Terrorists Operating in Canada?

This story caught my eye. It’s more than a little strange…

Basically, a woman has been arrested apparently for sending and attempting to carry parts of a firearm to Lebanon. It is alleged that the intended recipient is part of a terrorist organization, Hezbollah. So, she has been charged with aiding a terrorist organization.

Two things strike me as strange in all this:

  1. If a terrorist organization wanted to obtain firearms illegally, they could get them for a lot less trouble multiple ways:
    • steal them. Lord knows the Middle East has enough AK-47’s etc.
    • buy them in Lebanon. Why did she not simply carry some cash?
    • make them. They could employ a machinist or two and a carpenter to produce usable firearms in a matter of weeks with a rate of production far higher than shipping in random parts.
    • import them a hundred different ways by the boat-load, plain-load etc. The world is awash with firearms and people willing to smuggle them in bulk.
    • etc. I am sure creative minds can do better than this list.
  2. If Hezbollah were a terrorist organization operating in Canada, and possessing a firearm that might be useful for terrorism, why would they not use it in Canada or the US? The idea that a terrorist organization formed in response to an invasion by Israel into Lebanon could not find Israeli or other targets of opportunity in Canada makes me incredulous about the whole plot. Did Hollywood writers make this up? Isn’t it a bit like shipping coal to Newcastle? Has anyone noticed a shortage of firearms or munitions in Lebanon? I would not be surprised that a judge or jury would find reasonable doubt just to hear a prosecutor lay this before a court.
  3. Since the connection to a “terrorist organization” is so slim, why didn’t officials merely confiscate the offending item and send her on her way? That would have saved the taxpayers some money, prevented the use of the firearm for any illegal purpose and been quicker. Who, flying, has not run afoul of airport security droids? I have been stopped for carrying a knife in a shoe in my carry-on (I put it in the shoe to recycle the space and forgot about it when reorganizing the packing…) and a package of razor-blades in my shirt pocket (I noticed I had left it behind as I headed to the door and just put it in the pocket to bring it along. It went through two airports before being located. I had completely forgotten about it.) without being charged with any crime.

    The AR-15 is a semi-auto firearm, restricted in Canada to collecting, target-shooting under stringent conditions and transportation only to and from the shooting site by the most direct rout, but unless she was carrying the receiver, magazine or ammunition there should not have been any criminal charge. Parts of firearms except for magazines, ammunition and receivers are just objects in Canadian law. It seems to me to be an over-reaction. If the firearm were being smuggled into Canada, I would be upset, but sending it out and to a country where Hezbollah is a democratically elected party? No way. The government should be glad to see the firearm leave Canada and/or be dismantled.

We may never know the whole story of this but surely a lot of taxpayers’ money is being wasted on this project.

see Montreal woman facing terrorism charge.

About Robert Pogson

I am a retired teacher in Canada. I taught in the subject areas where I have worked for almost forty years: maths, physics, chemistry and computers. I love hunting, fishing, picking berries and mushrooms, too.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Terrorists Operating in Canada?

  1. Ivan says:

    That makes you an American, Bob. Deal with it.

    If you really believe Hezbollah gives a red rats hairy ass about civilians, I have a bridge in Brooklyn for sale. It’s dirt cheap and priced to move.

  2. Clarence Moon wrote, “That is rather un-American”.

    I am a Canadian. I do not have to think like a citizen of a country that could not come up with a concise name for itself. America is a cluster of continents, not the country to the south.

  3. Clarence Moon says:

    I do not support Hezbollah in the least…

    So you say, Mr. Pogson, but then you continue, in the same sentence to offer a justification for their existence. That would seem to be supportive in every sense of the word.

    Then your “Such actions merely…” observation strikes me as you’re suggesting that people can simply disobey laws that you deem inefficient. That is rather un-American.

  4. Clarence Moon wrote, “open support for Hezbollah and its activities that result in the slaughter of innocents in the Mid-East is surely over the top.”

    I do not support Hezbollah in the least but claiming they are terrorists for resisting an invasion by Israel and helping civilians who were being slaughtered by artillery etc. while Israel which was spawned by Haganah with a somewhat related history (formed to defend settlers from Arabs but later clearly terrorist by bombing the British out of Palestine) is a double standard.

    The mess that is the Middle East has long-standing roots made worse by European meddling since the Crusades. Punishing a young woman for being remotely involved does not make the world a better place. Such actions merely spread the anger farther and deeper, the opposite of what needs to be done.

  5. Clarence Moon says:

    You are beginning to look a little extreme, Mr. Pogson. I can well understand the fascination with Linux due to a combination of moral outrage over Gates and Ballmer, et al, making so much money from their cunning but serendipitous association with IBM and your own pinch-penny attitude toward life, but open support for Hezbollah and its activities that result in the slaughter of innocents in the Mid-East is surely over the top.

    Your own government, duely elected, I am sure, along with most Western governments have declared their aversion to such practices and have made support of these organizations a criminal offense. I am surprised that you, who are so insistent on the letter of the law in other cases, would welsh on something truly important. At its worst, Microsoft might obtain $50 or so, prorated over an extended service life, from a computer buyer. Hezbollah kills and maims people. Hardly the same thing unless you are truly bent.

Leave a Reply