At what point do we start getting suspicious?

Three weeks ago, on October 3rd, Canadian PM Stephen Harper's Conservative party narrowly passed a motion to "launch combat missions" in Iraq alongside other Western warmongering nations and their clients in the Middle East. The motion was passed (157 for to134 against) despite stiff opposition from the NDP and Liberal opposition parties and a Canadian public traditionally averse to any kind of foreign military campaigns. On the day of the vote, an online poll showed almost 60% of respondents were against Canada joining the 'coalition'.

NDP opposition leader Tom Mulcair said that the Harper government was "plunging Canada into a prolonged war without a credible plan" and that bombing ISIS "will only create more recruits for ISIS and can, in fact, prove to be disastrously counterproductive". On Monday, former prime minister Jean Chretien again criticized Canada's military involvement in Iraq saying that it was "just the latest in a long history of interventions by western countries that have left "scars" on the Middle East" and that "Canada should be putting its emphasis on humanitarian assistance for the refugees in the region."

The pusillanimous PM Harper responded by reading a gospel from the Neocon book of public scaremongering:
"It is imperative that we act with our allies to halt ISIL's spread in the region and reduce its capacity to launch terrorist attacks outside the region, including against Canada. As a Government, we know our ultimate responsibility is to protect Canadians, and to defend our citizens from those who would do harm to us and to our families.
In urging all parliament members to support the motion, Harper admitted that involving Canada in another war was not only unpopular but politically risky in the run up to next year's general election. Then again, given the widespread allegations of vote fraud leveled against Harper's Conservative party during the last general election, Harper may not have much to worry about.
Have the thought crimes laws been passed? Can I come out now?

Two days ago, having finally emerged from the broom closet into which he bolted during the gunfire in the Parliament building, Harper responded to the two "terror attacks" saying that the events were "a grim reminder that Canada is not immune to the types of terrorist attacks we have seen elsewhere around the world, and that the attack(s) would only strengthen Canada's response to terrorist organizations". Harper also pledged to speed up a plan already under way to bolster Canadian laws and police powers in the areas of "surveillance, detention and arrest. We will not be intimidated. Canada will never be intimidated."

But of course, as a result of two very well timed 'terror attacks', Canada, or rather Canada's public, its military and its political class, have been intimidated (or rather manipulated) into backing down in the face of Harper's warmongering and becoming accomplices in more corporate war-for-profit and the destruction of their civil liberties.

Michael Zehaf-Bibeau: Canada's first real Muslim terror dupe
Those familiar with the story of the Boston marathon bombers will recognize the history of the Ottawa shooter, Michael Zehaf-Bibeau. The son of a Libyan exile, he was born in Canada and spent time in Libya before moving back to Canada where he lived in several cities doing odd jobs. His father, Bulgasem Zehaf, reportedly fought with the Western-backed Libyan rebels as part of NATO's coup against Gaddafi in 2011. Readers will remember that alleged Boston bomber Tamerlan Tsarnaev's uncle, Ruslan Tsarni worked for a Haliburton subsidiary and was actively involved, via USAID, with funding NATO's Islamic terrorist campaign in the Caucuses via the Congress of Chechen International Organisations, which aimed to undermine Russian president Vladimir Putin. The official address of the Congress of Chechen International Organisations was the home of 20 year CIA Veteran Graham Fuller, national intelligence officer for near east and south Asia. Tsarni was also married to Fuller's daughter. Fuller is on record as having stated:
"The policy of guiding the evolution of Islam and of helping them against our adversaries worked marvelously well in Afghanistan [against the Russians]. The same doctrines can still be used to destabilize what remains of Russian power and especially to counter the Chinese influence in Central Asia."
Zehaf-Bibeau, like the Boston bomber brothers, was a very unlikely Jihadi. With a penchant for drug dealing and petty crime, he had little or no affiliation with 'radical Islam' until he became a Muslim and, again like Tamerlan Tsarnaev, psychologically 'lost the plot'.
Mr. Bathurst said he met Mr. Zehaf-Bibeau in a Burnaby, B.C., mosque about three years ago. He said his friend did not at first appear to have extremist views or inclinations toward violence - but at times exhibited a disturbing side.

"We were having a conversation in a kitchen, and I don't know how he worded it: He said the devil is after him," Mr. Bathurst said in an interview. He said his friend frequently talked about the presence of Shaytan in the world - an Arabic term for devils and demons. "I think he must have been mentally ill. "I thought he was really, genuinely mentally ill and not firing on all cylinders, he had a kind of loud, obnoxious personality."
The gold chain-wearing, beer-swilling 'Jihadi', Martin Couture-Rouleau
Like the alleged Boston bombers, Zehaf-Bibeau was known to both Canadian and US authorities. On at least four occasions he traveled to the US, according to US law enforcement officials. What he did there is still unknown.

Martin Couture-Rouleau was apparently an average young Quebecois until about 18 months ago when he allegedly converted to Islam and "became radicalized". In June this year his family contacted the RCMP, who met with Rouleau, and on three more occasions over the next three months. Rouleau joined 90 other potential Canadian 'jihadis' on a 'high risk traveller' list and in July had his passport confiscated at the airport as he attempted to fly to Turkey. On Monday last, he waited in a parking lot for 2 hours before using his car to run down two Canadian Forces members, killing Warrant Officer Patrice Vincent.

In the weeks preceding the attacks, ISIL released a statement via its 'glossy magazine' Dabiq (like al-Aaeda's Inspire magazine) where potential jihadi subscribers were told:
'If you can kill a disbelieving American or European - especially the spiteful and filthy French - or an Australian, or a Canadian, or any other disbeliever from the disbelievers waging war, including the citizens of the countries that entered into a coalition against the Islamic State, then rely upon Allah, and kill him in any manner or way however it may be. Smash his head with a rock, or slaughter him with a knife, or run him over with your car."
You have been warned. If you see a radicalized Western jihadi with a rock in the vicinity of your head, be sure to contact your local police department.

Asked what more police could have done, RCMP Supt. Fontaine said, "we couldn't arrest someone for thinking, for having radical thoughts. It's not a crime in Canada. Two days, and one more 'terror attack' later, thought crime is now very much on the cards in Canada:
The Canadian government indicated on Thursday that it intends to speed up proposals to toughen the country's anti-terror laws in the wake of the attack on parliament in Ottawa, including a measure that would allow "preventative detention".
Hours after the shooting in Ottawa on Wednesday, Jihadi twits were already tweeting, with one reading: 'soldiers of #Islamic_state who are everywhere around the globe [have] declared war on the coalition countries.' This is an obviously ridiculous statement given that the shooting in Ottawa clearly provides much needed justification for the Canadian military to join the attack on ISIL targets with the impassioned backing of the Canadian people.

ISIL outrageously claims a 'victory' when one of its alleged dupes kills a single Canadian soldier and, in response, receives tons of bombs dropped on it by Canadian jets. In short, ISIL appears determined to wage war on itself by providing Western warmongers with reason to bomb it (and the Middle East) back to the stone age. How's that for a savvy military strategy? But hasn't that always been the problem with the thinking of these erstwhile Muslim terrorists? Their general complaint has been that they are seriously pissed off about Western powers invading, bombing and generally meddling in their nations, especially in the Middle East. No one is going to argue with them on that one. So they know their history. Their strategy, on the other hand, is rather ill-advised. If they know that Western powers have a penchant for interfering in the Middle East on trumped up pretexts, why would they consider it a wise move to launch ineffective attacks Western targets, thereby providing their Western enemies with an apparently genuine pretext to continue invading, occupying and bombing Middle Eastern countries? It's almost as if these jihadis are silent partners in the West's 'war on terror'.
The 2006 case of the 'Liberty city seven'. Some hapless dudes who were encouraged, by the FBI, to wage a "full ground war" against the USA.
The story of these two unlikely jihadi suicide assassins must be placed in the context of North American security services' long track record of recruiting mentally unstable or naive young men and deliberately grooming them as patsies in the war on terror. Through the use of informants working for North American intelligence agencies and posing as Muslim leaders with 'contacts' and a 'plan', young, vulnerable men can be easily 'radicalized' and set up to play an unwitting role in the phony war on terror. In addition to manipulation of the vulnerable, Western Intel agencies also prepare for phony terror attacks with 'drills' that usually predict the real act with uncanny accuracy. From the London bombings in 2005 to the Boston bombings in 2013 and now to Canada where it has been revealed that the CSIS has been planning for the "precise scenario" that unfolded this week.

With a "preventative detention" (thought crime) law soon to be on the Canadian law books, CSIS etc. will undoubtedly be able to streamline the manufactured terrorism process, allowing them to produce many more such patsies on demand for the financial benefit of the Canadian and global 'elite'.

So Harper and the warmongers have their draconian 'thought crime' legislation in the bag, but why are they so hell-bent on bombing ISIL that they would manufacture two 'terror attacks' to justify it? The obvious answer is oil and gas. As Russia retook its rightful place among the major economic powers over the last 14 years, realpolitik entered the equation and China realised that it was much safer and cheaper to source oil and gas from Russia, its neighbor, than Canada, a country aligned with the Anglo-American empire, antagonistic towards China, and separated from China by thousands of miles of ocean. By participating in the renewed attack on Iraq and Syria, Canada hopes to help secure the Middle East for the Western elite and prevent both Russia and China from becoming the new center of global power, primarily by way of control over most of the world's energy resources. The manufacture of 'radicalized' Western jihadis and their use in manipulated 'terror attacks' in Western nations appears to be central to that goal.