OTTAWA -- The RCMP has warned its investigators to be on the lookout for cleverly disguised messages embedded by al-Qaida in digital files police seize from terror suspects. An internal report obtained by CP gives credence to the long-rumoured possibility that Osama bin Laden's terrorist network and other extremist groups are using a technique known as steganography to hide the existence of sensitive communications.
Steganography, from the Greek word stegos, meaning covered, and graphie, or writing, involves concealing a secret message or image within an apparently innocuous one.
For example, a seemingly innocent digital photo of a dog could be doctored to contain a picture of an explosive device or hidden wording.
[. . . . ] "There now exist nearly 200 software packages which perform digital steganography," the report says.
Improving air transport security was a major objective
3.135 One of the major objectives of the 2001 Budget was to improve security at Canada's airports. According to the Budget document, "Rigorous new national standards for security in airports and on board flights are essential to protecting people. This budget will therefore provide Transport Canada with funds to strengthen its capacity to set regulations, review standards, and monitor and inspect all air security services." [. . . . ]
3.137 The Budget did not specifically allocate funds to improve the security screening of airport workers with "air side" access—that is, those working in controlled-access areas of the airport where baggage and freight are handled and aircraft are serviced. If workers in secure zones are unreliable, many of the other improvements will be ineffective.
3.138 Over 110,000 workers in Canada's airports have access to the "air side." Transport Canada screens each worker to eliminate persons who are known or suspected to be involved in threats of violence against persons or property, who are known or suspected to be members of an organization involved in violence or "closely associated" with such a person, or who the Minister of Transport reasonably believes might be prone to interfering with civil aviation.
[. . . . ] Criminal associations are a significant threat to air transport security
3.143 Increasing level of criminality. Transport Canada exercises considerable discretion in the granting of clearances to restricted areas at airports. A criminal record may be the outcome of some offence unlikely to reoccur or to pose a threat to air transport. Individuals with a record of such an offence may be given a security clearance.
3.144 We examined persons holding clearances at five Canadian [. . . based on our analysis about 5.5 percent of clearance holders hired between January 2001 and May 2003 had criminal records.] Airports—Toronto, Montréal, Vancouver, Halifax, and Winnipeg—and found that about 3.5 percent have criminal records. In the general population, 9 percent of Canadians have criminal records. While this is still lower than the Canadian average, the upward trend over the last two years is of concern.
3.145 Transport Canada officials told us that the clearance program focussed on a relatively narrow concept of "unlawful interference with civil aviation," which concentrated on the risks of hijacking and sabotage. This concept has been derived from international conventions. The risks of drug smuggling and other criminal activity were not necessarily regarded as grounds for denial of a clearance.
3.146 Number of active investigations. The Canada Customs and Revenue Agency and the RCMP both investigate criminal conspiracies at Canadian airports; generally these involve drug smuggling. We reviewed the investigation files at the five airports we visited. Police and Customs had identified 247 individuals with clearances to restricted areas who were involved in criminal conspiracies, almost all of them in Toronto and Montréal with a few in Vancouver (no such individuals were identified at the airports in Halifax and Calgary). Customs and police officials consider that even a small percentage of clearance holders with criminal intent poses a serious threat. A single criminal may bribe or coerce entire work teams to facilitate smuggling. Those involved rarely know what is being smuggled.
3.147 The RCMP's assessment of clearance holders indicates a greater problem than is indicated in the criminal conspiracy investigation files at airports. At the two airports where police and Customs had no active investigations, clearance holders included individuals who may have significant criminal associations.
3.148 Extent of criminal association. Each of the 405 individuals in our sample was assessed for criminal association by the RCMP's Criminal Intelligence Directorate, based on its information in three databases—the Canadian Police Information Centre, the Police Information Retrieval System, and the National Criminal Databank. We asked the RCMP if its intelligence files indicated any associations that might preclude the issuing of a clearance to a restricted area. Such associations would include, for example, membership in a biker gang, a spouse or close relative involved in organized crime, or an address associated with criminal activity. It is important to note that such individuals would not necessarily have a criminal record themselves or be active in organized crime; we also note that none of the 405 clearance holders in our sample had been assessed by Transport Canada for criminal association.
3.149 Based on the results of the RCMP's database search on the 405 persons in our sample (generalized to the total number of people holding clearances to restricted areas at the five airports), we estimate that about 4,500 persons or 5.5 percent have possible criminal associations that warrant further investigation and possibly withdrawal of some security clearances. This represents a serious threat to security at airports.
3.150 In addition to identifying individuals with criminal associations, the RCMP identified 16 businesses operating at airports that were linked to criminal activity such as providing travel arrangements for organized crime, facilitating identity fraud, and selling stolen passes. The firms were associated with biker gangs, organized crime, and drug trafficking. No firms with terrorist associations were discovered. At the two airports where Customs and the RCMP had no active criminal conspiracy investigations, nine companies with criminal links were operating. [. . . . ]
Now, isn't this reassuring? There is more, so link.
[. . . . ] There are many telling parallels between the Soviet Union and Saudi Arabia. First, the USSR led, and Saudi Arabia now leads, an ideological movement with global reach.
[. . . . ] Second, both are weakened by hypocrisy. Both Soviet and Saudi ideological claims amount to pretense at odds with social reality.
[. . . . ] Saudi Arabia faces the same dilemma. It claims to uphold and exemplify the harsh, purified, stripped-down form of Sunni Islam known as Wahhabism, which is the state religion. Wahhabis are forbidden to mix with other Muslims, and are indoctrinated to hate Shia Muslims as apostates, to angrily despise Christians, Jews, and Hindus, to eschew the pleasures of normal life--from picking flowers to listening to music to smiling. In the phrase so often heard among Wahhabi terrorists from Gaza to Falluja, they "love death by martyrdom more than life."
Yet the House of Saud, the rulers of the kingdom, do not live by stern Wahhabi strictures. If anything, they flout them, with porno videos for entertainment inside their compounds, sex orgies in hotel suites when they go on vacation, and chilled vodka handed out by Ambassador Prince Bandar bin Sultan in Washington and Aspen. Above all, the Saudi Wahhabis who preach the destruction of the Judeo-Christian West and who incite Islamic youths to die in jihad in Iraq and elsewhere depend on the United States for their military and economic security.
Hypocrisy kills the soul and poisons the common identity that binds normal societies. Hypocrisy sapped the intellectual strength of the Soviet Union, just as it is undermining the Saudi way of life.
Third, and perhaps most important, totalitarian systems are weakened by the discontent of those forced to live under them. . . .
[. . . . ] Saudi Arabia, with its commitment to promoting Islamic extremism worldwide, remains the key to defeating the terrorists we face. It is also a society in crisis. President Bush can choose to deal piecemeal with Islamist terrorism. Or, like Ronald Reagan confronting the Soviet Union, he can take on the problem itself, directly, carefully, calmly, but firmly, by dealing with its Saudi source. With Condoleezza Rice at his side, the president can apply the lessons of experience to the core challenge of his new term.
There is much more if you link.
Wife Beating: An Arab How-To -- "Unfortunately, the examples mentioned in this article are the rule, not the exception. TV shows dedicated to husbands beating their wives can be viewed regularly on Arab TV." -- mentions Al Jazeera
On October 5, France expelled Algerian-born Imam Abdel Qader Bouziane for telling a French magazine that Muslim husbands may beat their wives. This follows the sentencing on January 14 of the Egyptian-born Sheik Muhammad Kamal Mustafa, the imam of the mosque of the Spanish city of Fuengirola, Costa del Sol, for publishing a book that explains that wife-beating is in accordance with Shariah law.
Sheik Yousuf Qaradhawi, one of the most influential clerics in Sunni Islam and head of the European Council for Fatwa and Research and the International Council of Muslim Clerics, has also advocated wife-beating on multiple occasions in his 1984 book "The Lawful and the Prohibited in Islam," and on his weekly Al Jazeera program, which is popular among the surging number of European Muslims who increasingly look to religious leaders from the Middle East for religious guidance. This is particularly true with the growth of viewers watching Arab TV stations, available on satellite TV in Europe, which frequently airs shows dedicated to teaching a husband how to beat his wife. The following examples on this subject can be viewed at www.memritv.org .
[. . . . ] Speaking on Syrian TV on July 26, Sheik Abd Al-Hamid Al-Muhajir explained that the Koran stipulates when a husband can beat his wife: "The Koranic verse refers only to a disobedient wife...First you must admonish...Then comes the stage of sending her to a separate bed...If this does not help either...it is said, 'and beat them'... What's better, that she gets slapped, or that she ruins her family, herself, and society?" [. . . . ]
A separate bed? Punishment or respite? Do look at the examples -- barbaric! Why are feminists not railing against this attitude coming to North America?
France takes on plague of sexual 'rite' -- gang rape
VIGNEUX-SUR-SEINE, France The boys were patient, standing in line and waiting their turn to rape.
Their two victims, girls of 13, were patient as well, never crying out, at least that is what the neighbors said, and enduring the violence and abuse not once, but repeatedly over five months.
That was three years ago. Late last month, 10 young men, now ranging in age from 18 to 21, were convicted of rape in a closed courtroom in nearby Evry and sentenced to prison terms ranging from three to five years. Seven others will go on trial in November. The fact that they are being brought to justice at all is highly unusual.
The phenomenon of gang rape in France has become banal. It occurs - how often is unknown - in the concrete wastelands built as cheap housing for immigrants on the outskirts of France's big cities. Here, according to sociologists and prosecutors, teenage boys, many of them loosely organized into gangs, prey on neighborhood girls.
Many of the boys are raised in closed, traditional families and are hopelessly confused or ignorant about sex; others are simply street toughs. In this world, women enjoy little respect; often girls who appear weak, or who wear tight-fitting clothing or go out unaccompanied by their fathers or brothers are considered fair game.
[. . . . ] "In the boys' minds, if a girl's virginity is respected, then nothing bad has happened."
The girls' story seeped out months after the events, according to Laurent Le Mehaute, the lawyer for one of the girls. After rumors circulated at their high school, the director referred the matter to the police. At first, the girls denied the story, but eventually identified 18 boys as their rapists.
All but one of the boys confessed to having sex with the girls, even acknowledging that it was not consensual. The one who claimed his innocence was acquitted. [. . . . ]
The glass b***s brigade out in barbaric force. What do you suppose they think of Western women--and how will they treat them--if this is how they treat their own? Of course, we really do need more immigrants like these -- compliments of the party that goes for short-term vote gain and our long-term insecurity. Bring enough with these attitudes here and what do you think is going to happen? Is already happening.
Stoned to death... why Europe is starting to lose its faith in Islam -- Islamic fundamentalism is causing a 'clash of civilisations' between liberal democracies and Muslims
DAYS before she was due to be married, Ghofrane Haddaoui, 23, refused the advances of a teenage boy and paid with her life. Lured to waste ground near her home in Marseilles, the Tunisian-born Frenchwoman was stoned to death, her skull smashed by rocks hurled by at least two young men, according to police.
Although the circumstances of the murder are not clear, the horrific “lapidation” of the young Muslim stoked a French belief that the country can no longer tolerate the excesses of an alien culture in its midst.
A few days ago, pop celebrities joined 2,000 people in a march through Marseilles denouncing violence against women, particularly in the immigrant-dominated housing estates. The protest against Islamic “obscurantism” and the “fundamentalism that imprisons women” was led by a group of Muslim women who call themselves Ni Putes ni Soumises (Neither Whores nor Submissive).
The movement, which emerged three years ago to defend Muslim women, is spawning similar groups across Europe, supported by a mainstream opinion that has recently abandoned political correctness and wants to halt the inroads of Islam.
From Norway to Sicily, governments, politicians and the media are laying aside their doctrines of diversity and insisting that “Islamism”, as the French call the fundamentalist form that pervades the housing estates, is incompatible with Europe’s liberal values. [. . . . ]
In Germany, with its three million — mainly Turkish — Muslims, and France, with its five million of mainly North African descent, television viewers were shocked when local young Muslims approved of Van Gogh’s murder. “If you insult Islam, you have to pay,” was a typical response.
“The notion of multiculturalism has fallen apart,” said Angela Merkel, leader of Germany’s Christian Democrat opposition. [. . . . ]
Multiculturalism falling apart? Well, not before it is time! Many years ago I visited a North African Muslim country. Wow! The only parts of me uncovered were my head, face, and arms from just above the elbows to the tips of my fingers. My legs were totally covered. I had the worst experience of my travelling life -- called every four and five letter word a young man who accosted me--wanting to be my "guide"--could muster. In another instance, I was accosted by a policeman--he showed his ID--who demanded I follow him to buy at his compound and not wait for a kiosk to open at 3 pm . . . . and then tried to get me and my travelling friend into his compound. This simply confirmed what I had surmised even before--after seeing a woman's eyes peeking out of a burqua in the extreme heat of India -- that Muslim males' attitudes toward women were and are barbaric. I never want to live in one of their societies. I don't want their views here.
What is wrong with our immigration system? Perhaps a few Muslims could have entered North America, become acculturated and accepted that they were not going to change our society's views about women. If large enough numbers are allowed in, the result is inevitable, given their attitudes and beliefs. What kind of stupidity has allowed this? Our immigration and refugee system is out of control completely. Until we make it clear that immigration is are NOT going to be allowed to change our society to fit in with a faith which hasn't changed in centuries, we will have problems. With Muslim immigration comes large families, given their prolific childbearing. I do NOT want my country to bow to their ways -- to accommodate their hateful views. It is time that this is spoken about publicly. I am tired of the redneck label applied to any who question what is becoming evident -- that we had better think of what kind of immigrants positively influence our society and which immigrants do not; then act accordingly.
[. . . . ] Wise Madam Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin would claim to have restored judicial-parliamentary equilibrium, routing those who've been screaming against judicial activism.
Well, somewhere in Quebec, the retired Madam Justice Claire L'Heureux Dube must be chuckling with satisfaction. Make no mistake about it: This court ruling and Justice Minister Irwin Cotler's pending legislation have been driven by the social activism of provincial appeals courts, rubber stamped by the Supreme Court and the Liberal government. Now that Justice L'Heureux Dube has been replaced on the Supreme bench by Rosalie Abella, a no less eager advocate of the same liberal causes, the others can be expected to proceed apace.
Conrad Black may not be the guy to quote these days, but since Pierre Trudeau's Charter of Rights and Freedoms made the Supreme Court the real governing body of the land, nobody has put it better: The effect of the Charter, he told us, was "to unleash on this country swarms of mad judicial tinkerers, social worker judges ignoring the law and carrying out what they took to be the moral imperative of remaking society along faddish and idiosyncratic lines." [. . . . ]
[. . . . University of Western Ontario law professor Rob Martin, in his book, The Most Dangerous Branch] " . . . the judges behave as if they possess unlimited power and are not subject to any legal constraints. They amend the constitution at will, rewriting it or inventing new principles, as if the constitution were their private possession or plaything. The judges have also seriously undermined Canadian democracy. They often reach conclusions based not on law, but on personal preferences. It becomes increasingly difficult to accept that Canada has a legal system, so much has the court abandoned or subverted fundamental notions of law."
Bang on! Both men have hit the nail on the head. Do link to this one; it is very good.
Critics say institution hijacked; gay marriage advocates see 'green light'
Critics say institution hijacked; gay marriage advocates see 'green light' -- It is not "marriage" nor "civil union" that bothers many; it is the idea that this opens the doors to adoption to homosexuals whose couplings--whatever they're called--are relatively short-lived, compared to heterosexual marriage, according to an article in the National Post today.
Of course, the state does not seem to care what is best for children nor what the majority might want. They want votes and now, along with the immigrants, the gays will vote Liberal. [. . . . ]
We knew it was all over when Paul Martin broke his word on consulting Parliamentarians over his two Supreme Court appointments. Our SCOC is a completely activist court the members of which, undoubtedly, remember who appointed them and, if not consciously, subconsciously and by virtue of having views and rulings that appealed to this PM and his predecessors, are social engineering activists. We do not have a court which represents the majority of Canadians; we have a leftist court doing what they were appointed to do.
Remember, in polls, it is Quebec and cities such as Toronto, which skew the numbers toward gay marriage and all kinds of other social engineering, leftist, socialist activity. A referendum would reveal what Canadians really think about a sensitive social issue; that is why we will not have one on this -- nor on other divisive and hot-button issues. Heaven forbid that democracy as the will of the people would rear its ugly head.
By the way, only large organizations have the money to poll for citizens' views and these polls are able to present whatever result the one who pays wants -- depending upon what is asked and how. Check the political connections of various pollsters. Need I say more?
EDMONTON (CP) - Alberta, the province most vehemently opposed to same-sex marriage, set the stage for more legal battles Thursday following the Supreme Court's landmark ruling on the issue.
Justice Minister Ron Stevens acknowledged the province can't use the Constitution's notwithstanding clause to stop the federal government from redefining marriage. But he said for now, Alberta will not issue licences to same-sex couples - a position that is expected to spark court challenges by gays and lesbians. [. . . . ]
Personally Endorse the Doha Declaration -- "if enough people endorse the Doha Declaration, its influence in protecting and promoting the family in future international negotiations and conferences can be increased dramatically."
[. . . . ] Reaffirming that the family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society, as declared in Article 16(3) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights;
Noting that 2004 marks the 10th Anniversary of the United Nations’ 1994 International Year of the Family and that the Doha International Conference for the Family was welcomed by UN General Assembly Resolution A/RES/58/15 (December 15, 2003); [. . . . ]
International Petition to Defend Marriage and the Family
WE THE PEOPLE from various nations, cultures, and faiths around the world join together in this urgent worldwide call to defend marriage and the family.
REMEMBERING that throughout history the family has been the essential foundation of every successful society, and is recognized as “the natural and fundamental group unit of society . . . entitled to protection by society and the State”; and
RECOGNIZING that marriage between husband and wife, entered into with the free consent of both, continues to be the best foundation for strong and effective families and the best environment to prepare each new generation for productive lives and responsible citizenship; and
NOTING that marriage and families throughout the world are now being severely undermined by a variety of social, cultural, political, legal and economic forces, including insufficient protection of life before as well as after birth, resulting in widespread harm to individuals, families, communities, and nations;
NOW THEREFORE, we call upon all responsible citizens, community leaders and government officials throughout the world to take all necessary measures to defend marriage as the exclusive union of male and female, to protect life from conception until natural death and to promote and strengthen the family as the fundamental unit of society. [. . . . ]
As I have said before, I do not have a problem with civil unions for gays; I simply find it alarming that this may lead to adoption. Centuries of heterosexual couples marrying and raising their children worked; certainly, what we see of the behaviour of too many young today indicates to me that, instead of tinkering with the traditional family, we should be supporting parents financially and otherwise to do the best job possible.
Daycare does NOT replace the interest of the two people most likely to interact with the child in loving teaching, civilizing, and preparing that child to become a productive citizen. We should be supporting a situation where there is at least one adult at home and actively parenting through the child's formative years. Every time our government pushes its control through universal daycare, instead of allowing parents to make choices, I curdle.
The best memories of my pre-school years were a mother talking to me about family I had not met, letting me help stir and later follow a recipe, then reading to us every afternoon while we waited for Father to return from work. Then we were his -- and he made toys for us, carved a truck for a boy, constructed a large doll carriage for me--which carried my baby brother because it was solidly built, made skis for us. It was wonderful. Two parents bringing their best efforts to bear. And we needed no strangers except some elderly neighbours -- substitute grandparents whose influence changed my life -- my first museum trip, my first formal dinner of several courses, piano lessons -- all the extras that an extended family bring. Do you think tinkering with marriage--imperfect though it might sometimes be--will improve the lives of our children? I doubt it.
[. . . . ] Being a single-income family is not a luxury; it is a sacrifice. Unfortunately, this is a concept that is lost on our consumer-mad culture. I would rather have one of us at home with the kids and do without some extras than be dropping our kids off at daycare and both of us rushing to our jobs so that we can pay off a house that nobody has time to live in.
Mr. Dryden, you can keep your $5-billion. Or better yet, use it to pay down our national debt. Just like many families who find themselves on the treadmill of consumerism, Canada has already spent too much money on things it cannot afford.
Bill Wylie, Mississauga, Ont.
Who should care for our children? -- Non-profit and private daycares prepare to square off over new money
[. . . . ] In Ontario, low-income families are eligible for government child care subsidies; both public and private centres are reimbursed for every low-income child enrolled. Fully 90% of children are subsidized at Discovery Place.
But it's not nearly enough, Mr. Goldsmith says. He receives about $26 per day from the province for each subsidized child, while his costs are $33.
The difference is made up by charging unsubsidized parents more and not raising daycare workers' pay, he says.
"It's our staff and parents that are subsidizing the system."
Structurally, Ontario and Quebec deliver services almost identically. The major difference is that all Quebec children qualify for much larger subsidies.
[. . . . ] The reason, he says, is that Ontario has made it too difficult for the families served by the centre to qualify for subsidies. Receiving student loans, for example, makes parents ineligible.
This attitude simply perpetuates the situation. If you do nothing to improve your lot, you get a daycare subsidy, but if you are struggling for an education to improve your life and income, you don't. How very short-sighted.
A man claiming to be member of an Islamic group who was arrested in India for planning a bomb attack today won a High Court case against Immigration Minister Amanda Vanstone.
The High Court ruled a member of the Refugee Review Tribunal (RRT) did not allow the man, known as Naff, procedural fairness.
It quashed the RRT's decision to refuse Naff refugee status and ordered it to redetermine his application for a review of the case.
Naff is a Muslim Tamil who said he was an active member of the Indian Union Muslim League and of a committee of the Jihad Movement.
He was president of an organisation in his village associated with a movement led by a benevolent Muslim industrialist, Dawood Ibrahim, whom he said he met in Bombay. [. . . . ]
You are so awesome! I don't think I have read through a single thing like this before. So nice to discover somebody with a few unique thoughts on this subject matter. Seriously.. thanks for starting this up. This site is one thing that's needed on the internet, someone with a bit of originality!
