Reply #228: one just keeps noticing fresh misconceptions ...

[iverglas]

they were only "able" to get the materials they needed through a sting operation.

That is NOT what the article you linked to in your previous post said.

In point of fact, they were NOT able to get the materials they needed because of a sting.

The sting involved, as they usually do, letting them THINK they were getting the materials they wanted -- but making sure they didn't actually get it.

The police / intelligence services did NOT initiate the transaction, and did NOT participate in the transaction, other than to take over the handling of it once it had been initiated by the suspects.

From the article:

The RCMP said yesterday that after investigating the alleged homegrown terrorist cell for months, they had to move quickly Friday night to arrest 12 men and five youths before the group could launch a bomb attack on Canadian soil.

Sources say investigators who had learned of the group's alleged plan to build a bomb were controlling the sale and transport of the massive amount of fertilizer, a key component in creating explosives. Once the deal was done, the RCMP-led anti-terrorism task force moved in for the arrests.

The RCMP were NOT parties to the purchase-sale of fertilizer transaction. They were MONITORING the group and discovered what they were planning, and intervened, to control the transaction, to PREVENT the transaction from being completed with real fertilizer.

In this kind of "sting", the police allow the suspects to continue their activities and the police do not get involved, but the police "sting" the suspects by changing an important factor in the equation: letting them buy something they think is fertilizer (or drugs, or stolen cars ...) when it isn't. This doesn't change the nature of the criminal activity, e.g. conspiring to blow something up. It just removes the ability to carry it out.

In this case, the police did intervene earlier than in some others. They did not just allow the transaction to run its course, it seems, and stop it at the last minute by substituting something else for the intended subject of the purchase; they substituted themselves for the fertilizer dealer for the purpose of controlling dealings with the suspects. The details will indeed be interesting to learn, but it does not seem that the police/intelligence services incited or encouraged the suspects to engage in the transaction in any way.

Another kind of sting involves letting someone approach someone whom they think is a drug dealer or prostitute or money launderer (or in the case a fertilizer dealer ...), but who is really a police agent, and letting him/her attempt to engage in a criminal transaction -- but that was NOT the case here, at least as far as we know.

I certainly reject the yammering you were initially responding to, about how maybe Islam is this and maybe Islam is that, but rejecting one nonsense does not mean having to believe another.

I guess I'll take my turn at baseless speculation, while I'm here.

It seems to me that this group of disaffected youth, loony stupid people, or whatever they turn out to be, was being monitored in a rather routine way by police/intelligence services for quite some time. Such surveillance can serve a number of purposes. It can forewarn of activities the individuals themselves are planning to undertake, but it can also provide leads to more interesting individuals and organizations that they may be in contact with.

I'll bet that one day some investigator or wiretap monitor was listening away, or reading away on his/her computer monitor, and all of a sudden sees fertilizer! bomb! behead! ... more likely, of course, not all at once. And thinks Whoa! what have we here?? They've been keeping an eye on these goofs for quite some time, not expecting them to actually do anything but ramble and rant on line and in their living rooms (and maybe engage in a little low-level freedomfighter-wannabe firearms possession and "training"), and here they've come up with a plan.

So then the surveillance starts in earnest, and the transaction they are attempting to carry out is identified and the police intervene with the supplier, and take over the handling of the transaction. And when the time comes to complete it, they "sting" the suspects by delivering cow manure instead of ammonium nitrate, and bust 'em.

And who are "they"? Goofs, I'm pretty convinced. Dissafected youth, loony stupid people (being a math whiz doesn't make one all-round clever), wannabes.

The idea that the RCMP and CSIS have broken some big-time terrorist ring operating in Canada, which is indeed how it was first made to appear, is nuts.

And yes, if my speculation is correct, it was inappropriate to make a big media hoo-hah about this investigation such as would lead some people to suspect that we have genuine al Qaeda-type terrorists operating on Canadian soil, or that international terrorism has turned its gaze to Canada. That does not appear to be so -- and to be fair, the police/intelligence services did make it plain that these were Canadians planning this, not a branch plant of al Qaeda.

But the thing is, nobody needs to be a big-time terrorist to blow up a building.

From a 2002 Supreme Court of Canada decision:

http://www.canlii.org/ca/cas/scc/2000/2000scc58.html

The accused has a lengthy history of mental illness and of dangerous handling of explosives. He also has a long history of treatment, and received out-patient psychiatric treatment as a requirement of a probation order in force against him between 1993 and 1996 because of an incident where he had taken a firearm to work with the intent of shooting a co-worker, for which he received a conditional discharge, three years' probation, and a 10-year firearms prohibition. In 1998 the accused pleaded guilty to unlawful possession of an explosive substance and to possession of a weapon for a purpose dangerous to the public peace, contrary to ss. 100(12) and 87 of the Criminal Code. The police had found in the accused's vehicle and in his apartment an arsenal capable of causing mass destruction to property, death and serious injury to persons in the area.

In the <appellant>'s vehicle was a suicide bomb. The only requirement for the device to deploy was the movement of the switch by the operator or victim. In the car were explosive substances, including two 500 ml bottles containing nitro-methane and picric acid, chemicals, which are extremely unstable in nature. Also located in the vehicle was a duffle bag with a container of 37% formaldehyde; 500 ml of sodium nitrate; 500 grams of sulphuric acid; 500 ml of lead nitrate; and 500 ml of picric acid; and 150 ml of glycerine and various other chemicals. The chemicals found in the vehicle have capability on their own, or in combination, to form highly explosive substances and could have been used to create an arsenal of devices.

Similar chemicals were located inside the residence, including two 80 lb bags of ammonia nitrate and two pipe bombs. Three detonators were seized including one that had been exploded.

The bomb inside the vehicle, if detonated, would have destroyed the vehicle and killed the person activating the device. The debris would have caused damage to cars, buildings and
injured anyone within a 75 metre radius. The two 80 lb bags of ammonia nitrate, if mixed with fuel oil and detonated in the <appellant>'s suite, would have damaged the suites two to three floors above and two to three on either side, as well as cars parked along the street and houses across the street. Anyone in the area would be killed or seriously injured.

If they had been able to complete their transaction and had actually done what they were planning (not including beheading Harper; for the love of mike, how stoopid can some people be?) they could have caused quite horrible death and destruction.

By the way, it was 3 tonnes of the stuff in this case, not tons; that's about 3.3 tons. Just for anyone curious.