Is there any sort of proof, that would stand up in a Canadian court of law, that he is a terrorist conduit?

If there is, lock him up, other wise, I’m not very big on the say so of some other country…. I’m sure we all still remember what happened with Arar.

The African embassy bombings were in August of 1998. Mr. Jaballah arrived in Canada in early 1999, and because authorities knew who he was they locked him up almost right away. Now, we can’t get rid of him, so I guess he gets to live here forever.

It’s like we’re the Fort Lauderdale of international terrorism. Retire to Canada. They can’t kick you out, and they won’t lock you up!

It’s Shangri-La!

There’s a list of terrorists as long as my arm that we could never convict of a crime in a Canadian court room. Should we invite them all to live in Canada permanently? ‘Cause if we can’t get rid of them once they’re here, more of them are going to come here.

It makes me wonder what we would do to Osama bin Laden if he applied for asylum in Canada. We wouldn’t grant him asylum, but once he’s in Canada, what could we do to him? We can’t deport him to Saudi Arabia (they’d torture him). Arguably we can’t deport him anywhere else either, since an argument could be made that just about every other country on Earth might torture him. He hasn’t committed any crimes in Canada, so we can’t lock him up here even if he has no legal right to be here.

I guess he can take Mr. Jaballah’s couch. I imagine he’ll still be here, no matter how long it takes to track binLaden now.

Ah, Canada. Come for the asylum. Stay for the government’s complete inability to get rid of you.

I’m not sure why we send him anywhere. He was never charged or convicted of a crime. I thought we still had due process in Canada. Am I wrong? Until that time he does have a right to be here.

And as for the security cameras, I think Al-Qaeda probably has very advanced communications – forget the Internet or phone. Carrier pigeon baby. Sure they get tired over the Atlantic, but whatever. Maybe what we really need is an anti-carrier pigeon missile shield. That will teach those treasonous, leftist, khalifascist, dhimmi pigeon’s.

I am glad that we actually have such a debate in Canada. We’re struggling with the grey, which is to be expected, and lauded. There’s a reason he tried for asylum HERE after all. Most other countries would have just immediately deported him. (I can see the scene now: “Dear, that’s awful! Torture you say. And why do the Egyptians want to torture you, Sir? Organizing pro-democracy rallies? Giving out birth control to teenagers? Oh, I see. Because they believe you’re an alQaeda operative who helped pull off the African embassy bombings. Well. Ok then. Here’s you’re one-way ticket to Cairo. Good luck with sorting that out!”). I’d imagine the Americans wouldn’t, but not because of the potential torture, but because THEY’D want to keep him (I’d imagine if he’d applied for asylum in the U.S. he’d be in Cuba right now). I think pretty much every other country on the planet would either secretly keep him locked up themselves (and maybe torture him themselves, depending on the country) or wash their hands of him and put him immediately on the first plane back to Egypt. I can’t imagine anyone else putting him under house arrest on the word of his wife and son to keep an eye on him!

As I said, I think it’s a complicated case, and I think our system (pretty uniquely) recognizes that. That we’d include “house arrest” as an option in such a case gets my dander up a bit, but it’s better than what most countries would do (which is to say that most countries would simply be focusing on WHO gets to torture him, and where).

I’m sorry, but while I generally agree with not sending people back to countries where they’ll face torture, this is the exception. This guy helped blow up two embassies and then high-tailed it to Canada to ask for asylum. His argument is “don’t send me back to Egypt because they’ll torture me because they think I was involved in the Africa bombings”. It seems to me that as soon as he got on Canadian soil, the fact that he’s an alleged terrorist has helped his case. While “the Egyptians will torture me” is an important aspect of the story, “because they think I’m an alQaeda operative” is important too. The reason he hasn’t been charged with a criminal offense in Canada is simply that our government was smart enough to lock him up as soon as they realized who he was. He wasn’t behind bars because he’s committed a crime in Canada, he was behind bars because we can’t deport him, and we’re not willing (or didn’t used to be) to let him just live as a free man in Canada through the amazing power of default.

I’m not certain where the line is drawn, but there has to be a point where “not deporting people to countries who face torture” crosses “not allowing terrorists who aren’t eligible for real asylum, de-facto asylum, on the grounds that they’re so bad their own government wants to torture them”.

This man has no right to be in Canada. As far as I’m concerned, the fact that we’re too high-minded to deport him back to Egypt is laudible, but what we do now with the suspected terrorist with no right to be in Canada who we can’t send back to Egypt isn’t so simple. To me, “leave him alone to live his life” just isn’t the answer. Deport him, jail him, or convince me of a rational third option, but let’s not pretend WE’RE the bad guys here. Whether or not we should install cameras in his house is the least of our worries. That he has a house in Canada and is allowed to live in it is the real question that needs to be addressed.

a) We live in a society dominated by leftists, a government which at the time of Mr. Jaballah’s incarceration was infested by covert Al-Qaeda supporters and Jihadis, and a judiciary noteworthy only for their desire to turn our country into another Soviet Gulag.

b) By YOUR OWN ADMISSION, Stageleftislamofascinazi, this guy spend eight years in jail .

c) We don’t imprison innocent people.

Q.E.D…?

by matttbastard
Via Stageleft – The Globe and Mail:
Canadian officials are taking the unprecedented step of asking a judge to install closed-circuit video cameras inside a terrorism suspect’s family home, arguing national security necessitates the sc…

No, more pants-wetting overreaction form those who profit from fear.

“Fuck due process…I is a scared!” – a Conservative.

Seems to me, IF the guy is really involved in “communications relay” as part of a terrorist cell, the best and most effective way to catch him would be to monitor his “communications” – like his fax machine, his internet usage, and his phone.

I’m no fan of wiretapping, but if the government feels that this guy is such a risk, why not monitor his communications? Surveillance cameras in the house is way over the top, a major invasion of privacy, and ineffective in case this guy makes a phone call with his back to the camera.