Homegrown terrorist: Toronto 18 bomb plotter Saad Khalid recalls his radicalization

Good interview with one of the participants in the Toronto 18 bomb plotting case, Saad Khalid, on the radicalization process, with the usual knowledgeable and thoughtful comments by Lorne Dawson:

His [Khalid’s] story in many ways offers parallels with how Lorne Dawson, a professor and chair of the sociology and legal studies department at the University of Waterloo, describes the concept of homegrown terrorism and how individuals are motivated to choose that path.

“These are young people who are mainly men. They are remarkably ordinary,” Dawson says.

“They’re pretty much like most other young people. If we’re going to explain why someone would become a terrorist, particularly a homegrown terrorist, the process of radicalization, then you’ve got to look at individual motivations.

“With each layer of explanation, you’re reducing the pool of potential candidates for who could become a terrorist. So it’s like a funnel.”

Homegrown terrorist: Toronto 18 bomb plotter Saad Khalid recalls his radicalization – Canada – CBC News.

Dan Delmar: Dissecting Drainville’s faulty identity rhetoric | National Post

Good dissection by Dan Delmar on the hapless rationalizations and excuses of former Minister Drainville, the main public face of the Charter:

Indeed, the Charter of Values didn’t go far enough in a number of areas; among them, the supposed secularization of institutions. A good start would be to cut financing and tax breaks to religious organizations and private religious schools; to stop funding the incessant and costly renovation of the plethora of churches in Quebec that no one attends; to, again, remove the Assembly’s crucifix, because no credible secular jurisdiction has Jesus Christ perched above the heads of men and women who are enacting laws.

Drainville also wanted to curb Islamism: You can’t counter ghettoization by further excluding Muslims from the government jobs they weren’t able to get in the first place. During a campaign press conference featuring former Premier Pauline Marois, I wandered off into the very next room of an east-end Montreal employment centre. A dozen people were receiving job training; nearly all were visible minorities and four were hijabi women. Marois, like Drainville, didn’t seem to comprehend how their Charter would exacerbate the problem of ethnic integration.

Dan Delmar: Dissecting Drainville’s faulty identity rhetoric | National Post.

Diaspora Politics: Israel, Ukraine and Russia

More on diaspora politics and interests. I have not seen any coverage in Canadian media of tension between the US and Israel over Israel’s abstention on a UN resolution censuring Russia for its invasion of Crimea. Presumably the Canadian government would be equally annoyed as the Americans given its strong language against Russia and in favour of Ukraine. But then of course, this has to be “balanced” by the Canadian government’s strong support of Israel.

Always hard when there are such strong differences of opinion, both with respect to foreign relations as well as domestic diaspora politics.

Adding more fuel to the flames in Washington were public remarks by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman in which they maintained their “neutrality” and failed to back up the United States.

“We have good and trusting relations with the Americans and the Russians, and our experience has been very positive with both sides. So I don’t understand the idea that Israel has to get mired in this,” Lieberman told Israel’s Channel 9 television when asked about the Ukraine crisis.

When White House and State Department officials read these comments, they nearly went crazy. They were particularly incensed by Lieberman’s mentioning Israel’s relations with the United States and with Russia in the same breath, giving them equal weight. The United States gives Israel $3 billion a year in military aid, in addition to its constant diplomatic support in the UN and other international forums. Russia, on the other hand, supplies arms to Israel’s enemies and votes against it regularly in the UN.

U.S. officials angry: Israel doesn’t back stance on Russia – Haaretz.

 

On Passover, speak out against injustice | Farber

A reminder of the historical role that the Jewish community has played in social justice in Canada and elsewhere by Bernie Farber, who is particularly active on refugee as well as a wide array of other issues:

Has this vulnerable past been forgotten? Have we lost empathy for others who continue to face discrimination and require support? A core Jewish value, the directive to leave the world a better place “Tikun olam” seems today a faraway concept.

Today’s Jewish community understandably supports any government that stands behind Israel. Sadly it seems to have done so while suspending its historical connection to issues of social justice.

We understand the existential angst faced by Jews in the Diaspora. In our lifetime there was a wholesale attempted genocide committed against Jews that almost succeeded. We get the need to be supportive of a strong Jewish state.

However, we also know that any government’s support for Israel must not weaken who we are as a community – our belief in human and civil rights and our commitment to human dignity.

Governments need to do more than visit Israel, more than commemorate the Holocaust and more than speak at events in the Jewish community. Support for Israel ought not to blind us to those issues that cry out for our attention.

Today it seems the tent within the Jewish community has little room for voices that demand social change. And make no mistake, those voices exist.

On Passover, speak out against injustice | Toronto Star.

Charte: Drainville répond aux critiques de ses collègues | Le Devoir

The debate has started within the PQ regarding the role or not of the proposed Charter in the election results:

Dès le lendemain de l’élection, le député de Lac-Saint-Jean, Alexandre Cloutier, est l’un de ceux qui ont affirmé que le PQ aurait dû « se concentrer sur ce qui faisait davantage consensus » plutôt que de s’acharner à vouloir adopter la charte dans son intégralité. Selon lui, le PQ aurait pu légiférer sur les signes ostentatoires en concluant un compromis avec la Coalition avenir Québec (CAQ).

Jean-François Lisée a pour sa part indiqué qu’il trouvait exagéré que la charte interdise le port de signes religieux ostentatoires dans les hôpitaux, les universités ainsi que dans les municipalités. Le député de Rosemont a aussi confié qu’une période de transition plus longue aurait été préférable pour mettre en place les mesures de la charte. Le PQ avait notamment prévu une période d’un an pour les employés de l’État et de cinq ans pour les fonctionnaires du milieu universitaire, médical et municipal.

Charte: Drainville répond aux critiques de ses collègues | Le Devoir.

Drainville, for his part, demonstrates his total ignorance of Canadian multiculturalism, and remains in at least a defensive if not denial mode:

Le modèle de multiculturalisme canadien préconise une forme de cohabitation côte à côte dans laquelle les différentes communautés vivent séparément. Il n’y a pas dans le multiculturalisme de volonté de construire une fondation commune. Nous croyons le fait que de définir clairement un espace où les différentes religions ne s’immiscent pas dans le rapport entre les citoyens et leur État est un gage d’égalité et de respect pour tout un chacun. L’État, comme une grande table où tous les citoyens sont invités à venir s’asseoir. Peu importe leurs différences de sexe, d’orientation sexuelle, d’origine, de croyance ou de non-croyance. L’interdiction du port de signes religieux pour les employés de l’État visait cet objectif. Tout le contraire d’exclure.

Évidemment, nous étions conscients que nous en demandions à certaines communautés plus qu’à d’autres. Nous en étions conscients et préoccupés ; d’où la création d’une période de transition d’un an pour tous les employés de l’État et jusqu’à cinq ans pour les employés du réseau de la santé, des municipalités, des cégeps et des universités.

La charte des valeurs, un premier bilan

New Policy Accommodating Sikh Kirpan at Canadian Missions Abroad

Another application of the Supreme Court’s Multani decision (allow Sikh children to carry the kirpan at school). Reasonable accommodation and responding to community concerns. Timing of announcement, of course, is political (on Vaisakhi)

Will be interesting to see if any commentary on this decision outside of Quebec:

Visitors to Canadian missions who declare themselves to be Sikhs will be permitted to retain their kirpans when entering the missions, provided their kirpans are secured within a sheath, attached to a fabric belt and worn under clothing across the torso. They should also be in possession of the four other Sikh articles of faith.

New Policy Accommodating Sikh Kirpan at Canadian Missions Abroad.

Ontario Liberals to target ethnic voters with demographic database software

More on “shopping for votes” and targeting key demographics, this time ethnic communities:

A Liberal source said the software processes census data that can then be fed into Liberalist and matched to individual addresses. It would show, for instance, which houses or apartments are likely to contain Italian-speaking residents, allowing a campaign to target them with Italian-speaking volunteers.

The software lets users see where particular cultural groups are clustered, so they can tailor their campaign efforts to the community. If the tool identified a neighbourhood with a high number of Muslim residents, for example, a campaign can structure its canvassing efforts around prayer times, the source said. The program has already been used by the federal Liberals.

Pitney Bowes makes a range of commercial software generally used by companies for marketing campaigns or to analyze demographic data when determining where to do business.

Provided with a sketch of her briefing, including the software, Ms. Sorbara declined to be interviewed.

“I don’t comment publicly on campaign strategy and would therefore not have had anything to add to your outline,” she wrote in an e-mail.

The PCs are believed to already have sophisticated technology for determining where key voting demographics are and how to reach them. Their techniques are a closely guarded secret, but one insider said the party overhauled its program after the 2011 election and further tweaked it after two by-elections last winter.

Ontario Liberals to target ethnic voters with demographic database software – The Globe and Mail.

British government must proceed with caution in reviewing Muslim Brotherhood

Interesting commentary on the review of the Muslim Brotherhood in the UK and some of the domestic and international risks that Dr. Hellyer of the Royal United Services Institute in London and the Brookings Institution in Washington DC thinks are significant:

The likely outcome of the review is not a terrorist designation, if the evidence being relied upon is the same that has been available thus far. There is evidence to suggest the Muslim Brotherhood is sectarian, permissive of incitement, and other such unsavoury characteristics, including a willingness to engage in violence for political ends. Such characteristics differ widely across the organization, depending on the country. However, it would be difficult for such evidence to amount to a terrorist designation for the Brotherhood. It is dubious to think that the review will deliver such a verdict unless the Brotherhood changes quite dramatically between now and the time the review is completed. Such a designation, it ought to be remembered, would have to stand up in a British court of law.

The review, therefore, is likely to deliver a rather unflattering picture of the Brotherhood, but not result in a terrorist designation. The timing of its delivery is also quite important to note: it is due to happen in July, which is close to when parliament ends its session in the UK. It is also when the Arab world will slow down owing to the summer holidays, Ramadan and Eid. Indeed, it is entirely plausible the review will be completed, and its results are not even reacted to by very many people at all. However, the UK government will be able to note that it has taken the concerns of its allies in the region seriously, without actually doing very much at all.

British government must proceed with caution in reviewing Muslim Brotherhood – The Globe and Mail.

Finding a cure for hate | Toronto Star

Interesting and lengthy article on trying to understand the psychological and medical reasons behind hate, an initiative by Dr. Izzedin Abuelaish, of U of T’s Dalla Lana School of Public Health, who became famous after most of his family was killed by an Israeli rocket in Gaza, and became the basis for his book, I Shall Not Hate.

For his part, Abuelaish likes to think of hatred as a disease or mental disorder. It certainly works, metaphorically — hatred spreads from person to person, like an infection, he says. It can metastasize, like cancer; it can be chronic, like diabetes. People are not born with hatred, he believes; they acquire it from the environment, just as people are exposed to bacteria or second-hand smoke.

Others at the workshop were hesitant to brand hatred as a disease or disorder. Much controversy has come from the “great tendency of psychiatry to turn issues that are popularly in the human condition into mental disorders,” noted Dr. Alexander Simpson, chief of forensic psychiatry with the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH) in Toronto.

“To hear a universal human experience — an expression of negative emotion like hate — being someway turned into a disease is the sort of thing that psychiatry’s been told off for doing for the last 30 years,” Simpson said. “I have some reluctance to consider that.”

He raised the possibility that perhaps hatred can be likened to blood pressure; we all have it but when it reaches a certain level, we get sick.

Finding a cure for hate | Toronto Star.

Separatism was dealt a blow, but don’t think it was knocked out – The Globe and Mail

Good thoughtful commentary and advice by André Pratte of La Presse (but in the Globe):

That’s where the duty of the rest of Canada, the federal government and Quebec federalists begins. First and foremost, we should resist the temptation to put up the “Mission Accomplished” banner. Second, we have to get French-speaking Quebeckers more involved in national institutions, beginning with the Government of Canada. It is not good for either the province or the country that Quebec is so weakly represented in the federal cabinet as it has been in recent times. And finally, we need to constantly and intelligently promote federalism, so that Quebeckers not only reject independence but embrace the Canadian work-in-progress.

Separatism may not be a threat in the near future. But beware of the sleeping dragon. And in the meantime, we should be careful about the mutual indifference that has come to characterize the relationship between Quebec and the Rest of Canada. That indifference could surreptitiously lead to a de facto separation.

Separatism was dealt a blow, but don’t think it was knocked out – The Globe and Mail.

Don Macpherson of the Gazette reminds us of the risks of raising expectations and constitutional negotiations (Don Macpherson: Only federalists can awaken the sovereignty movement). ButDaniel Weinstock wants to reopen constitutional discussions, as they end up being more polarizing:

If on the other hand, political leaders in the ROC interpret this election (and perhaps also the last federal election, that saw the Quebec electorate reject the Bloc Québécois en masse for a federalist party) as giving rise to an historical opportunity, a main tendue inviting them to complete Canada’s coming to full self-consciousness as a multinational federation united by the political will to affirm the individual rights of all Canadians and the legitimate aspirations to self-determinations of all of its constituent polities (Quebec, to be sure, but also the First Nations with whom we share our land), then, perhaps, the right answer to the question with which I began this post is that the 2014 election will come to be seen as the moment at which the sovereignist movement died.

Now, I concede that there is not much political hay to be made for any party at this historical juncture in Canada in adopting, and in acting on, the latter interpretation. Some political leaders in the ROC are just as depressingly prone as are some of the political leaders in Quebec to give a great deal of weight in their political decision-making to the short-term electoral costs of standing up for minority rights. The mark of the true statesperson is however to look beyond the next election, (I think Kant said that) even if in doing so he or she is looked upon askance by voters.

The Ball is in ROC’s Court | In Due Course.

Conrad Black is equally wanting to stir things up:

Quebec is ready to deal