By Doug Aldridge
Monday, June 25, 2007
The recent trial and life-sentence delivered to five, British-born converts to terror has a significant Canadian angle. Momin Kawaja, who lives in a rather well-turned out neighbourhood in the east end of Ottawa, was an unindicted co-conspirator in the British Case. Evidence revealed the British case Kawaja is linked to, has connections to the 7-7 subway bombers in London. The one that saw more than 50 of our Commonwealth kinfolk, murdered by the usual suspects of whack-job religion-drugged, sexually repressed losers, on the hunt for a paradise, post-mortem sexual union.
The Brit-bombers were convicted of planning to attack a dance club, and several other public places. The weapon of choice: remote-controlled bombs. According to the Brits, Kawaja was developing remote detonating devices. He made several trips to the U.K. and he has been reported as attending training camps on the Pakistan/Afghan frontier. UK authorities took the gang down, before the bugs had been worked out of the remotes.
Kawaja, is awaiting trial in Ottawa under provisions of the Supreme Court threatened Anti-Terrorist Law.
There is plenty of evidence, gathered in Great Britain and in Canada that Kawaja's high-priced legal- talent are working to squash. The Supreme Court of Canada has already wounded the anti-terror legislation. Many on the political left would like to see it killed off altogether.
Given its ideological make up the big question is whether the Politically Correctoidal, mainly Liberal-appointed judges will allow the evidence to be entered while protecting its source.
Smarts 101: Protecting the security and viability of the intelligence source is vital to the continuity of secure, reliable intelligence. Given their past performance, one doubts the Supremes have the capacity to get a bare pass in that area of study.
Strange, considering the trust we have given them to look out for the good and welfare of the country, the courts insist we adopt the Marquis of Queensberry rules, in all engagements with the enemy. To the Liberal-left judges the fact the enemy is back-alley fighting, is of no consequence.
Understand...To the political correctoids, equality is found at the finish line...NOT at the start line. The technical term is "equality of outcome." Essentially, unless you are a member of an alleged disadvantaged group; based on race, language, disability and gender identity, the Government of Canada will use the rule of law, passed by Parliament, to limit your access to jobs and promotion and by so doing, compromise your standard of living and your ability to earn the big money needed to care for and educate your children.
Given this mentality, it is reasonable for the liberal political correctoid to conclude, that because we have tanks and artillery and aircraft and agree with George Bush, that terrorism has to be stamped out; it justifies to the Liberal-left, such terrorist tactics as using women and children as human shields...while we are forbidden to scan the less than one per-cent of suspicious phone calls made each day, to prevent an attack on our homeland. The courts are being politically correct to a fault as they level the playing field between the good guys and the bad guys. In fact you'd be hard-pressed to get them to acknowledge just who is the good guy.
In their perfect world, Canada's Liberal judges would rule the poor lad's rights were somehow, obscurely to be sure, violated. Kawaja would be free...a hero to the community. The lawyers would be beating at his door, looking for the mother of all civil actions. To the left, the perfect storm is the one that will net the most money and heap the maximum humiliation on the "Infidel" Conservative government.
To those who sit on the Highest Judicial bench it would be pure muscle flexing, designed to show-up that awful Stephen Harper who suggested we find a way to put more "Law and Order" types on the bench. Something the majority of Canadians want to see. To the Supremes, it's the Conservatives who are the "Infidels." Each night they pray for the coming of Justin Trudeau.
One of the prime factors in the lack of political common sense, which has become the norm in Canada, is the fact that over per cent of the elected governments in this country, since 1867, have been Liberal. The Conservatives have had the rest. This Liberal weighting has left a severe imbalance in the make-up of our prime minister-appointed senior public servants, commissioners, senators, judges...etc., to the end of bureaucratic possibility.
Looking at the policies and programs announced by the various departments, you would hardly guess the Conservative Party was elected to government and has been in that role for 15 months. It's sad but true...but the Ottawa bureaucrats and mandarins and their almost religious devotion to the implementation of fundamentalist Trudeauism, continue to drive the agenda. That being the case, it explains the irrational patterns we see affected by elected Conservative politicians...desperately playing every end against the middle, in the hunt for the elusive 6 or 7 percent of voter support needed to ensure a majority parliament.
If The Conservatives have any hope of cutting the Gordian Knot of the cult of Trudeau, a majority government and a ready-made plan to dismantle the upper end of the bureaucracy is essential. It will be necessary to cut some rather impressive "retirement packages". However, that price will be recouped quickly by setting Canada free to do business.
The history and heritage of this country must be recognized and restored. The revisionist doctrine of Trudeauism must be struck down. Stephen Harper's legacy, as a conservative, and as a leader, will be decided by the choice he makes. He should know there are millions of ordinary, frustrated Canadians who will support him unconditionally should he choose to scupper Trudeauism and its disciples.
Pursuant to Title 17 U.S.C. 107, other copyrighted work is provided for educational purposes, research, critical comment, or debate without profit or payment. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for your own purposes beyond the 'fair use' exception, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Views are those of authors and not necessarily those of Canada Free Press. Content is Copyright 1997-2024 the individual authors. Site Copyright 1997-2024 Canada Free Press.Com Privacy Statement