Error: Unable to create directory uploads/2019/01. Is its parent directory writable by the server?

The Canadian Counterterrorism Money Solution

Posted on May 16 2010 7:00 pm
Christine Williams is a 9-time international award-winning interviewer. She is Host and Producer of the Canadian National TV program “On the Front Line with Christine Williams” aired on CTS TV. She is also a Senior Advisor to the Hudson Institute in New York.
Be Sociable, Share!
Print This Post Print This Post

Canada is adopting a new bill (Bill S-7) that will allow victims of terrorism to sue for terrorist acts in Canadian court, putting an onus of responsibility and accountability on terrorist states and/or organizations.  Albeit a complicated task, it is a step in the right direction, targeting the pocketbooks of these reprobates.

For too long innocent taxpayers have been exploited by the Islamic fringe and although Bill S-7 won’t significantly benefit taxpayers directly, theoretically it balances the books a trifle in offsetting the reprehensible monetary endowments enjoyed by this fringe. Some examples:  Hundreds of polygamous men who have brought their wives from abroad into Ontario are now being supported by state welfare;  Mohamed Omary—on welfare for two decades—has alleged links to terrorism and toured Europe; and Mahr Arar, still listed as a U.S. terrorist, successfully sued Ottawa for 10.5 million dollars (on taxpayers’ backs) due to an RCMP investigative “injustice.”

To a lesser degree, yet still examples of the frittering away of taxpayer dollars, are the indiscriminate sums doled out to informants.  For example,  Shaher Elsohemy, the Muslim businessman who was paid $4 million by the RCMP to infiltrate a core group of “Toronto 18” suspects, plotting bomb attacks in southern Ontario:

The lucrative deal between the Mounties and their prized informant included cash, cars and homes for him, his wife, his daughter, his parents and his two brothers

There is also Mubin Shaikh who successfully negotiated a tax free 2.7 million dollars after going back to the RCMP Oliver Twist style.

In the early stages of the investigation, he happily accepted $77,000 to infiltrate the group … Shaikh went back to the RCMP and asked them to boost his reward to an even $300,000.  They agreed.

Two years later… Shaikh is proving to be as much of a Crown liability as an asset. As star witnesses go, he has become more star than witness. Since the arrests, he has outed himself on national TV, proclaimed the innocence of some of the accused, snorted cocaine on the taxpayers’ dime, and pleaded guilty to threatening two 12-year-old girls. During his recent testimony at the youth trial, the Crown accused its own hired mole of fudging facts to protect the defendant.
And now, after all that, Mubin Shaikh wants more cash — more than 30 times the dollar figure he originally agreed to.

There are those who argue that these millions are well spent, given the catastrophic outcome of what could have occurred without their help.  Pelting huge sums of money at informants for their service is inarguably the simplest route.  Yet the unfriendly portrayal of Shaikh in Macleans provides a menacing inside scoop and provokes a need for scrutiny of the methodologies used by the RCMP, calling into question its level of investigative expertise.  Its sloppiness in the Arar case is no less sobering.

Now, a new frontier in Canada has emerged in this war on terror which could offer some promise, even though tricky to enforce:  Bill S-7—the Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act.  The bill allows lawsuits against any person, group or country that supports or abets attacks, to be filed through Canadian courts.

The bill is nothing new.  One precendent lawsuit involves the Libyan government’s role in the disastrous 1988 bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland.  Libya subsequently agreed to compensate Lockerbie relatives to avoid a diplomatic row, and retire the issue through a peaceful settlement to normalize its relations with the United Nations (UN) and the U.S.,  a key point.

Meanwhile in a separate legal action through a Manhattan federal court, families of victims of the 9-11 terror attacks and a 1983 bombing of U.S. Marines in Lebanon have filed a lawsuit against Iran for $2.6 billion, citing its involvement as a state supporter of terrorism.   But, given Iran’s history of calling 9-11 a “big lie” and its irrational anti-Semitic ramblings about obliterating Israel, it’s doubtable Iran will pay up.

Yet such legal suits are still promising beyond the compensatory factor.  They serve as one critical part of a multifaceted strategy in the War on Terror: to isolate, marginalize, embarrass and hopefully shed light on the heinous crimes of terrorists and their impact on innocent victims. Sadly enough, there are still too many ignoramuses among us branding the West as evil and Israel as an Apartheid State while Islamist lunatics vehemently spread their Salafi ideologies within our very borders.

Forcing terrorist organizations and States into a position of public accountability before the international community is a welcome strategy that Canada has wisely endorsed through Bill S-7.  Hopefully we will see more of this in the West.

Be Sociable, Share!
3 Responses leave one →

Leave a Reply

Note: You can use basic XHTML in your comments. Your email address will never be published.

Subscribe to this comment feed via RSS

Copyright 2019 NewsReal Blog

The Theme Foundry