A List of Canadian Terrorists

[killjoy]

I'm from Alberta. It's unfortunate but true that in Alberta (and I'd say Saskatchewan) there is probably a disproportionate level of bigoted crap. 'Course the East, never wanting us to get one up on them will go ahead and even it up by calling all of us racist (ahhhh, Toronto. I miss that warm feeling of superiority) and Quebec can go ahead and goose-step it's youngsters through the streets looking for 'language crimes' and everyone just puts a constipated smile on their face like, "What? So?", because Quebec was born to be appeased. Posing aloof while being appeased from afar is just so...French.

I love immigrants. I really do. It’s the nations boon. In a big way I don’t even think we have the moral right to deny people who could benefit. After all, it’s not really ‘ours’ either. It’s the biggest land-grab in history. I don't think there's really anything wrong with our immigration except the wholesale corruption the permeates practically every level of anything federal that the Liberal party lauded.

But that's a whole hundred more posts. One thing all of Canada is 'guilty' for, is wanting to open our doors to anyone in the world who is in danger because of local strife or war. I love this and I'm all for it. Unfortunately if the world was that simple the world would be easy. The side effect of letting people in from war-torn or insecure nations, and in fact being known for doing that, is that naturally there are going to be many people who are not changing nationalities so much as retreating to continue the fight from here.

The way I see it we have 3 ubiquitous choices:

1. Scrap everything.

2. Change nothing.

3. Reshape the policies so we can still allow others to share and help build our fantastic nation while being able to block people who just want a safe haven to fight their wars from.

I'm guessing that the last one on the list will likely be the last thing we'll actually do.

.

[August1991]

One thing all of Canada is 'guilty' for, is wanting to open our doors to anyone in the world who is in danger because of local strife or war. I love this and I'm all for it. Unfortunately if the world was that simple the world would be easy. The side effect of letting people in from war-torn or insecure nations, and in fact being known for doing that, is that naturally there are going to be many people who are not changing nationalities so much as retreating to continue the fight from here.

All things considered, I disagree.

We are at present facing a problem posed by a specific group: radical Muslims. By and large, other immigrant groups do not pose the same threat. Radical Muslims are not just a problem in Canada but elsewhere too. It may not be politically correct to state this but it's patently obvious and it's not helpful to ignore it.

Why do radical Muslims pose a problem? Clearly, the Israeli/Palestinian conflict is part of the cause but there are other reasons too. For example, the status of women within Islamic society is at tremendous variance with the western world.

The history of the West over the past few centuries has been a battle to give the individual the freedom to choose. We faced down militaristic Germany and the State planning apparatus of the Soviet Union in the past century. Before that, we dispensed with the crude obscurantism of the Christian Church.

When Churchill said these words, he was genuinely fearful:

Hitler knows that he will have to break us in this Island or lose the war. If we can stand up to him, all Europe may be free and the life of the world may move forward into broad, sunlit uplands. But if we fail, then the whole world, including the United States, including all that we have known and cared for, will sink into the abyss of a new Dark Age made more sinister, and perhaps more protracted, by the lights of perverted science.

The current threat manifests itself in an entirely different way from Nazism but IMV, bin Laden, the Taliban, Wahhabism, dhimmitude and so on represent in their own way a similar Dark Age.

[GostHacked]

Holy Crap! The Left believes these Terrorists have the right to live in Canada?

There is none, because no-one says they should stay, other than their lawyers.

That's not true. There is a good majority of people who are either sympathizing with them, or, defending their rights - ie the group in ottawa today that lobbied for the gov't to remove the 'terrorist' element from our laws. These are white, full bred Canadians.

I say this over adn over; Canadians defend the guilty.

Perhaps the thinking should be, protecting the innocent until proven guilty.

[killjoy]

All things considered, I disagree.

We are at present facing a problem posed by a specific group: radical Muslims. By and large, other immigrant groups do not pose the same threat. Radical Muslims are not just a problem in Canada but elsewhere too. It may not be politically correct to state this but it's patently obvious and it's not helpful to ignore it.

For the present I more or less inclined agree with all that. In regards to fanatical Islam currently there is likely more reason to be suspicious. It's unfortunate but I agree. But I believe my point still stands. If you are letting people in from, particularly a country in civil war you have to take measures to be sure that you are not enabling that war more by allowing them to raise money here specifically for what would be a war threat back there. The case of Sri Lankians (sp?) is special as well in that we shouldn't stop people from sending their money home if they are sincerely only trying to help their families, but what happens is people catch wind of this and extort family here through family members there. Add to the mix that Canada has long been fertile and safe ground to launder money and, IMO you have a serious and unchecked problem.

I agree that for the present Islamic fanatasism are a particular threat, but the system is still too susceptible to corruption.

I think we're debating opposite sides of the same coin.

The history of the West over the past few centuries has been a battle to give the individual the freedom to choose.

It hasn't been just the West. It's the entire world. "The People's Century" as they call it. This battle for individual freedoms is precisely what Islam is in conflict within itself.

When Churchill said these words, he was genuinely fearful:

QUOTE

Hitler knows that he will have to break us in this Island or lose the war. If we can stand up to him, all Europe may be free and the life of the world may move forward into broad, sunlit uplands. But if we fail, then the whole world, including the United States, including all that we have known and cared for, will sink into the abyss of a new Dark Age made more sinister, and perhaps more protracted, by the lights of perverted science.

The current threat manifests itself in an entirely different way from Nazism but IMV, bin Laden, the Taliban, Wahhabism, dhimmitude and so on represent in their own way a similar Dark Age.

I just don't do the entire WWII analogy thing anymore bud. No offence. Even though I read what you said and am somewhat inclined to agree, (although I'm likely to argue that fanatical Islam is more of a threat to Muslims than the rest of us), I just can't take it anymore. WWII was WWII and his prediction of a 'Dark Age' is an age-old prediction. Just my opinion.

.

[Riverwind]

We are at present facing a problem posed by a specific group: radical Muslims. By and large, other immigrant groups do not pose the same threat. Radical Muslims are not just a problem in Canada but elsewhere too. It may not be politically correct to state this but it's patently obvious and it's not helpful to ignore it.

More people have died from Jamacan gang violance than from Muslim terrorism in the country. More people have died from Sikh terroism (Air India bombing) than from Muslim terrorism.

The current threat manifests itself in an entirely different way from Nazism but IMV, bin Laden, the Taliban, Wahhabism, dhimmitude and so on represent in their own way a similar Dark Age.

These groups are people operating on the fringes of their societies. They have no hope of gaining and keeping power in any Muslim country of significance. The only thing we have to do is make sure our police have the tools to stop terrorist groups. We should also try to starve these fringe groups of the anger the feed upon being a lot more diplomatic when it comes to dealing with issues related to Muslims. This does not mean we give into their demands - it simply means we be less confrontational when making our case (i.e. no more pre-emptive wars on Muslim countries).

[August1991]

More people have died from Jamacan gang violance than from Muslim terrorism in the country. More people have died from Sikh terroism (Air India bombing) than from Muslim terrorism.

That may be true but as usual, one must consider the potential gravity of a danger, the chance of the danger occurring and the cost of deterring the danger.

Crossing at a redlight may potentially kill you, but the chance is slight and the cost of being careful is small. Having your car stolen would mean losing several thousand dollars but the chance of it happening is rather high and the cost of insurance is rather low.

Clearly, fanatical Muslim terrorism poses a potentially great cost to society and the chance of it occurring is deemed high enough to warrant extra measures.

[killjoy]

More people have died from Jamacan gang violance than from Muslim terrorism in the country. More people have died from Sikh terroism (Air India bombing) than from Muslim terrorism.

Well, yeah. Mostly because these guys were caught....because of tighter security...which is argued we don't need because there's no threat. (???)

You're more likely to die in a car accident than by cancer from smoking. We should all keep on smoking and stop driving?

.

[mikedavid00]

Maybe because that ethnicity is a huge supporter of the Liberals? No?

Yes.

That's why we have our immigration policy to begin with.

[mikedavid00]

"Relations between these two organizations have not always been cordial and much of the earlier interservice bad feeling has been made all too public of recent date during the Air India trial. Neither governments nor Canadian citizens will tolerate any continuation of these turf wars and apparent lack of trust and cooperation."

http://www.csis-scrs.gc.ca/en/publications...ntary/com85.asp

I know the story and I'll say that they still could have been brought to justice. It was up to the judge and he just decided to protect the guilty. The Sikh's accused were even in the woods practicing with exposives. There was more than enough evidence that was 'good enough' to get them. Again, it's a personal descision of the judge. What he says is not moral rule or what's right: it's only his personal feelings on the matter.

we're letting in refugee claimants and family sponsorship - the world trash ---

Where is such bigotry bred?

We're all biggots. It's all about how honest we are to admitting it.

I invite you to do some research on our Immigration policies, job creation numbers (not unemployment percentages), and especially the issue of 'underemployment'.

Canada is getting world trash at this stage in the game. After 5 years of living here, 36% of all immigrants are living in poverty.

It's not because they aren't educated or such - it's because there aren't jobs for them - or us for that matter which makes the whole situation worse.

But nothing gets done about this because it would be policitcal suicide for any party to speak up about this.

Canada is a private a club, a private country. It's not open for the world to come into and we're all not welcoming at this stage. You may me, and most on the message board, but guess what, as a born Canadian (and tax payer all my life), I have the right and freedom to denounce immigration in it's current form.

And that makes me a biggot? Because I disagree with a poor policy? Because the media and CBC doesn't want me to even discuss the issue? Because I feel that the majority of people coming into Canada have no desire at all to integrate with our society? Am I not allowed to have these feelings about my OWN country?

Where is such sense of entitlement bred? WHy do youo feel that our country is just some open border place for the third world to settle and ghettoize? Why do you feel that a +50 year old woman from Pakistan down the street from me got a glucoma eye surgery while jumping ahead all the others in the waiting list?

A woman who doesn't work, doesn't pay taxes, never has, doesn't care to speak English, and Canada felt it was a good idea to let her immigrate here.

Am I not allowed to be apposed to this sort of thing?

[Charles Anthony]

Bigotry is identifying people as trash.

Denouncing an immigration policy is not bigotry.

Bigotry is identifying people as the world's trash.

The "trash" comment was quoted and identified as bigotry.

The denouncement of the immigration policy was not quoted and was not identified as bigotry.

In fact, I will take this one step further:

People question how it is that these 17 young terrorists could plan such destruction.

I do not know the answer. However, those young terrorists came from within our borders and planned their bigotry from within our borders. I do not trust people who would use the term "trash" to identify a racial demographic.

Where is such sense of entitlement bred?

I can only speak for myself: I do not feel anybody (immigrant or born-here) is entitled to much.

WHy do youo feel that our country is just some open border place for the third world to settle and ghettoize?

That is a good question. I will not say whether I feel that or not because it should be in a separate thread. I would enjoy discussing my views on citizenship and immigration. Here is a hint: I believe in equality of human rights.

Am I not allowed to be apposed to this sort of thing?

Yes, you are. However, once people are identified as "trash" other people are identified as a bigots.

[mikedavid00]

In general, we take in around 200,000

False. We take about 236,000 with an estimated 10-20,000 more illegals.

http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/pdf/pub/facts2004.pdf

immigrants per year. Of these, about half (100,000) are admitted in the category of skilled workers, about a third (70,000) as family class and the rest (30,000) as refugees. Be cautious however. The 100,000 in the skilled worker categaory include dependants (children, spouse) so in fact, we only accept about 30,000 skilled workers.

Hence my 70% number. Atleast you were honest about the facts.

In addition, Canada loses about 70,000 every year through emigration (primarily to the US). Statcan data

I challenge you to provide data on this.

Canada's immigration law changed significantly in 1976. Since then, IMV, Canadian immigration has ressembled the kind of immigrants going to the US. North America is a dynamic society because of it.

Simply not true but his is a whole other post.

Incidentally, the US has a lottery system now which I think is better than our system.

(Link)

And they are letting in 10,000 people a year out of a country with 10 times the population of ours.

You'll note that when Canada accepted many immigrants in the early part of the last century

That has nothing to do with today and shouldn't be brought up in discussion.

they were in effect "refugees" because there was no point system and most of them were illiterate peasants from Europe. At the time, many people considered them "trash" too. Mike, you might want to consider under what circumstances your own family/ancestors arrived on this continent.

They came as business owners, employed canadians, helped the economy, and changed their last names from Arabic to English just to fit in (1950's). My Grandfather also served in the military and faught in WWII.

[mikedavid00]

Yes, you are. However, once people are identified as "trash" other people are identified as a bigots.

Again, Am I not allowed to be bigot?

I guess if I used the term 'Euro Trash' that would be a cool thing to say and that's ok. But because I brought up our precious third world immigrants who aren't here on our point system and our litterlally ruining our country (actually it's a gov't with this devistating policy.. you can't blame people for wanting to take advantage of somethign so easy).

I will say that i'm a true product of multiculturalism. If you could peek into my life, you would see.

However, my views on people who don't want to integrate into our society and ghettoize themselves together I will always consider the world trash and lower class that are coming here.

And am I not allowed to say this? Are we not allowed to talk about this? Do words hurt anyone here? Of course not. We need to admit that we now have a huge problem and deal with it.

Or did the media tell you that we weren't allowed to talk about that?

[Argus]

Holy Crap! The Left believes these Terrorists have the right to live in Canada?

Holy Crap! You want us to believe a rightwing thinktank that has been sued in the past for making false allegations!

Point of order: Are there ANY major news organizations in Canada which have never been sued for making false allegations?

[Argus]

I am also to hold the Conservatives accountable for every immigrant who turns out to have espionage links that slips through? Oh silly me, your list contains some of those same people! They came in when the Conservatives were in power!

OOPS!

Brian Mulroney (spit) was in power from September 17, 1984, to June 25, 1993. As an example from your linked list:

Brian Mulroney might have been a Progressive Conservative, but he was never a conservative. His government was certainly not conservative.

[Argus]

As a percentage of the population, we accepted more immigrants in the early 1900s than we do now. .

This is an argument which has never made any sort of sense. The vast majority of immigrants at the turn of the century were of a similar or identical culture and educational level to that which prevailed in Canada at the time, and they were needed for a vast, empty country.

Australia accepts more net migrants than we do

Good for Australia. Australia has a labour shortage and an unemployment rate at a 30 year low.

Canada's immigration law changed significantly in 1976. Since then, IMV, Canadian immigration has ressembled the kind of immigrants going to the US. North America is a dynamic society because of it.

Really? How about we redirect the vast majority of immigrants to Quebec then, and ensure they're all English speakers? Do you think Quebecers would be grateful for how "dynamic" this would make their society?

You'll note that when Canada accepted many immigrants in the early part of the last century, they were in effect "refugees" because there was no point system and most of them were illiterate peasants from Europe.

Most Canadians were illliterates, as well, but that was okay because we had a great need for illiterate peasants as farmers, fishermen and loggers. We no longer have this need!

Neverthless, we still get tens of thousands who are, basically, illiterate peasants, with the additional problem that not only can't they read and write in English/French, they can't speak it either, nor are the yat all familar with our alphabet.

Or toilets.

As I've argued with Argus, I suggest you watch some time the end credits of a Hollywood movie and in particular look at the family names of the people involved in the film's production.

August, I suggest you watch some time when police wanted notices are put on the news, take a look at the faces and descriptions and family names and you'll see precisely what affect immigration has had on our major cities, especially in central Canada.

[Argus]

we're letting in refugee claimants and family sponsorship - the world trash ---

Where is such bigotry bred?

Just guessing but there is an expression which likely applies. It is "Familiarity breeds contempt".

[August1991]

Mike, you come to this forum and immediately start using terms like "bigot" and "private club". Well, you are entitled to your opinion - but if Canada is a private club, it has 30 million members and you get one vote. In its long history, Canada has been a country of immigration.

But let me turn to your post:

In general, we take in around 200,000...

False. We take about 236,000 with an estimated 10-20,000 more illegals.

I said "around" meaning on average over the past 10 years or so. I won't quibble about your illegal numbers.

...immigrants per year. Of these, about half (100,000) are admitted in the category of skilled workers, about a third (70,000) as family class and the rest (30,000) as refugees. Be cautious however. The 100,000 in the skilled worker categaory include dependants (children, spouse) so in fact, we only accept about 30,000 skilled workers.

Hence my 70% number. Atleast you were honest about the facts.

Your 70% number is wrong; it's closer to 85%. Only about 15% of immigrants are skilled workers. The rest are dependants, family class, refugees and so on.

In addition, Canada loses about 70,000 every year through emigration (primarily to the US). Statcan data

I challenge you to provide data on this.

Statistics Canada

Canada's immigration law changed significantly in 1976. Since then, IMV, Canadian immigration has ressembled the kind of immigrants going to the US. North America is a dynamic society because of it.

Simply not true but his is a whole other post.

What's not true? It's a fact that our immigration law became "unbiased" in 1976 and now we accept immigrants - like the US - from around the world. I think it is reasonable to say that the US (and Canada) have among the highest standards of living and are the most dynamic and free societies in the world.

As I said, look at the end-credits of any Hollywood film and then tell me that having acces to a larger pool of talent is a bad thing. More important, a dynamic society allows creators access to that pool.

Incidentally, the US has a lottery system now which I think is better than our system.

And they are letting in 10,000 people a year out of a country with 10 times the population of ours.

The US lets in far more than 10,000 people a year. Now it's your turn to justify your claim.

You'll note that when Canada accepted many immigrants in the early part of the last century...

That has nothing to do with today and shouldn't be brought up in discussion.

We're discussing immigration. I think it's relevant to put facts in in perspective.

...they were in effect "refugees" because there was no point system and most of them were illiterate peasants from Europe. At the time, many people considered them "trash" too. Mike, you might want to consider under what circumstances your own family/ancestors arrived on this continent.

They came as business owners, employed canadians, helped the economy, and changed their last names from Arabic to English just to fit in (1950's). My Grandfather also served in the military and faught in WWII.

The stereotypical immigrant is a smart, uneducated, ambitious person who wants to work hard and get ahead in life. Immigrants make a tremendous sacrifice coming to a country where, for their whole life, they will speak with an accent and they will have people like you, Mike, smugly looking down on them. Why do they do it? For their children and because despite all, they can breathe freely.

----

Canadians travel freely around the world now. Maybe you've travelled abroad. How can a Canadian possibly say then that foreigners can't come here? Moreover, Canada is a huge land mass with a small population. It's like a large empty mansion - we'd be foolish (and poorer) to leave it that way.

Mike, if you want to argue that some immigrants come here and don't respect basic North American values such as an individual's freedom to choose, then I would agree with you. But that's no reason to forbid all immigration.

Being Canadian (I would say being North American) should mean something. IMV, this "something" has been lost in a multicultural fog over the past few decades.

PS. Mike, you'd improve the credibility of your arguments if you paid attention to spelling and formatting. Life is such that people use spelling skills as an indicator of reasoning skills. You can always google tough words.

[Argus]

Canadians travel freely around the world now. Maybe you've travelled abroad. How can a Canadian possibly say then that foreigners can't come here?

Whaaa? Canadians travel freely abroad, but that doesn't mean we immigrate freely abroad. Many countries don't even allow immigration. Try immigrating to Japan someday, August.

Moreover, Canada is a huge land mass with a small population.

Pointless cliche. Much of Canada is uninhabitable. These immigrants aren't going out onto the Arctic tundra, they're going into that narrow strip of land within 100 miles of the US border.

It's like a large empty mansion - we'd be foolish (and poorer) to leave it that way.

Yeah, it's like a big empty mansion with no roof or heating in most of the rooms. Unsurprisingly, almost everyone crowds into the few rooms which offer creature comforts.

Mike, if you want to argue that some immigrants come here and don't respect basic North American values such as an individual's freedom to choose, then I would agree with you. But that's no reason to forbid all immigration.

Being Canadian (I would say being North American) should mean something. IMV, this "something" has been lost in a multicultural fog over the past few decades.

There's your reason for banning immigration right there, August. Being Canadian should mean something, but it's been watered down so that anyone who hops off a plane can call themselves a Canadian, even though they have no emotional ties whatsoever to this nation. We have huge immigrant communities that are now so large it is slowing down assimilation - and continuous streams of new immigrants continue to sustain and enlarge those communities. Moreover, some of the types of immigrants we've brought over are determined NOT to be assimilated. And yes, I'm speaking most particularly of Muslims who send their children back "home" to find a "proper" bride or husband, because they think Canadian women are whores and Canadian men are godless secularists.

We should ban immigration for about 25-30 years so that the great mass of immigrants can be assimilated into Canada's culture. If you hold such disdain for Canadians as a people you have no business coming here as an immigrant and should go "home" forthwith.

[BubberMiley]

This is an argument which has never made any sort of sense. The vast majority of immigrants at the turn of the century were of a similar or identical culture and educational level to that which prevailed in Canada at the time, and they were needed for a vast, empty country.

No, actually they were largely eastern European, a lot of them Jews. Before that, it was all English, French, Scottish, some Irish, a few Icelandics and Aboriginal. Hardly identical cultures--some of them haven't fully assimilated even yet.

And there is still a great need for immigration where I live in Winnipeg, where we have a massive, rapidly aging civic infrastructure and generations of young people headed to Fort McMurray to seek their fortune.

[Argus]

This is an argument which has never made any sort of sense. The vast majority of immigrants at the turn of the century were of a similar or identical culture and educational level to that which prevailed in Canada at the time, and they were needed for a vast, empty country.

No, actually they were largely eastern European, a lot of them Jews.

In 1901 57% of immigrants were from the UK and 19% from the US.

Before that, it was all English, French, Scottish, some Irish, a few Icelandics and Aboriginal. Hardly identical cultures--some of them haven't fully assimilated even yet.

Such as who? The Jews? At least they're not doing drive-bys.

And there is still a great need for immigration where I live in Winnipeg, where we have a massive, rapidly aging civic infrastructure and generations of young people headed to Fort McMurray to seek their fortune.

And what makes you think immigrants have any more interest in Winnipeg than Winnipegers do? They'll come to Canada and head for Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver.

[BubberMiley]

And what makes you think immigrants have any more interest in Winnipeg than Winnipegers do? They'll come to Canada and head for Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver.

Winnipeg sponsors immigrants. They have to live here for a certain period in order to get citizenship.

[GostHacked]

http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/20...ati-client.html

Form their lawyer, they don't stand a chance on a fair trial. Remember this is a criminal activity. The accused should get due process. I have a feeling this whole trial will be a farce.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...?hub=TopStories

Quote from Galati, the lawyer for one of the accused.

"This is anything but a show trial for political ends."

This I can agree with. Not saying they are not guilty, but that has yet to be proven in any way shape or form. Remember they are all just suspects right now (and with evidence, some shakey at best). Innocent until proven guilty. If this trial is not done in that fashion, this will set a bad precident for future trials regarding terrorism or anything else for that matter.

[Hicksey]

The fault here can be laid with lawmakers and politicians both conservative and liberal.

Our lackadaisical immigration laws and the almost non-enforcement of them is their fault. Between the liberals and their feel-good immigration policies and the conservative rhetoric sans results our immigration problems have been allowed to fester for decades without any real attempts at correction.

We need real immigration reform. If we can't get confirmation you have no ties to terror organizations, that you have NO criminal record of any kind you shouldn't be allowed citizenship -- period.

We shouldn't care about their religion or race, just about what security risk they pose. If a muslim has neither a criminal record nor terror ties, why should they not be granted a spot in line to immigrate here?

The focus should be on security regardless of country of origin, race or religion. But we certainly need to take a hard line on immigration.

[Rue]

A List of Canadian Terrorists

The following list includes a variety of terrorists and key supporters who have lived in Canada while on the run for terrorist actions in a homeland conflict, or who have acted on behalf of an overseas terrorist organization after establishing a Canadian residence. Naturally, the list is far from being definitive.

Almrei, Hassan. Born in Syria, this Ontario resident is suspected by CSIS of being an al Qaeda member.

Amhaz, Ali Adham. A Hizbollah operative who immigrated to Canada, he helped to launder hundreds of thousands of dollars through Canadian banks for the terrorist group and used some of the proceeds to purchase demolitions material, night vision goggles, new computers, and camera equipment for the group. He lived in Burnaby BC.

Ayub, Fauzi Mohammed. Detained in Israel as a leading Hizbollah operative, he appears to have been recruited by the group in Canada in the early 1990s. After training in Lebanon, he entered Israel in 2000 to set up stores sites for weapons and explosives. He arrived in Canada in 1988 and has a family here.

Atmani, Karim Said. A Moroccan who fought in Afghanistan and became a Bosnian citizen, he has also been convicted in France for charges related to passing fraudulent passports to al Qaeda members in Europe.

Bagri, Ajaib Singh. A BKI member from British Columbia, he is on trial for the1985 Air India Bombing. The ISYF is fervently backing his defence.

Bhullar, Davinder Pal Sing. A one-time leader in the Khalistan Commando Force, he is fighting extradition from Surrey BC to India, where a death sentence awaits him for a bomb attack that killed nine people.

Boumezbeur, Adel. A Montreal Salafist and Algerian, he has also lived in Vancouver and has been convicted of terrorist-related offenses in France.

Boussora, Faker. A wanted al Qaeda member believed to be hiding in Montreal in 2002. Born in Tunisia, he was trained in Afghanistan and was unknown to Canadian authorities until a videotape in which he pledged commitment to martyrdom turned up.

Daher, Kassen. A suspected al Qaeda member, he lived in Canada before being arrested in Lebanon.

Dahoumane, Abdelmajid. Originally from Algeria, and a member of the Salafist cell in Montreal. He also lived for a while in Alberta.

Dbouk, Mohammed Hassan. A Hizbollah member in British Colombia, he was the brother in law and partner to Ali Amhaz. He has fled to Lebanon and taken up another role within the terrorist group.

Farahat, Hassan (aka Abdul Jaber). Accused of being a senior member of Ansar Al Islam, and has been arrested by Kurdish guerrillas in northern Iraq, he was the Imam of the Salaheddin Mosque in Toronto from 1997 to 2002.

Haouari, Mokhtar. An Algerian who arrived in Canada via France, he supported Ahmed Ressam’s attempts to get false documentation and was a member of the same Salafist Cell in Montreal in the 1990s. He also lived in Surrey, BC.

Hardeep, Singh. A leading member of the Khalistan Commando Force, he was deported from Canada in 1995 — the same year the KCF was mounting a major recruiting campaign here and in the UK.

Harkat, Mohamed. Arriving in Canada from Pakistan (via Malaysia) with a fake Saudi passport, he lived quietly in Ottawa at a variety of menial jobs, after winning his refugee claim in 1997 and marring a Canadian citizen. A CSIS investigation has accused him of being involved in the GIA, and having worked for al Qaeda before leaving Pakistan.

Al Husseini, Mohammed Hussein. An alleged hijacker and Hizbollah member, he provided valuable insights on the group to CSIS before being deported in 1994 after living on welfare in Montreal. Part of his role was to coordinate reconnaissance for the group on potential targets inside Canada.

Ikhhlef, Mourad. A refugee who had been involved in the Algerian GIA, he was involved in the Salafist cell in Montreal.

Jabarah, Abdul Rahman. Arrived with his brother Mohamed and parents as immigrants from Kuwait in 1994, and settled in St. Catherine’s Ontario. Recruited by al Qaeda in 1990, he was killed in Saudi Arabia in July 2003 as police moved in on his terrorist cell after a series of truck bombings.

Jabarah, Mohamed Mansour. Raised in St. Catherine’s Ontario, he led an al Qaeda cell in Singapore that was planning a mass bomb attack (with 21 tonnes of improvised explosives) before he was arrested while passing through Oman in 2002.

Jabbalah, Mahmoud. Accused of being tied to Islamic Jihad, and had worked for Osama bin Laden’s construction and development projects in the Sudan in the early 1990s, this Toronto resident has been jailed since August 2001, after being deemed a national security risk. He arrived in Canada as a refugee claimant.

Al-Jiddi, Al Rauf bin Al Habib bin Youssef (aka Abderraouf Jdey). A wanted al Qaeda member believed to be hiding in Montreal in 2002. His involvement in al Qaeda was unknown until videotape of his pledge to martyrdom turned up in a cache of intelligence materials in Afghanistan.

Kadr, Abdul Rahman. A son of Ahmad Said Kadr, he was captured by Northern Alliance troops in Kabul in November 2001 while fighting as a member of the Taliban.

Kadr, Ahmad Said (also spelled as ‘Khadr’). A one-time Toronto resident who arrived in Canada from Egypt in the 1970s, and served as an aid worker in Afghanistan and Pakistan before becoming involved in al Qaeda. His current whereabouts are unknown and it is possible he may have recently been killed (along with a third son) along the Afghan-Pakistani frontier. Two of his other sons have fought for al Qaeda or the Taliban.

Kadr, Omar. The teenaged son of Ahmad Said Kadr, this under-educated boy killed a US Army medic in Afghanistan in 2002 with a grenade while fighting as a member of al Qaeda.

Kamel, Fateh. Born in Algeria, and a one-time member of the GIA, he was the leader of the Montreal Salafist Cell in the 1990s. He has been convicted in France for passing black-market passports to Islamic militants.

Labsi, Mustapha. An Algerian, he came to Montreal as a part of the Salafist cell there.

Mahjoub, Mohamed Zeki. A Toronto area convenience store clerk, he is also suspected of being a senior ‘fixer’ for Islamic Jihad. He came to Canada with a doctored passport, and is fighting deportation .

Malik, Ripudaman Singh. A BC resident and senior fundraiser for the BKI in the province. He is being tried for his involvement in the Air India Bombing.

Al-Marabh, Nabil. A Toronto area resident (a sometime welfare recipient who also worked in his uncle’s photocopy shop) from Kuwait, he is suspected of being involved in a support role for the 9-11 attacks. Arrived in Canada as a refugee claimant, he was convicted by the US of conspiracy to enter the US illegally. When arrested in the US in September 2001, he was carrying $20,000 in cash and $25,000 in jewelry.

Marzouk, Hessam Mohamed Hafez. An Egyptian al Qaeda member, he once lived in Surrey BC, and was arrested in Azerbaijan before facing charges in Egypt.

Mohamed, Samir Ait. Lived in Vancouver, Montreal, and Toronto, and is currently awaiting extradition to the US. In 1996, he facilitated Ahmed Ressam’s acquisition of a silenced pistol, and helped to provide him with fake ID and a counterfeit credit card in late 1999.

Muhammad, Saeed Sobrhatolla. Accused of being a member of Ansar Al Islam, and has been arrested by Kurdish guerrillas in northern Iraq — he arrived in Canada in 1995 and maintains a family here.

Nadarajah, Muralitharan. A senior fundraiser for the LTTE, and possibly involved in an assassination cell, he arrived in Canada as a refugee claimant from Switzerland in 1998, and was ordered deported in 2002 — but is still fighting that decision.

Nawar, Nizar Ben Muhammed Nasr. One of some 1,300 Tunisian students who entered Montreal in 1999 (and one of 100 who dropped out of sight after the WTC attacks), he appears to have recruited there and delivered a suicide attack on a historic synagogue in Tunisia in early 2002 that killed 19 people.

Ouzghar, Abdellah. Born in Algeria, he was an associate of the al Qaeda Salafist cell in Montreal in the 1990s, but also lived in Hamilton. He was convicted of passport fraud in absentia by a French court.

Ressam, Ahmed. A member of the GIA in Algeria, he arrived in Canada in 1994 and was a member of a Salafist cell in Montreal. After acquiring a Canadian passport under a fake identity, he was trained in Afghanistan and was arrested in December 1999 when attempting to enter the US with a car trunk full of explosives and sophisticated timers.

Reyat, Inderjit Singh. A BKI member and one of the defendants in the Air India Bombing trial. Normally a resident of BC, he has already been convicted in the UK for charges related to the incident.

Sabanayagam, Loganathan. One of the six founders of the LTTE, he had been involved in their 1975 assassination of the mayor of Jaffna, and is a first cousin of the organization’s founder. He was convicted in 1994 of a number of fraud related charges pertaining to passport forging. He entered Canada from the US as a refugee claimant in 1988.

al-Sayegh, Hani. A Saudi who is suspected of being involved in the murder of 19 US personnel in a 1996 truck bombing in Saudi Arabia (an al Qaeda operation,) he was arrested in 1997 as he tried to settle in Canada.

El Sayed, Omar. A Hizbollah member caught living in Edmonton with a false ID (after entering Canada in 1998 with a fake Dutch passport,) he was arrested after the RCMP determined that Germany wanted him to face charges related to heroin and cocaine trafficking, selling firearms and threatening a police officer. An Alberta judge ordered him released on bail in 2002, and he has since disappeared.

Saygili, Aynur. A PKK member, she entered Canada under a false name and helped to take over a Kurdish cultural organization. She was arrested here in 1996 as a threat to national security.

Shanmugam, Tharmalingam. The chief weapons buyer for the LTTE. He travels around the world on a fake Canadian passport, but has probably never lived in Canada.

Singh, Iqbal. Arrived in Canada in 1991 as an undocumented refugee (after hopping through several countries with false documentation,) he was a member of the Babbar Khalsa International and the Sikh Students Federation. He was deported to Belize from Toronto in 2001 as a threat to Canadian security after a lengthy legal battle.

Slahi, Mohamedou Ould. An al Qaeda member who was recruited as a student in Europe, he also lived in Montreal for two years after fleeing Germany (where he was wanted for welfare fraud). In 1999, he carried a message from Bin Laden to Ahmed Ressam, ordering him to prepare an attack on Los Angeles International Airport.

Suresh, Manickavasagam. A senior LTTE leader who arrived in Canada in 1990 to take command of their front organizations here, he has been fighting deportation since 1995. The case has set a number of important legal decisions, including a ruling that refugees can be deported to countries where they face torture if there is a serious risk to Canadian security, and a dismissal of arguments that fundraising and propagandizing for terrorist groups in Canada is a form of free expression and free association.

Tobbichi, Adel (aka Mezbar, Amine). An Algerian, he was extradited from Montreal to the Netherlands in 2002 to stand trial with six al Qaeda members who were planning a series of attacks in France and Belgium.

Vignarajah, Kumaravelu. A one-time LTTE combatant, he also worked for the RCMP as a wiretapping translator, before the Mounties discovered he had concealed his part in the murder of Indian troops in Sri Lanka and suspected he was stealing intelligence documents. He entered Canada as a refugee in 1989.

Link

Holy Crap! The Left believes these Terrorists have the right to live in Canada?

Yep all leftists want these people left alone. O.k. let's see if your compartmentalized brain can handle this. The issue as to how to treat terrorists (if they are in fact convicted of terrorism) is not a left or right issue - it's a legal issue.

Now if you want to take people that have in fact been convicted of crimes and punish them, then yes there might be a debate on what is appropriate punishment but again how is this a left or right arguement?

There are plenty of socialists and leftists who want to hang terrorists and there are plenty of right wingers who are terrorists and don't think they should be harassed.

Now let's see are right wing extreme terrorists leftist once they become terrorists?

Your attempt to simplify and portray this as a left and right wing issue then make a sweeping generalization that all leftists are soft on terrorists is foolish.

Tony Blair the last time I looked was to the left of centre-tell me he is soft on terrorists.

[mikedavid00]

Australia accepts more net migrants than we do

NO THEY DO NOT. I REPEAT - NO ONE ON EARTH ACCEPTS THE MASS AMOUNT OF IMMIGRANTS THAN CANADA:

Here is the info on australia (which I agree is probably the second easiest country to get into right now).

Research and Statistics Section - DIMA

In Total

The number of settler arrivals was 65,804 — an 8.8 per cent increase over the corresponding period for the previous year. Over 60 per cent of this increase was due to a rise in Skill Stream settler arrivals.

Australia’s net permanent gain was 33,904 — an increase of 11.7 per cent over the corresponding period for the previous year.

By Birthplace

On a regional basis, Europe (24.4 per cent) was the largest contributor to settler arrivals followed by Oceania (16.0 per cent), Southeast Asia (13.8 per cent), North East Asia (11.5 per cent) and Southern Asia (11.2 per cent).

The largest increase (3,780) occurred in Europe up by 30.8 per cent followed by Oceania (1,202) an increase of 11.4 per cent, Central Asia (959) an increase of 171.6 per cent, Southern Asia (674) an increase of 10.1 per cent and South East Asia (633) an increase of 7.5 per cent. North Africa and the Middle East with a decrease of 1,123 was the largest percentage decrease (16.3 per cent) followed by North East Asia (-744) a decrease of 9.0 per cent and Sub-Saharan Afica (-375) a decrease of 6.6 per cent.

The United Kingdom (18.5 per cent) was the largest single birthplace group followed by New Zealand (13.1 per cent), China (7.8 per cent) and India (7.6 per cent)."

And you are only getting in if you are WORKING and being productive!

(Our version from above would read something like this:)

We have let in over 230,000 peole. Of which 20% are Chinese, 18% Southeast Asian comprised of mostly Sikh, and 16% From Pakistan.

TOP 10 SOURCE COUNTRIES OF IMMIGRANTS (1996 - 2000)

China

India

Pakistan

TOP 10 SOURCE COUNTRIES BEFORE 1981

United Kingdom

Italy

U.S.A.