Let me be clear.
The prime perpetrator of 'jihadist terrorism' is NOT ISIS.
it is Wahhabism, from Saudi Arabia.
They fund mosques throughout the world, that use a Wahhabi-based curriculum.
They are well-funded, in the millions of dollars, backed by an unlimited bottomless pocketbook (Saudi oil money) and have surrounded themselves with layers of lawyers and politicians. Thus, Wahhabism can not be declared as a terrorist organization, and thus they are free to fund and promote terrorism throughout the world. Every Western government knows this, and Obama has even publicly recognized Wahhabism as part of the problem.
There is a certain Wahhabi-funded mosque in Toronto, for instance, that is known to produce terrorists. This goes back to the trials of the Toronto 18 - the gang that was convicted for a plot to blow up the parliament buildings. The radicalization of the main leader can be directly traced to a mosque in Toronto. Yet the mosque was untouchable under Canadian law. Too many lawyers. Too much money available to drag it out through court. Too much protection under the 'freedom of religious persecution' court actions.
The problem with identifying and labeling these Wahhabi-funded groups as terrorist groups is that they change labels at a whim. Al-Qaueda, ISIS, Daesh, and so on and so forth. And Wahhabi is essentially a religion, which can not be labeled as a terrorist group.
See, for instance,
'For more than two centuries, Wahhabism has been Saudi Arabia's dominant faith. It is an austere form of Islam that insists on a literal interpretation of the Koran. Strict Wahhabis believe that all those who don't practice their form of Islam are heathens and enemies. Critics say that Wahhabism's rigidity has led it to misinterpret and distort Islam, pointing to extremists such as Osama bin Laden and the Taliban. Wahhabism's explosive growth began in the 1970s when Saudi charities started funding Wahhabi schools (madrassas) and mosques from Islamabad to Culver City, California.'
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/...
or
You Can't Understand ISIS If You Don't Know the History of Wahhabism in Saudi Arabia
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...
These are mainstream media publications, not biased special interest publications.
So, to combat terrorism, you have to get around the lawyers. Prevent them from arguing in a court that your actions against their client are unconstitutional and against the law. Religious persecution, as it were, allowing them to hide behind Islam. (Much like the IRA hid behind Catholicism). The way to stop it is through clandestine activities, activities that the lawyers can not challenge in a court of law. If, for instance, the bank accounts of these mosques suddenly vanish, so they can no longer fund their activities, they can no longer effectively promote radicalization.
Enter Bill C-51, that allows the Canadian government, and security agencies, to use clandestine activities against these institutions. If, for instance, these mosques could be effectively unfunded through misdirection of funds unlegally, these Wahhabi institutions would become ineffective. (Illegally is against the law, unlegally is beyond the law). The challenge is to stay one step ahead of them and to have the flexibility to respond immediately as they change coats.
Trudeau is well aware of this. He will support Bill C-51 as an effective way to deal with these scenarios. Trudeau Sr. used the War Measures Act (which gave him similar powers) very effectively against the FLQ. The problem arises with the trust the general public has in their government.
There is absolutely no doubt that an ideologically-based demagogue government like Harper can misuse the provisions of Bill C-51 to achieve it's agenda, beyond that of fighting terrorism. The 2010 G20 summit in Toronto, for example.
There is also no doubt that terrorism can be combated effectively with these provisions.
What is needed is legislation, similar to the WMA and Bill C-51, that can be used secretly, clandestinely, and specifically against publicly-identified and publicly-declared targets and only those targets, not indiscriminately against ANY target. Very similar to tactics that can be used against a declared enemy in times of war that are kept, for obvious reasons, secret.
If, indeed, there is a war against specific terrorists, then the enemy has to be clearly identified and targeted, and the threat to our security neutralized. We are, perhaps, too indoctrinated into the ways of the cold war (nation to nation) and have no experience against a non-national enemy (the way Britain has with the IRA). The Geneva Convention deals only with nation-to-nation warfare, not with a freedom-vs-ideology conflict. Only with the rise of an ideologically driven non-national movement that is not constrained by national boundaries and has more funding and power (political and military) than perhaps a majority of nations, has this become a problem that needs to be addressed with new and novel tools.
What is also needed is a government that all Canadians can trust, because it has trusted and independent non-partisan oversight (the Senate?).
