Muslim extremist admits he was spy who revealed Canada bomb plot

  • Thread starter Thread starter Rick
  • Start date Start date
R

Rick

Guest
Amazing. A complete set up. Only this time they didn't carry it through.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/07/16/wterr16.xml&sSheet=/news/2006/07/16/ixnews.html

Muslim leaders in Canada have reacted with fury after a radical advocate of Sharia law revealed that he had been a government spy who helped to uncover an alleged al-Qaeda plot, writes Toby Harnden.

Mubin Shaikh, 29, came forward to confirm that he was recruited by the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS), the country's equivalent of MI5, and directed a 10-day winter training course in guerrilla tactics.

During the course, which Mr Shaikh set up in a field in the remote village of Washago, Ontario, young Muslims allegedly dressed in camouflage, used guns for target practice and taped a video used to recruit others.

He said that he was initially asked to befriend the leader of a "cell" of 17 Muslims who allegedly planned to blow up the parliament buildings in Ottawa and Toronto's stock exchange. The 17, arrested last month, face terrorism charges.

"This is like the pot calling the kettle black," said Tarek Fatah, of the Canadian Muslim Congress. "He was the embodiment of extremism in the city and his spying calls into question whether he's acting out of sincerity, or is trying to fish himself out of his own troubles."

Aly Hindy, the imam of the Salahuddin Islamic Centre in Scarborough, Ontario, attended by some of the 17 suspects, said Mr Shaikh and Canadian intelligence had encouraged and entrapped young Muslims. "The government and the people keep saying that we should not make our young people radical. CSIS is the one radicalising the youth. I call him CSIS Shaikh."

But Mr Shaikh, who has declined an offer to enter Canada's witness protection scheme, is unrepentant, calling the suspects dangerous "fruitcakes" who deserved to be jailed.

The self-professed fundamentalist believed in holy war in Iraq and Afghanistan but not in Canada, he said.

"I wanted to prevent the loss of life. There are no combatants on the downtown streets of Toronto," he said.

Nada Farooq, the wife of Zakaria Amara, one of the accused 17, said: "I know this man. May Allah curse him and make him suffer."

--
Reminds me of the Pakistani who came forward after 9/11, claiming he was recruited and trained by "al Qaeda" to fly hijacked planes into skyscrapers, turned himself into the FBI before 9/11, passed two polygraph tests, but then "higher ups" told the FBI to let him go.

Pakistani-British man warned FBI he had been trained by al Qaeda for
9/11, let go
'More than a year before 9/11, a Pakistani-British man told the FBI an
incredible tale: that he had been trained by bin Laden's followers to hijack
airplanes and was now in America to carry out an attack. The FBI questioned him
for weeks, but then let him go home, and never followed up. Now, the former
al-Qaida insider is talking....Khan said, "I told them before the 9/11, about
more than year, be... hijacking in America or on America airline."...NBC News has
learned that Khan passed not one but two FBI polygraphs. A former FBI official
says Newark agents believed Khan and tried to aggressively follow every lead in
the case, but word came from headquarters saying, "return him to London and
forget about it" -- which, critics say, is exactly what the FBI did.'
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5131524/

And then we learned:
CIA was protecting its 9-11 terror cell
'The feds bungled a key opportunity to possibly nix the 9/11 terror plot, it was
reported yesterday. An Arabic-speaking FBI agent had requested information about
a Jan. 5, 2000, Al Qaeda meeting in Malaysia, but the CIA never turned it over,
The New Yorker reported. The ambitious FBI detective, Ali Soufan, was so upset
when he eventually got the information - after 9/11 - that he vomited. Soufan,
who had been investigating the 2000 attack on the U.S. Navy destroyer Cole that
killed 17 sailors, realized the two plots were linked. "And if the CIA had not
withheld information from him he likely would have drawn the connection months
before Sept. 11," The New Yorker reported. The intelligence Soufan had sought
showed that a one-legged jihadi named Khallad - a key Al Qaeda lieutenant linked
to the Cole bombing - had attended the Malaysia meeting where the Sept. 11 plot
was hatched. According to the magazine, the CIA also learned in March 2000 that
Al Qaeda operative Nawaf Alhazmi was in the United States, but the CIA never
alerted the FBI. Alhazmi ended up on the American Airlines flight that [allegedly] crashed
into the Pentagon . The CIA may not have told the FBI about Alhazmi and another
Qaeda operative, Khalid Almihdhar, because it hoped to recruit them as spies,
according to the article.'
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/story/432036p-364067c.html
 
Nada Farooq, the wife of Zakaria Amara, one of the accused 17, said: "I know this man. May Allah curse him and make him suffer."
Wow. May God spite the man that tries to save lives and not destroy them. I think what CSIS did was the right thing. It's no different than going undercover to buy drugs from a drug dealer. If you sell drugs, you deserve to go to jail. If you try to kill innocent people, you deserve to go to jail.
 
karam8 said:
It's no different than going undercover to buy drugs from a drug dealer. If you sell drugs, you deserve to go to jail. If you try to kill innocent people, you deserve to go to jail.
It is not that easy. Remember that according to all the data available 911 was an inside Israeli job. Therefore all of the so called "arrab terrorism" is probably also sponsored indirectly by the Western intelligence agencies (Canad not excluded).
 
Not even that easy. The issue in the 'alleged plot' is that what CSIS did is tantamount to entrapment. If a law enforcement agency has an undercover police officer take problem kids who might become criminals into an operation of his creation that turns them into criminals and plans a crime, then arrests them before they commit it, you have two problems:

1. They haven't committed a crime. Arresting them in posession of incontrovertible evidence that they were imminently about to commit a crime is admissable (although that only applies if they would have committed the crime if you hadn't put them up to it, and that they were *actually going to do it*, rather than just talk about it), but that wasn't what happened in this case. These impressionable teenagers (remember what that was like?) were in posession of things that they needed to carry out a training program that they were brought into by a CSIS operator (which was set up by him). . . hardly the same thing.

2. You've entrapped them. It's not a legal law enforcement method. In fact, it's against the law precisely because if police could routinely go around inciting people to commit crimes and then arresting them. . . well. . . you get the picture. Look up 'entrapment'. This is a textbook example.

This incident was a *classic* case of a police/intelligence frame-up for the media. The new (pro-bush) government and these agencies needed a 'success' very badly, so they found some impressionable kids (never hard to find) and used them to invent one. (Come on. . . over a hundred officers and a media circus, just to arrest a couple of 17-year olds with a paintball gun?)

With any luck, the Supreme Court will see it that way; Canada's Supreme Court is not as bottled up as the US's.
 
"It is not that easy. Remember that according to all the data available 911 was an inside Israeli job. Therefore all of the so called "arrab terrorism" is probably also sponsored indirectly by the Western intelligence agencies (Canad not excluded)."

I agree the West had a lot to do with 9/11. They had the information to stop it, but didn't. Why? There are many reasons, and if you look hard enough, anyone will know the answer to this.

As for this being a frame up. I don't know. I really haven't looked into it that much. But I do know these people bought large amounts of explosive material.
 
K8 said:
As for this being a frame up. I don't know. I really haven't looked into it that much. But I do know these people bought large amounts of explosive material.
Please do us all a favor and try to refrain from posting on topics that 'you haven't looked into that much' - you seem to be creating noise on a fairly regular basis at this point.
 
Back
Top Bottom