Authorities Can't Find Anything To Charge Alleged 'Extremist' With But Still Insist On 24-Hour Monitoring, Computer Restrictions

from the fighting-terrorism-means-never-having-to-make-sense dept

Canada's civil liberties-trampling anti-terrorism law (C-51) only recently passed, but authorities have been nothing if not proactive in combating the threat posed by radicalized citizens. Co-opting US law enforcement's belief that supportive words = 'material support,' the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) raided the home of an "extremist," arresting him and seizing a bunch of his computer equipment.

Harun Abdurahman, known as Aaron Driver to his father, apparently came under surveillance after expressing his "extreme views" during an interview with a Canadian newspaper. His father, a career member of the Canadian Armed Forces, seems somewhat dismayed by his government's actions.

"They told me he was on the watch list. He was considered a radical extremist and 'we hope he doesn't go to terrorist,'" said the man's father in an exclusive interview with CBC News in March. The CBC is not identifying the father.

"Here you've got your national security force, if you will, monitoring your child," he said. "How would you react to something like that? I didn't know what to say."
Driver/Abdurahman may be C-51's first test case/victim, even though his surveillance and arrest occurred before the law was passed. But if the aftermath of this arrest is any indication, Canadians who articulate "extreme" views have a lot more reasons to fear their government than their government has reason to fear them.

After spending a week in jail, Driver has been released. He has not been charged, but federal authorities are treating him as though he just served a lengthy prison sentence for an incredibly heinous crime. There are 25 stipulations attached to his release (once again, not charged with any crime) which will severely limit Driver's ability to live anything approaching a normal life.

Here are just a few of the restrictions imposed by authorities:

  • Wear an electronic monitoring device around the clock.
  • Take part in "religious counselling" and forward the counsellor's name to RCMP.
  • Follow an overnight curfew (from 9 p.m. to 6 a.m. daily) and stay at his home in Winnipeg's Charleswood neighbourhood. The home was raided earlier this month.
  • ​Surrender any passports he has and not apply for any passport from Canada or any other country.
  • Not possess any desktop, laptop or tablet computer. Any cellphone he has must be approved by RCMP, and the phone number must be submitted to police.
  • Provide passwords and access to his cellphone at the RCMP's request, with "such requests not to exceed two times per month."
  • Stay away from social media websites, including Facebook, Twitter, Kik, Surespot and Telegram encrypted chat.
  • Have "no contact or communication directly or indirectly with any member of ISIS, ISIL, Islamic State of Iraq and Syria and Al Qaida in Iraq." He must also not possess anything bearing the logos or names of any of those groups.

The government believes these are reasonable restrictions to place on a person who has not been charged with nor convicted of any criminal activity. Federal prosecutor Ian Mahon sees these stipulations -- which are far more severe than those that convicted criminals face -- as nothing more than an appropriate level of quid pro quo.

"If he is willing to enter into certain conditions, then there's no reason to keep him in custody," Mahon told CBC News on Monday.
How about "if he hasn't been charged with any crimes, then there's no reason to keep him in custody?" That's sort of how criminal custody works. Apparently, plenty of exceptions will be made for someone deemed dangerous enough to justify a raid involving several officers loaded in tactical gear and the seizure of electronics, but not dangerous enough to be charged and put on trial. This is the Canadian government aggressively chilling speech it doesn't like and nothing more.

And for all the supposed danger Driver posed, the police didn't seem to exercise much care during its weeks of surveillance.
Neighbours say undercover officers have been watching the home in the city's southwestern neighbourhood of Charleswood for months.
LOL. "Undercover."

If the RCMP truly believed this was a dangerous individual, it would have done better obscuring its presence. But all it was looking for was an excuse to bust someone for the nonexistent crime of supporting unpopular views. It openly surveilled a Canadian citizen, held him for a week without charge and then only agreed to release the uncharged Driver if he would agree to further round-the-clock scrutiny from authorities so concerned about his online comments, they couldn't even find anything to charge him with.

Hide this

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: aaron driver, c-51, canada, extremism, harun abdurahman, isis, rcmp


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Thread


  • icon
    That One Guy (profile), 24 Jun 2015 @ 4:18am

    For a very loose definition of 'willing'

    "If he is willing to enter into certain conditions, then there's no reason to keep him in custody," Mahon told CBC News on Monday.

    I imagine the only reason he was 'willing' was they told him he either accepted the terms, or they'd keep him locked up for a couple of years while they 'investigated' him to find something to charge him with.

    An armed raid on your house, followed by stewing in a cell for a week, with the promise of a lot more time behind bars unless you basically plead guilty to the accusations leveled at you so those involved can brag about the 'would be terrorist' they caught? Yeah, not exactly a situation conductive to non-coerced 'agreements'.

    "Here you've got your national security force, if you will, monitoring your child," he said. "How would you react to something like that? I didn't know what to say."

    Just a suggestion but, "I hereby resign" and/or "I did not sign up to serve in the military of a country that acts in this fashion towards it's own citizens" would seem to be appropriate responses.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      DigDug, 24 Jun 2015 @ 10:47am

      Re: For a very loose definition of 'willing'

      In the U.S., every person that joins the military swears to uphold the constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic.

      Time for those Army Rangers, Navy Seals, Marine Recons to grab their weapons, fill up on ammunition, and start raiding the Executive branch terrorist members of the NSA, CIA, FBI, HSA and the White House, then after they've all been arrested and shipped off to Gitmo, slip over to the Judicial branch and arrest the FISA judges and ship them out as well, and finally, every member of the senate and house of congress can go as well.

      Then we'll hold a continental congress and refill the posts with people that will actually reflect the needs and requirements to protect our rights and freedoms, which doesn't require stomping all over the constitution and bill of rights.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Blackfiredragon13 (profile), 24 Jun 2015 @ 11:02am

        Re: Re: For a very loose definition of 'willing'

        Careful dug, you don't want the courts to consider your speech "threatening" do you? Remember reason!

        /s

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      JoeCool (profile), 24 Jun 2015 @ 1:18pm

      Re: For a very loose definition of 'willing'

      "Just a suggestion but, "I hereby resign" and/or "I did not sign up to serve in the military of a country that acts in this fashion towards it's own citizens" would seem to be appropriate responses."


      Except if Canada's military is anything like any other military, you can't simply resign. When you join the military, you're stuck for a set time when you sign up (usually something like 5 or 6 years). If you don't do your duty for the FULL period, you do the rest of said period in a military prison before being dishonorably discharged. The dad is well and truly stuck.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        That One Guy (profile), 24 Jun 2015 @ 3:09pm

        Re: Re: For a very loose definition of 'willing'

        Well I'm sure that won't have any effect on his ability to do his job, being constantly reminded that the very government he's serving considers his son to be a would-be-terrorists, treats him like one, yet doesn't have enough proof to actually try him as one.

        Nope, I'm sure he'll still be proud as can be of his service after this little event.

        /s

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2015 @ 2:37pm

      Re: For a very loose definition of 'willing'

      Just a side note, but their commander in chief is Queen Elizabeth II, and not the Canadian government. If things get sticky, that could make a difference.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Ninja (profile), 24 Jun 2015 @ 5:20am

    after expressing his "extreme views" during an interview with a Canadian newspaper

    How do you define a point of view as "extreme"? Let's look back in time. Were the views of ones that considered the monarchy a bad system extreme? Were the ones that spoke against racism extreme in their views in the early XX century? Were the views of the ones that spoke against slavery in 1700 or something extreme?

    Can't our fucking stupid governments learn from history a little bit?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2015 @ 6:26am

      Re:

      They're doing this on purpose. 14 years is long enough to see that this approach is how NOT to fight terrorists. Of course, they'd rather not kill off their gravy train and remove their crowns any time soon.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2015 @ 7:33am

      Re:

      Their perspective doesnt go beyond the wad of cash stuck in front of them. I'm referring to the US govt - but I'm sure its the same up there...unfortunately.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2015 @ 10:57am

      Re:

      "Can't our fucking stupid governments learn from history a little bit?"

      They have. They don't want examples like the ones you mentioned to be repeated.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    That Anonymous Coward (profile), 24 Jun 2015 @ 6:21am

    Someone please take stock of those cheering this on, because I want to see their faces the day it expands to nab them as well. The definitions always expand and grab more, to show a larger pool of "bad guys" being caught... at the expense of justice & rights.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2015 @ 6:29am

    Aaron Driver

    Really? Next we will find out that he worked as his father's personal assistant.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2015 @ 6:31am

    I don't understand

    If you haven't been charged with a crime, how can the state justify restricting your liberties?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Quiet Lurcker, 24 Jun 2015 @ 6:50am

      Re: I don't understand

      Remember Pavlov and his dogs? How he taught them to salivate at the sound of a bell? That's what's going on here.

      Any time government types hear words like 'radicalized', 'terrorist', 'jihadist', or similar, they immediately go brain-dead (or should that be 'more brain-dead than they already are'?).

      As part of this reaction, they will ignore things like civil liberties, common sense, laws, history, or any of perhaps half a hundred things which would serve to underline the ignorance of what they're doing or proposing to do.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2015 @ 6:53am

      Re: I don't understand

      Simple, they disliked his views therefore .....

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2015 @ 6:57am

      Re: I don't understand

      That sounds like something only a terrorist would say!

      Quick arrest him/her but never bother to charge him/her of anything so he/she can't prove himself/herself innocent of the charges!

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Laroquod (profile), 24 Jun 2015 @ 7:03am

      Re: I don't understand

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2015 @ 10:12am

        Re: Re: I don't understand

        Interesting, thanks for this information.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        nasch (profile), 26 Jun 2015 @ 6:31am

        Re: Re: I don't understand

        Not that I can blame the guy, but I wonder what would have happened if he had refused. In the US, there's a very short period of time someone can be held without bringing criminal charges (unless you're talking about Gitmo of course, then anything goes). What's the situation in Canada? Does the special terrorism law let them lock people up for a long time without putting them on trial? Isn't there something in the Constitution prohibiting such behavior?

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          Uriel-238 (profile), 26 Jun 2015 @ 12:54pm

          I think I want Gitmo to be a verb

          Git · mo
          Verb
          To carry off or lead away (a person) extrajudicially and in secret or by force, esp. by a state agency or institution, esp. to be tortured or detained cruelly.

          We thought Abel was abducted by aliens. Turns out he was Gitmo'd by the local sheriff.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2015 @ 8:23am

      Re: I don't understand

      Soft dictatorship. The state says jump and everyone rushes to do what they are told without thinking critically about it

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Vincent Clement (profile), 24 Jun 2015 @ 8:49am

      Re: I don't understand

      By passing laws that allow the government to get around Constitutional rights under the guise of safety and security. For example, if you suffer from major depression, go to an ER and tell the nurse you have suicidal thoughts, the government can 'form' you, essentially making you a ward of the crown. Same goes for kids taken by the government.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2015 @ 9:29am

      Re: I don't understand

      Because terrorism and child pornography.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2015 @ 7:24am

    That *is* prison

    Not conventional prison, of course, but it's prison. He's restricted to a particular region (as far as he can travel in 7.5 hours, since he can only leave at 6 and has to be back at 21), not only physically but also mentally (not being able to have a computer or access social networks means he's cut off from most of the world).

    He also can't talk to anyone at all. Due to what is popularly known as "six degrees of separation", everyone is indirectly connected to the evil organizations listed.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      tqk (profile), 24 Jun 2015 @ 9:10am

      Re: That *is* prison

      No it's not. They may have intended that, but they're incompetent. He may not have a computer, yet they tell him to stay away from social media sites. Great, all he needs is Tails Linux on a USB key and an internet cafe, and he'll be the next recruiter or publicist for IS, untraceably so.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2015 @ 9:22am

        Re: Re: That *is* prison

        Well, he'll be wearing an electronic monitoring device. They could just tag the GPS coordinates of libraries and add an explosive charge to the ankle bracelet. He wanders too close to a Forbidden Zone? Boom.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2015 @ 7:38am

    My reaction is; if he wasn't an extremist before, he soon will be, because he would have more freedom under Sharia law than in a so called democratic country.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    John Fenderson (profile), 24 Jun 2015 @ 7:56am

    Religious counselling??

    Amongst all the horribles in this story, this stood out:

    Take part in "religious counselling" and forward the counsellor's name to RCMP.


    So they are now treating religion as mental illness. At least they're being upfront about it.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Gwiz (profile), 24 Jun 2015 @ 8:05am

      Re: Religious counselling??

      Amongst all the horribles in this story, this stood out:

      Yeah, I agree.

      Does that counseling have be from a member of an "approved" religion?

      If so, that's not just a slippery slope, it's a Teflon mountainside covered with baby oil.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2015 @ 9:17am

      Re: Religious counselling??

      To be fair, a lot of people develop weird beliefs when they're not properly educated. So many, in fact, that it seems like a poor use of resources to re-educate each person on an individual basis.

      Maybe the Canadian government could set up a system of communal retreats to provide services to larger groups of people all at once. They could even make it fun, like going away to summer camp.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2015 @ 10:13am

        Re: Re: Religious counselling??

        .. and if that doesn't work. You and the other "non conformists" will be ushered into new and improved "group" tanning facility located at said "summer camp", where you will receive a nice crispy tan from a 2,000 degree blast furnace.

        I feel like we've been down this road before.....

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2015 @ 10:23am

        Re: Re: Religious counselling??

        To be fair, a lot of people develop weird beliefs when they're not properly educated.

        It is the nature of youth to explore the more extreme areas of politics and social systems. It is not a lack of education, but rather part of exploring how society functions. Almost all become less extreme as they realize the implications of the extremes, and they take on more responsibilities in life.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        John Fenderson (profile), 24 Jun 2015 @ 12:03pm

        Re: Re: Religious counselling??

        "To be fair, a lot of people develop weird beliefs when they're not properly educated."

        As long as we're being fair, a lot of people develop weird beliefs when they are properly educated. But that's beside the point.

        The point is, what is a "weird belief?" To my eyes, all religious beliefs are very weird -- and everyone should be able to have any weird belief that they wish.

        It's not the government's place to declare that some beliefs are unacceptable and need to be expunged through therapy. Haven't western nations spent decades demonizing the USSR for doing exactly that?

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2015 @ 12:24pm

          Re: Re: Re: Religious counselling??

          Haven't western nations spent decades demonizing the USSR for doing exactly that?
          True. But it was easier for me to work a reference to Maoism into my comment than anything related to the USSR. 'Gulag' would've stuck out like a sore thumb.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      PRMan, 24 Jun 2015 @ 10:28am

      Re: Religious counselling??

      Maybe they just want someone to teach him the Qur'an more correctly, so he won't be so radical:

      Qur’an 9:29-Fight against Christians and Jews ”until they pay the tribute readily, being brought low.”

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      tqk (profile), 24 Jun 2015 @ 10:39am

      Re: Religious counselling??

      So they are now treating religion as mental illness.

      Likely, they're only treating extremist (Jihadist) expressions as potentially dangerous. The rest of those nutbars are considered tamed.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        John Fenderson (profile), 24 Jun 2015 @ 12:07pm

        Re: Re: Religious counselling??

        Then why cast it in religious terms rather than taking the more reasonable stance that people who tend to be dangerously violent should get some help?

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      tracyanne (profile), 24 Jun 2015 @ 9:07pm

      Re: So they are now treating religion as mental illness. At least they're being upfront about it.

      It's probably the only thing they managed to get right.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      nasch (profile), 26 Jun 2015 @ 6:26am

      Re: Religious counselling??

      So they are now treating religion as mental illness.

      Is "religious counseling" counseling to remove religion, or counseling by a religious figure? A strange requirement either way.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        GEMont, 26 Jun 2015 @ 11:39pm

        Re: Re: Religious counselling??

        Not absolutely certain, but in Canada I think "Religious Counselling" is slang for being raped while in "custody", such as while serving time in prison, or while awaiting trial in lock-up, or as a punishment/coercion treatment during police station jail-room interrogation.

        Its derived from the many Canadian Church Child molestation cases, in which raped children are mentally imprisoned via death threats by church members - no pun intended there - to prevent the children from reporting their molesters.

        As it was mainly done to Native Indian children, it was always pretty much approved of and universally covered up by all levels of government and law enforcement, as a rule.

        It is certainly a more legal form of torture than water boarding, since its usually carried out by incarcerated criminals, and its a torture that deals an extremely long lasting mental repercussion, that will likely make any border-line or wannabe Canajun terrorist think twice about typing the word "bomb" anywhere in the True North Strong and Free.

        /s

        ---

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2015 @ 7:59am

    I would get the hell out of canada, but where to go?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      neghvar (profile), 24 Jun 2015 @ 8:40am

      Re:

      Cross the US border and demand asylum. Since he has not been convicted or charged with anything, this is obviously a political vendetta and not criminal. Thus the US may grant asylum based on his situation of injustice.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Roger Strong (profile), 24 Jun 2015 @ 9:11am

        Re: Re:

        The US kidnapped and tortured Canadian Maher Arar for 11 months, merely for knowing someone who knew someone who expressed the same opinions as Driver.

        This word you keep using, "asylum", I do not think it means what you think it means.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        tqk (profile), 24 Jun 2015 @ 10:57am

        Re: Re:

        Cross the US border and demand asylum.

        Very funny. You're not taking this at all seriously. Even with all the Big Brother Canada might raise up against anyone, that would be a drop in the bucket compared to what the US could marshal against those like him.

        Canada is still very much largely empty. Look at Labrador. There's plenty of places in this country you could go and never see another human being, assuming you've fuel to last the winter and Deet to last the bug season.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          GEMont, 26 Jun 2015 @ 12:44pm

          Re: Re: Re:

          "...assuming you've fuel to last the winter and Deet to last the bug season."

          Wow. Sounds like you've actually been to Canader!
          You didn't even mention the words Eskimo or Skis!
          You sure you're a Real American??

          I read somewhere, years back, that an entire regiment of Canajun Soldiers had to be rescued from the Labrador or Manitoba woods during a military exercise because of Black Flies.

          Now that's grim.

          ---

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • icon
            tqk (profile), 26 Jun 2015 @ 2:31pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            You didn't even mention the words Eskimo or Skis!

            They're called Inuit these days, and lots of countries the world over think skiing is fun. Been there, done that, never again.
            You sure you're a Real American?

            North American, yes. US citizen, no. You think "American" only applies to residents of the USA ("United States ***OF*** America")? Millions of Canadians, Central Americans, and South Americans disagree. However, we've learned to accept the arrogant delusions of you "Americans."
            I read somewhere, years back, that an entire regiment of Canajun Soldiers had to be rescued from the Labrador or Manitoba woods during a military exercise because of Black Flies.

            Proves my point. It's hell to go outside if it's not -40. Somebody screwed up scheduling maneuvers during bug season. Someone quantified it as 600 bites per minute in downtown Winterpeg.

            North in the Territories, I hear the mosquitos are six feet (ca. two metres) long and 200 lb. (200 * 0.4535923 == 90 kg.).

            That may just be the Inuit trying to dissuade us from going there.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • icon
              nasch (profile), 26 Jun 2015 @ 2:57pm

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

              However, we've learned to accept the arrogant delusions of you "Americans."

              I'm not sure how much is arrogance and how much is convenience. What other word would one use to describe someone from the US?

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • identicon
              GEMont, 27 Jun 2015 @ 12:01am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

              Dunno about that "myth".

              A friend, long ago, sent me a polaroid from the NW Territories where he was working, of two mosquitoes flying - apparently in circles - whilst tied together with thin string, and them beasts looked to be about three to four inches long.

              Of course, they mighta been males. :)

              As for national pride, the older I get, the less I can understand how anyone, in any country, can actually be nationalistic and patriotic unless they literally avoid reality altogether. What amazes me even more is the incredible number of such people on earth today.

              I assume its something in the water, or due to car exhaust fumes. Maybe sunspots....

              ---

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2015 @ 8:01am

    Ahh. Bill C-51. From the government that claimed the long form census was too invasive

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2015 @ 8:18am

    considering Fuerher Harper considers being pro environmentalism as an extreme view and harmful to his bank accounts. I have little doubt there will soon be a great many Canadians being watched under this Law for the crime of trying to save the environment and/or just opposing the dear leaders views.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2015 @ 8:20am

    I wouldn't be surprised if he does something extreme when they take him off the leash.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2015 @ 10:20am

    Yo dawg, I heard you like extremism ...

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Uriel-238 (profile), 24 Jun 2015 @ 11:17am

    Yeah, I think Canada has just earned any act of terrorism Driver instigates.

    This demonstrated that Canada is not a refuge of just conduct and guaranteed due process, but is, in fact, an oppressive regime that needs to be toppled.

    Of course, I'm opinionated. I think the United States extrajudicial detainment, rendition and torture program retroactively justifies the attacks on 9/11 by demonstrating the true tainted colors of the US.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    johnvanvliet (profile), 24 Jun 2015 @ 11:21am

    example

    If you WANT to create " The Terrorist Known as 'V' "

    this IS how a government needs to go about it

    RCMP, you DO know YOU YOUR SELVES are CREATING these" so called" Terrorist !

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      JoeCool (profile), 24 Jun 2015 @ 1:28pm

      Re: example

      They've been taking lessons from the FBI: if you can't find a terrorist, make them yourself! Then claim victory for Democracy.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      tqk (profile), 25 Jun 2015 @ 7:48am

      Re: example

      RCMP, you DO know YOU YOUR SELVES are CREATING these" so called" Terrorist!

      The RCMP are not to blame here. They are merely the enforcers. They follow orders from the court and politicians.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2015 @ 12:35pm

    Extremely angry...

    I don't know about this guy - but being treated the way he is would certainly make me angry... and when a government pisses off its citizens for no reason other than to fuck with their lives, that's when you really see shit hitting the fan.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2015 @ 1:40pm

    If he isnt a terrorist yet....

    He sure will be after having that garbage pulled on him.

    What a dumb way to drive someone into the enemies hands.

    RCMP, you must be as stupid as our DOJ.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2015 @ 3:15pm

    Criminal law with SAFEGUARDS against an "overbearing" government to terrorist laws to whatever the fuck i want laws

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Justme, 24 Jun 2015 @ 7:43pm

    Use their playbook. . .

    I don't know what opinions he was expressing, so without any opinion on those, i would still take a page for the government's playbook by using their actions in this case to demonstrate that your opinion are perhaps not so extreme considering the government's conduct.

    After all, they like to portray opposition to government surveillance as a threat, that not only vindicates that surveillance but also as a justification for expanding it.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    GEMont, 25 Jun 2015 @ 7:59pm

    Dominions Dominate Domestic Denizens

    Finally, the Fascist Dominion of Canada has dropped its phony "democracy" label and now proudly parades about, displaying its true colors... er.. I meant "colours" of course.

    ----

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Close

Add A Reply

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Special Affiliate Offer

Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Recent Stories
.

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it
Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.