Toronto 18 - in solitary cells for over 600 days -W/O TRIAL!

I thought the story was interesting… what’s going to happen to these poor young teens and does anybody care anymore?
politicalaffairs.net/article/art … 501/1/316/
“Toronto 18” Stuck in Legal Limbo

A week ago, a man moved into the cell beneath Fahim Ahmad. “I hear him singing, you know, out loud,” Fahim says. Fahim is talking to me on a poor-quality telephone line from the Don Valley Jail in Toronto. This twenty-minute conversation is Fahim’s only connection with the outside world for the day.

“The man sings like this, I’ll sing it to you: `I’m going crazy, Fing Fing crazy, I’m going crazy, Fing Fing crazy, get me outta here, I’m going crazy…’ He is banging and screaming and puts faeces on the walls. I hear him all the time now, and that is after only one week.”

One week in special solitary confinement must seem a very short time when you’ve been living in 24 hours isolation, in a 6 by 7 by 10 foot room, for over 600 days. But for Fahim and the other young men in their early twenties who have had their lives turned upside down after being accused of participating in a supposed terrorist cell, this is their daily existence.

“These conditions are designed to make you go crazy,” Fahim says.

In June 2006, eighteen Muslim men and boys – all Canadian citizens, and all but one between 15 and 25 – were arrested in a highly publicized scoop. Within hours of their arrest the police had held a press conference. But at the same time, a publication ban on court proceedings silenced the defendants. As a result, the trial of the men who would become known as the Toronto 18 was done by the newspapers and networks, the young men guilty were found guilt as charged by the media.

All this years before their trial, which has yet to occur. No date is currently set. “We’ve been told it is going to take a least a year for the trial to actually start,” Saima Mohammad says.

Shortly after the arrest of the Toronto 18, People’s Voice wrote that the case seemed to amount to entrapment. Since then, the facts appear to have borne this out.

The Toronto Star has said the allegations “are so bizarre as to be almost unbelievable.” Two of the two star witnesses of the crown have turned out to be police informants - paid to the tune of four million dollars.

One informer, who allegedly sold fertilizer to make explosives, has disappeared and his name cannot be printed. The other informer, Mubin Shaikh, has become a media star, repeatedly breaking the publication ban and doing interviews CBC, CTV, even the BBC.

More shocking is Shaikh’s own revelation that he is a drug addict, struggling with a cocaine habit. Less than three hours into his testimony in court at the preliminary hearings, and reportedly after successful attacks on his evidence by the defense, the crown took uncommon act of stopping proceedings through a Direct Indictment. This has further undermined the crown’s case, according to the solidarity committee, and now the trial is in limbo.

“I think there is a broader political agenda associated with this issue,” says James Clark, a leader of the Toronto Coalition to Stop the War who has also been helping with the Presumption of Innocence Project. “Canada has 2,500 troops in Afghanistan and like other countries has clamped down on civil liberties, using scaremongering, Islamophobia, and anti-Arab racism.”

James points to the internment of Japanese Canadians during the Second World War; “this will be a huge blot on our collective history” he says.

“The only thing I can say on a personal level is that I knew Fahim, I went to school with some of the Toronto 18, and they were normal Canadian Muslims playing video games, going to school and doing normal things Canadians do,” Saima says. “Now they are behind bars based on accusations. They have been made out to look like monsters, which of course is not true.”

Okay, I’ve never heard a Canadian discuss this. Why not? Do you only discuss these things when there are no non-Canadians around to hear you? Do you care at all?
If you believe they are guilty - what are they guilty of?
And if you believe they are not guilty - as this article seems to suggest some people believe, what do you make of that? Were they just normal kids who got caught up with a bad leader who swayed them? I can see that happening to a teenager. And i remember thinking the story sounded a little like entrapment when I first read it - these kids are just so young, and it’s doubtful they could have gotten any terrorist equipment on their own had the Canadian government not pretended to be a source of it.
What gives? Are these poor boys just to be forgotten?

This is one of those Voltairean situations: clearly some of these men were intent on committing acts of terrorism in Canada, that’s pretty much a given (and have a look at what their wives were saying on chat sites in this Globe and Mail story from two years ago archived at Frontpage.com: Hateful Chatter Behind the Veil). But they must not be held without trial for so long a la Guantanamo Bay. And so, as much as I or any right-thinking Canadian loathes these people and rightly fears what they and their ilk have been planning to do to our society, they must either be tried or let go.

I don’t agree with them, and what they were planning to do must be prevented, but keeping them locked up without trial for so long hurts what they were planning to hurt. We cannot allow these types of people to drag us down to their level.

As such, it is an outrage. I’m going to write to my MP in protest. And before you roll your eyes, well, it’s true…I have not followed the story closely over the past two years, so I hadn’t realized that two years had gone by.

Where’s Jaboney with a big heaping mug of outrage on this one? And why wasn’t it Jaboney who blew the whistle on Canadian egregiousness on F.com in this instance? Your silence is deafening and very telling.

(EDIT: What’s with the URL function not working?)

they are terrorist !! hang them with out a trail !!! screw their rights, they wanted to kill people.

I hope you’re being facetious.

I feel a lot more sympathy for dead clowns than living terrorists:

youtube.com/watch?v=k2kxlZDO … re=related

My sympathies are with the rule of law in Canada, which doesn’t seem well at all these days.

Poor young teens…that’s rich.

Poor young teens…that’s rich.[/quote]

Well, the youngest was 15. It isn’t like he ran off and joined a terrorist training camp or anything…I look at the young ones kind of like someone who got swayed by a cult leader or something. The oldest ones who did the swaying - yeah, i hope appropriate justice is served.

If you feel so much sympathy for them, perhaps you’d rather they were running around free in America?
Think they’d be treated better?
Maybe we could ship them there. :smiling_imp:

[quote=“Josefus”]If you feel so much sympathy for them, perhaps you’d rather they were running around free in America?
Think they’d be treated better?
Maybe we could ship them there. :smiling_imp:[/quote]

Nah, they’d just end up in Gitmo like that other Canadian kid.

There you go.
Problem solved.
Out of sight, out of mind. :laughing:

There you go.
Problem solved.
Out of sight, out of mind. :laughing:[/quote]

Yep. Sadly, these days are over. Didn’t Canada just sign something promising that they would no longer ship misbehaving immigrants back to countries where they are likely to be tortured (which is the reason Canada hasn’t had to build a gitmo of it’s own in the first place)? Or made to sign something like that? or something?

For the life of me I don’t understand why so many westerners are so reluctant to hold trials. Isn’t rule of law one of the democratic values which makes us superior and which we’re supposedly defending against the encroachment of the dark ages represented by Islamic fundamentalism?

The only reason I can think of to avoid trials is because accusers don’t really believe the evidence is there to support their accusations.

Well yes…there is [b]that limitation[/i] isn’t there. But others with a more thorough knowledge of the situation are the ones calling the shots.

Well yes…there is [b]that limitation[/i] isn’t there. But others with a more thorough knowledge of the situation are the ones calling the shots.[/quote]

In other words, you have no clue either why accused persons aren’t being brought to trial but you support the policy based on blind faith.

It is supposed to be, yes.

Another possibilty is that they know the accused were in the process of planning something (and let’s be serious, now…does anyone really believe they weren’t?), but they don’t feel they have enough evidence to prove it in a court of law. They fear letting these people go for what they most likely would do.

The crux of the matter is that while the accused are despicable human beings, they must be treated fairly. Two years in prison without a trial is not fair. Either find them guilty, or let them go.

And if they are let go, then, naturally, make for goddamned sure that their every move is under surveillance. A crew of potential terrorists can’t really do much if you have a crew of people assigned to keep tabs on them night and day. Which, in this day and age, seems pretty necessary.

To those who protest that this sounds too much like a recommendation for a police state, I would respond: they already do this, anyway. If you’re known to the police as a bank robber and there have been a number of recent bank robberies, then you are being tailed. Better that the potential terrorists are living freely and going about their business while being watched than to be stuck in prison with no date for a trial set. Right? And if they truly aren’t and weren’t going to plan some kind of terrorist attack, then being under surveillance shouldn’t be a problem because they won’t be arrested for anything.

Aren’t those statements equivalent? They’re accused of the crime of conspiracy to commit a terrorist attack and fear is clearly what would be keeping law enforcement officials from putting them on trial or letting them go at this point.

I also fear terrorists but if they were actually engaged in a conspiracy then the rule of law makes provisions for imprisoning them for a significant length of time for that crime. Anyone with even a smattering of history should know though to fear a government whose officials are allowed to elevate personal suspicions to the level of the power to imprison any citizen as much or even more.

Well yes…there is that limitation isn’t there. But others with a more thorough knowledge of the situation are the ones calling the shots.[/quote]
In other words, you have no clue either why accused persons aren’t being brought to trial but you support the policy based on blind faith.[/quote]Spook -
So, in other words, you have no clue as to the actions of these incarcerated individuals or the situation in which they were apprehended or the judgment of the Coalition Forces personnel who actioned their apprehension but you oppose their being held based on your personal feelings?

One characteristic that all extremists have in common is a disdain for due process and rule of law because they act as a direct brake on their excesses.

[quote=“spook”]One characteristic that all extremists have in common is a disdain for due process and rule of law because they act as a direct brake on their excesses.[/quote]I am making oatmeal cookies. Its my first try here to do this. I added sesame seeds.