First, apologies for the rather lengthy delay without posting, I dont intend to allow it to happen again without forewarning, been very busy.

First, Some Vindication:

It would seem that The Economist agrees with me when it comes to the Conservatives newly announced senate reform and fixed elections. In an article in the conservative magazine, they deconstruct the hype around the two changes, and the article ends with the line: "Rather than coherent constitutional reform, these bills look like a mere swipe at the Liberals."

So Apparently We Caught Some Terrorists...

or so Ive heard, from every single news outlet and political pundits blog in nauseating levels of detail and coverage. Andrew Coyne spent endless post after post examining every last minute detail. Warren Kinsella was so gushing with resiliance and an attempt at a stiff upper lip that he created an entire website devoted specifically to stating that we are not afraid of 17 extremely amateur and largely harmless wannabe terrorists who never truly posed much of a threat. It hit the front page of every newspaper imaginable, and in the opinion of this writer, was vastly overblown. There is even a massive sars-concert type event planned for Toronto to try to 'rebound' from this supposed threat.

Lets think about this. These people had little training, knowledge or even ingenuity. Five of them were under 18. These amateurs managed to FAIL at smuggling weapons into our country, which is no small feat of incompetance given our disgustingly porous borders. They NEVER posessed the supposed 3 tonnes of Ammonium Nitrate, they merely ordered it, and were quickly denied the order on the grounds of it being a ridiculously suspicious order.

There have been a number of such amateur terror cells captured in the United States, as evidenced by the Monitor. Why is it such a big deal here? I think for a lot of us, it was summed up well by Jon Stewart, its as though we've joined the club of the 'also hated', as though we can say 'hey look! We're hated too!'

This Also Brings Up a Pet Peeve of Mine...

Why is it that when it comes to terror suspects, assuming guilt is perfectly alright? Now, Im pretty sure these guys are guilty, all accounts would appear they are, but theres a disturbing trend with terror suspects of assuming guilt. You see it in the United States a great deal surrounding the Guantanamo debate, the assumption often made that those in Gitmo are terrorists because they are there.

Ive heard it a great deal of late, the idea that we should simply shoot these terrorists, that somehow, because they are alleged to be terrorists (or more accurately, terrorists in training), that we shoul somehow skip the judicial process. We have a judicial process for a reason, and we should never walk down that path that says that some crimes dont need that process. Down that road lies the ability to justify Gitmo.

Innocent until proven guilty is a maxim that should not be railroaded.
Habeas Corpus should not be ignored.

Personally, I congratulate CSIS and the RCMP for a job well done (assuming guilt), but caution that we shouldnt make too big a fuss over such a small incident.