Canada's "anti"-Terrorism Directorate: There's No Money In Solutions!

Every part of this farce is a huge waste of time tax money and resources, and so aids and abets terrorists. 
This is criminally-negligent stupidity on steroids, and those involved are all traitors.

By the National Posts's Douglas Quan on January 2nd, 2020.

National security and legal experts say they’re hopeful Ottawa’s plan to create a new office specializing in terrorism prosecutions will improve this country’s track record of holding accountable those who threaten public safety.

NO, AS USUAL WITH LIBERAL GOVERNMENTS, IT WILL DO THE EXACT OPPOSITE AND 
ENCOURAGE TERRORISM.

“It’s been an inconsistent track record,” said Phil Gurski, a former CSIS analyst and president of Borealis Threat and Risk Consulting Ltd. “My initial reaction is ‘yay,’ but the form this thing takes dictates whether it means anything. The devil is in the details.”

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau recently directed the ministers of justice and public safety in their mandate letters to “coordinate efforts to prosecute terror suspects to the fullest extent of the law” and create a new office of Director of Terrorism Prosecutions.

AND OF COURSE ALSO THEN, IF THEY'RE SWARTHY FOREIGNERS, TO RELEASE THEM WITH $10 MILLION PAYOUTS, TO AVOID CHARGES OF RACISM! WHEE!

Since Canada’s adoption of the Anti-terrorism Act in 2001, 56 people have been charged with terrorism-related offences in this country.

WOW, REALLY? THAT'S LIKE ... 2.5 A YEAR. 

(I THINK THEY MAY HAVE MISSED A FEW)!

The outcomes have been mixed.

In February, federal prosecutors announced that Rehab Dughmosh had been sentenced to seven years in prison after being found guilty of leaving Canada to participate in the activities of a terrorist group and other offences. Prosecutors said she had tried to travel to Syria to join the Islamic State in April 2016 and used a knife and a golf club to assault people at a Canadian Tire store in Scarborough, Ont., in June 2017.

When Ayanle Hassan Ali went on a knife rampage at a Canadian Forces recruiting centre in Toronto in 2016, injuring two people, federal prosecutors took the position he did so for the benefit of, at the direction of or in association with a terrorist group of which he was the only member. 

But the trial judge found him not guilty of the terror charge and found him not criminally responsible for other offences, including attempted murder, on account of mental disorder.

The Crown tried to make the case on appeal that a “lone wolf” can commit an act of terror to advance his own self-constituted terrorist group. But the appeal was recently dismissed by the Ontario Court of Appeal.

BUT WHY SHOULD "TERRORISM" (i.e: MASS EXTORTION) REQUIRE ONE'S GROUP MEMBERSHIP, AS OPPOSED TO IT SIMPLY TARGETING GROUPS OF PEOPLE, AS OPPOSED TO, SAY, COMMON EXTORTION "ONLY" TARGETING INDIVIDUALS?! (BECAUSE LIBERALS ARE BACKWARDS.)

Citing errors in jury selection, Ontario’s top court this past summer ordered a new trial for Raed Jaser and Chiheb Esseghaier who were convicted of conspiracy to commit murder for the benefit of a terrorist group and for participating in terrorist activity in relation to a plot to derail a Via Rail passenger train.

GOOD REASON TO ENDANGER THE PUBLIC, RETARD.

Michael Nesbitt, a law professor and fellow at the Canadian Global Affairs Institute at the University of Calgary, said terrorism cases are notoriously difficult to prosecute, which likely accounts for why the rate of acquittals is slightly higher in terrorism cases than for all criminal cases — 12 per cent versus  four per cent, according to a paper he published in 2018.

THAT'S BECAUSE YOU WANT TO ASSIGN A LIST OF FALSE MOTIVATIONAL REQUIREMENTS TO THE COMMON CRIME OF EXTORTION.

Prosecutors, for instance, have to show the perpetrators not only intentionally caused death or serious harm (or risk of harm) to the public but were motivated by an ideological, political or religious purpose, he said.

RIGHT. BECAUSE ALL CRIMES MUST BE ORGANIZED CRIMES, OR THEY WEREN'T CRIMES AT ALL; AND ALL TERRORISTS MUST BE MEMBERS OF TERROR-GANGS, OR THEIR TERRORISM DIDN'T TERRORIZE ANYONE! WHEE!

PATHETIC LIBLOGIC STRIKES HARD AT OUR CITIZENS' POCKETBOOKS AGAIN!

They also face potential complications related to disclosure of information. The gathering of intelligence and evidence typically involves multiple agencies, such as CSIS and the RCMP, as well as foreign partners. Questions inevitably come up: how did those agencies communicate with one another? How was information obtained? What are they obligated to release?

SO EACH INTELLIGENCE GROUP HAS TO LET THE TERRORISTS IT CAPTURES GO FREE, LEST IT RISK EXPOSING THE ORIGINS OF ITS INTEL IN OTHER GROUPS.

(THIS HAS ACTUALLY HAPPENED, AND RECENTLY, TOO).

Nesbitt agrees it would be helpful to have a director of terrorism prosecutions to standardize charging practices, help give more uniform advice to the RCMP and CSIS about their disclosure obligations, build up expertise within the prosecutorial ranks and weed out any biases that may exist.

"PROSECUTORIAL EXPERTISE!"? 
TERRORISM = EXTORTION! DUH!

Nesbitt noted, for instance, that prosecutors have directed most of their terrorism charges at extremists who were inspired by al-Qaida and Islamic State but not far-right extremists, such as Alexandre Bissonnette, the man behind the deadly Quebec City mosque shooting in 2017, or those involved in the financing of Hezbollah.

“How, when and why the government is choosing to classify some attacks as terrorism and not others has become hard, if not impossible, to figure from outside government,” he wrote in a soon-to-be-published blog post.

WHAT'S SO HARD TO FIGURE OUT ABOUT IT?! ALL FOUR SCENARIOS INVOLVED ISLAM AND MUSLIMS - AND THEY ALSO ALL INVOLVED THE CONSEQUENCES OF IGNORING ISLAM AND  MUSLIMS, TOO! (AND WTF DOES THAT LAST BIT EVEN MEAN, MORON?)!

The idea for a director of terrorism prosecutions was first proposed in 2010 in the final report of the inquiry into the investigation of the bombing of Air India Flight 182 in 1985. It recommended that “one unit should be responsible for dealing with all aspects of terrorism prosecution,” including managing the relationship between government agencies, providing legal support to law enforcement agencies and ensuring the secrecy of intelligence operations is maintained while making sure rules over disclosure of information are followed.

The report recommended the new director of terrorism prosecutions serve under the Attorney General of Canada and help “create a pool of experienced counsel for terrorism prosecutions.”

University of Toronto law professor Kent Roach, who served as research director for the inquiry, told the Post having the new unit serve under the attorney general makes sense given the need to consult with allies and domestic agencies about secrecy claims.

THIS ENTIRE EXPENSIVELY WASTEFUL FARCE ONLY EXISTS BECAUSE YOU LYING TREASONOUS MORONS WANT TO KEEP THE REAL MOTIVATIONS OF ALL TERRORISTS (ISLAM) A SECRET!

“I agree it is best to integrate both those who prosecute and those who make secrecy claims because in difficult cases there may be trade-offs between keeping Canadian (and our international partners) secrets and having a prosecution go forward with enough disclosure to the accused to make the trial fair,” he wrote in an email. “The secrecy issues have been a challenging aspect of both terrorism and espionage cases so it would make sense for the office to do both.”

Nesbitt, however, suggests the new director of terrorism prosecutions should be housed within the Public Prosecution Service of Canada, so as to avoid having two streams of prosecutors — one involved in terrorism and one involved in other federal crimes — reporting separately to the attorney general.

SO THEY WANT TO CONTROL US BY CENTRALIZING ALL INTEL AND TERROR PROSECUTIONS IN ONE OFFICE, THE BETTER TO KEEP ITS ISLAMIC ORIGINS ALL A SECRET FROM THE PUBLIC THEY ALLEGEDLY SERVE, AND TO CENSOR THOSE OF US WHO DARE TO EXPOSE IT.

He also advises against centralizing the new unit in Ottawa or Toronto to allow for involvement of prosecutors elsewhere in the country who know how to respond to regional differences in terms of threats and approaches to litigation.

SURE, LET'S MAKE IT PHYSICALLY INACCESSIBLE, TOO - "BECAUSE FAIRNESS!"

It is unclear where the creation of a new director of terrorism prosecutions sits in Justice Minister David Lametti’s list of priorities. His mandate letter from the prime minister asks him to lead an “immediate” process, for instance, to develop a new framework for sick people to receive medical assistance in dying.

In a statement, Lametti’s office said: “Under our government, Canada has already convicted four individuals for terrorism-related offences after their return to Canada, and another returnee has been charged. … The creation of the Director of Terrorism Prosecutions is in line with recommendations from the Air India Commission, and would help build specialized expertise on terrorism cases — which can be quite complex.”

NO, THEY'RE REALLY NOT! THEY INVOLVE A BUNCH OF ILLITERATE FOREIGN SUB-HUMANS WITH CELL-PHONE ACTIVATED EXPLOSIVES AT MOST, YOU RETARDS.

The office declined, however, to offer a timeline, saying only it would work “expeditiously” with the public safety minister to create the new office.