of remark contemptible, since it is, in essence, dumbing down our discussion to this level.

Any person with a modest education knows that there are many and varied reasons that differ even from individual to individual for wanting to engage in these sorts of acts of terrorism. While not trying to be comprehensive, religious extremists, cultural attitudes, support for Israel, constant war and hardship (and blame for this being transferred, rightly or not, to the Americans) are some good examples.

[Johnny Utah]

"We are a target because of who we are and how we live, our society, our diversity and our values," Prime Minister Stephen Harper said.

Reducing it to a simplistic meme like this (they hate our values, they hate us) is disingenuous. The true situation is far, far more complicated than that. I find this kind of remark contemptible, since it is, in essence, dumbing down our discussion to this level.

Any person with a modest education knows that there are many and varied reasons that differ even from individual to individual for wanting to engage in these sorts of acts of terrorism. While not trying to be comprehensive, religious extremists, cultural attitudes, support for Israel, constant war and hardship (and blame for this being transferred, rightly or not, to the Americans) are some good examples.

They don't need a justified reason to hate the west and what it stands for they just do because it's not their way. If it's not their way we are the enemy, the infidels. Support for Israel is not a valid reason for them to hate us, it's just another excuse they use..

[gerryhatrick]

Nevermind taking a page, he's ripping off the whole Bush book.

In the morning shooting his mouth off about what he thinks motivates people just arrested, and in the afternoon doing it again in front of Canadian Forces recruits.

[Machinations]

"We are a target because of who we are and how we live, our society, our diversity and our values," Prime Minister Stephen Harper said.

Reducing it to a simplistic meme like this (they hate our values, they hate us) is disingenuous. The true situation is far, far more complicated than that. I find this kind of remark contemptible, since it is, in essence, dumbing down our discussion to this level.

Any person with a modest education knows that there are many and varied reasons that differ even from individual to individual for wanting to engage in these sorts of acts of terrorism. While not trying to be comprehensive, religious extremists, cultural attitudes, support for Israel, constant war and hardship (and blame for this being transferred, rightly or not, to the Americans) are some good examples.

They don't need a justified reason to hate the west and what it stands for they just do because it's not their way. If it's not their way we are the enemy, the infidels. Support for Israel is not a valid reason for them to hate us, it's just another excuse they use..

I never said it was justified. What I said was, their reasons. Are you saying they have no reasons? Simply, they are murderous and hateful? Lies, I say. People rationalize doing evil things all the time - for revenge, jealousy and many other human failings. I am not justifying their actions, merely pointing out what they see as reasons - and they are as varied as the people that espouse them.

[FTA Lawyer]

The only thing that strikes me as detrimental is the rather broad generalization that statements such as this make.

The entrapment statement you made is absolute nonsense.

Entrapment is probably an overstatement. But we do live in a society that still has habeus corpus. My one concern with this case is that they were some angry young kids on the internet who were offered weapons and explosives by CSIS. The kids then began to escalate their plans facilitated by the CSIS and RCMP involvement. There was probably one or two older guys who are dangerous and should be charged, but i feel that most ofthe arrests will prove unwarranted as there would be no proof these kids would have done anything if not offered the chance by CSIS and the RCMP in the first place. (i dont really know since not all of the details have been released, so i am certainly just speculatiing here).

Perhaps Harper needed an excuse to make Canada a militant nation. And now he has an excuse to invade some random Arab nation with the Americans..... Think Iran....

Andrew

Andrew,

I don't really understand your comments...and I'm not sure that you do either.

The writ of habeas corpus is a remedy for an unlawful arrest / detention / imprisonment. I'm not sure how you were intending to use the term in the context you have put it in your comments.

Entrapment is a technical and complicated area and I am sickened that the media has tossed it out there flippantly for the uninformed masses to discuss unintelligently. A relatively simple explanation comes from a Manitoba Court of Appeal case in 1987 known as R. v. Biddulph:

Mere solicitation of an offence by an undercover officer is not enough to raise the defence.

There must be evidence that the accused had been pressured, threatened, or deceived, and conduct on the part of the police so shocking or outrageous as to bring the administration of justice into disrepute.

Offering someone who is espousing hate over the internet the opportunity to escalate their behaviour into full-blown terrorism is not entrapment. With the incredibly minimal details available at this stage, there is no responsible basis for anyone to be suggesting entrapment is in play.

And it should be kept in mind that entrapment, procedurally, is only a defence in a criminal case after the Crown has proven the accused is guilty. In 1998, the Supreme Court of Canada in a case called R. v. Pearson said:

Once the defendant is found guilty, he alone bears the burden of establishing [on a balance of probabilities] that the conduct of the Crown and/or the police amounted to an abuse of process that deserves a stay of proceedings.

Further, it is well settled law that a stay of proceedings will only be granted in the "clearest of cases" where an abuse of process is so serious that there is no other available sufficient remedy.

Please resist the temptation to give your opinion on issues unless you first research and understand them.

FTA

[Machinations]

I think though, the RCMP facilitating the sale of the 3 tons of ammonium nitrate to these people is a little - shady, at least. No matter what, anyone purchasing that volume of ammonium nitrate would have raised red flags. Us coming along and offering it to angry people seems anagalous to handing someone on the street a gun then arresting them when they aim it to fire.

Could'nt we have just arrested them on conspiracy charges? Oh, then it would'nt be the big, slam-dunk, snipers on the courthouse (how theatrical!) event that it is. Which, politically, was desperately needed.

[Riverwind]

I think though, the RCMP facilitating the sale of the 3 tons of ammonium nitrate to these people is a little - shady, at least. No matter what, anyone purchasing that volume of ammonium nitrate would have raised red flags.

My current understanding is the RCMP were notified by legimate sellers about a suspicious order. The RCMP then told the sellers to go ahead with the sale and the RCMP would take responsibility for delivering it and arrest the buyers.

If that version of events is accurate then I think the RCMP did nothing wrong or shady in this particular operation.

[Machinations]

I think though, the RCMP facilitating the sale of the 3 tons of ammonium nitrate to these people is a little - shady, at least. No matter what, anyone purchasing that volume of ammonium nitrate would have raised red flags.

My current understanding is the RCMP were notified by legimate sellers about a suspicious order. The RCMP then told the sellers to go ahead with the sale and the RCMP would take responsibility for delivering it and arrest the buyers.

If that version of events is accurate then I think the RCMP did nothing wrong or shady in this particular operation.

If that version of events is accurate, I concur.

[Charles Anthony]

Could'nt we have just arrested them on conspiracy charges? Oh, then it would'nt be the big, slam-dunk, snipers on the courthouse (how theatrical!) event that it is. Which, politically, was desperately needed.

No. The intent of the suspects must be proven. The full knowledge of what the suspects were intending to purchase must be proven. A whole whack of other things must also be proven. That is likely what the cops needed to demonstrate with the sting.

Compare the two scenarios:

SUSPECT: "Have you got the goods?"

SELLER: "Yes -- over there."

SUSPECT: "All of it?"

SELLER: "Yes. Have you got the money?"

SUSPECT: "Yes -- here it is."

SELLER: "Good. Bye."

SUSPECT: "Bye."

SUSPECT: "Have you got the goods?"

UNDERCOVER COP: "Yes. I have all 3 tons of ammonium nitrate."

SUSPECT: "Where?"

UNDERCOVER COP: "All 3 tons of ammonium nitrate are over there. Are you sure you want 3 tons of ammonium nitrate?"

SUSPECT: "Yes. Yes."

UNDERCOVER COP: "Do you have the money?"

SUSPECT: "Yes. Yes. Here it is. Now give it to me!"

UNDERCOVER COP: "Are you sure you want to buy all 3 tons of ammonium nitrate for this amount of money?"

SUSPECT: "Yes! Yes! You stupid farmer! Give me the ammonium nitrate and stop wasting my time!"

etc. etc. etc.

The above scripts may seem corny but I they should illustrate.

The cops have to demonstrate clearly that the suspects knew what they were doing and were not coerced.

[sharkman]

I'm sure the RCMP is pretty well aware of what will fly in a court room and what is entrapment.

[AndrewL]

Perhaps Harper needed an excuse to make Canada a militant nation. And now he has an excuse to invade some random Arab nation with the Americans..... Think Iran....

Andrew

Where do you get these ideas? Harper has no intention of making Canada a militant nation, that sounds like Liberal Fear Mongering. The same kind of Liberal Fear mongering Liberals used in the TV Ad against Harper using the Canadian Military which backfired..

He is already looking to spend millions on the military. If he can spin this whole event the right way it might give him carte blanche to increase the size and reach of our miliatry. Next thing you know we will be holding hands with the US in their next fabricated war, and becoming a target in return.

Andrew

[AndrewL]

The only thing that strikes me as detrimental is the rather broad generalization that statements such as this make.

The entrapment statement you made is absolute nonsense.

Entrapment is probably an overstatement. But we do live in a society that still has habeus corpus. My one concern with this case is that they were some angry young kids on the internet who were offered weapons and explosives by CSIS. The kids then began to escalate their plans facilitated by the CSIS and RCMP involvement. There was probably one or two older guys who are dangerous and should be charged, but i feel that most ofthe arrests will prove unwarranted as there would be no proof these kids would have done anything if not offered the chance by CSIS and the RCMP in the first place. (i dont really know since not all of the details have been released, so i am certainly just speculatiing here).

Perhaps Harper needed an excuse to make Canada a militant nation. And now he has an excuse to invade some random Arab nation with the Americans..... Think Iran....

Andrew

Andrew,

I don't really understand your comments...and I'm not sure that you do either.

The writ of habeas corpus is a remedy for an unlawful arrest / detention / imprisonment. I'm not sure how you were intending to use the term in the context you have put it in your comments.

Entrapment is a technical and complicated area and I am sickened that the media has tossed it out there flippantly for the uninformed masses to discuss unintelligently. A relatively simple explanation comes from a Manitoba Court of Appeal case in 1987 known as R. v. Biddulph:

Mere solicitation of an offence by an undercover officer is not enough to raise the defence.

There must be evidence that the accused had been pressured, threatened, or deceived, and conduct on the part of the police so shocking or outrageous as to bring the administration of justice into disrepute.

Offering someone who is espousing hate over the internet the opportunity to escalate their behaviour into full-blown terrorism is not entrapment. With the incredibly minimal details available at this stage, there is no responsible basis for anyone to be suggesting entrapment is in play.

And it should be kept in mind that entrapment, procedurally, is only a defence in a criminal case after the Crown has proven the accused is guilty. In 1998, the Supreme Court of Canada in a case called R. v. Pearson said:

Once the defendant is found guilty, he alone bears the burden of establishing [on a balance of probabilities] that the conduct of the Crown and/or the police amounted to an abuse of process that deserves a stay of proceedings.

Further, it is well settled law that a stay of proceedings will only be granted in the "clearest of cases" where an abuse of process is so serious that there is no other available sufficient remedy.

Please resist the temptation to give your opinion on issues unless you first research and understand them.

FTA

Why would i resist the temptation. If i did all the research then you wouldnt have anything to post. And BTW, i said i was speculating and that entrapment was an overstatement on my part. Did you just ignore those things so you could show us all how smart you are?

Andrew

[Argus]

The cops have to demonstrate clearly that the suspects knew what they were doing and were not coerced.

Actually, it's the other way around. The suspects have to prove they WERE coerced.

[Argus]

Please resist the temptation to give your opinion on issues unless you first research and understand them.

FTA

Why would i resist the temptation.

Because it makes you look dumb.

You were speculating about the evil mounties entraping poor young Muslim boys, and using legal terms like habeus corpus when you apparently didn't know what they meant.

[kimmy]

He is already looking to spend millions on the military. If he can spin this whole event the right way it might give him carte blanche to increase the size and reach of our miliatry. Next thing you know we will be holding hands with the US in their next fabricated war, and becoming a target in return.

Andrew

And we're not a target already?

(re-checks recent headlines...)

-kimmy

{I think we might be a target already...}