Oblivious to Terror? Canada?

So it would certainly seem. We are such well-adjusted communities in Canada, we consider ourselves so perfectly aligned to living in harmony with one another, we simply cannot imagine that ensconced within our communities where freedoms of all kinds are taken for granted, there could be any individuals or groups whose covert actions are meant to violently disrupt our lives. We are, as a country and as a collective of people, fairly blase, not really given to excess of any kind.

We are so fair-minded that we are more than willing to extend the courtesy of doubt toward those whom our intelligence agencies and policing agencies have brought attention as potential, or outright threats to the moderate balance of our lives together, as a pluralist society embracing people from all parts of the world who have migrated here as refugees or immigrants. Who could possibly resent such a country, ready to open its doors to those seeking a new life?

But from experience we now know there are those who resent Canada as a country of the West, a nation allied with others like ourselves who value the freedom of advanced economic activity and the political stability of a liberal democracy. The ire of religious extremists whose grievance against the West is so monumental that they harbour no second thought or self-doubt about the carnage they will unleash on innocent civilians through their intention of violent attack, appears boundless.

Through the easeful communication made possible by use of the WorldWideWeb, militant fanatics seeking to sow terror within countries whom they scorn as degraded societies lacking a fundamental commitment to their vision of the Almighty, sometimes betray their presence through fumbled attempts at violent upheavals. National policing agencies track their presence, apprehend suspected members, gather evidence and seek to prosecute.

And then a hue and cry rises to the heavens about due process of law, (which all agree is crucial to the functioning of any modern society), and the illiberalism seen to be inherent in running counter to individuals' rights under the Canadian Constitution. A left-liberal media, hand in glove with liberal-sensitive NGOs focused on single-issue problems, create their own advocacy on behalf of those suspected and placed on trial for terror-related activities.

We are so functionally mild and mannered that we cannot comprehend that there are those among us, either imported temporarily through visas, or home-born and -bred whose disaffection with our society has led them to plan and attempt to carry out violence against us. And when these suspects are apprehended, and subjected to due process of law - under admittedly special legal precedents to deal with terror - we look askance at those whose mandate it is to protect the nation.

In the words of the newly-installed CSIS head, Richard B. Fadden, there exists a "loose partnership of single-issue NGOs, advocacy journalists and lawyers" in the general population who believe in their collective naivete that "our charm, and the Maple Leaf on our backpacks are all that we need to protect us. Why ... are those accused of terrorist offences often portrayed in media as quasi-folk heroes, despite the harsh statements of numerous judges?

"Why are they always photographed with their children, given tender-hearted profiles, and more or less taken at their word when they accuse CSIS or other government agencies of abusing them?" Accused terrorists, he points out, are etched out as unsophisticated, idealists or too young to be held accountable for the plans they hope to execute; fallen victim to false ideologies, and needful of understanding. And if their plans manage to succeed, what then?

All too often the government itself and its agencies, tasked with the huge responsibility of protecting the population and the country at large from malevolent attacks such as have been seen elsewhere in the world, is held in suspicion. Intelligence agencies' motives are held up to scrutiny, taken to be so maladroit, and themselves evil, in attempting to hold to account innocents who have been wrongly labelled as agents of violence.

"Terror is downgraded to a form of dissent, an act of revolutionary charm rather than a Criminal Code offence and a violation of international human rights standards. Much of the coverage of the trials of those charged in Toronto has reflected this approach. Perhaps this has roots in the belief that Canada is somehow immune from terror, and therefore can't really have any terrorist conspiracies.

"Terrorist offences are the most vile form of criminal conduct. They are abnormal crimes.... They attack the very fabric of Canada's democratic ideals... Their object is to strike fear and terror into citizens in a way not seen in other criminal offences." A large proportion of the public adheres to the liberal-left notion that national security and the security of human rights are consistently in opposition where in fact you cannot have one without the other.

Judicial demands for full disclosure have placed intelligence at a distinct disadvantage. To agree to full disclosure of all details painstakingly assembled as a scaffold by which CSIS and other agencies are able to convince themselves through evidence and interviews, intelligence-sharing and geographic and political data, would be to give away the shop. Leaving such agencies with little option but to demur and withdraw.

In the process leaving those naive elements in society triumphant with the success of the withdrawal of charges by the demanding judiciary against suspects whose activities and background checks have sufficiently incriminated them to render them suspect as terrorists determined to wreak havoc in Canada or using this country as a springboard to terror activity elsewhere.