The Nation Says "Duh"

Blind Nationalism is a bad thing in itself.  On the flip side of that, I think that some nationalistic pride is understandable in this case.  Unfortunately, in the land of fast-track immigration practices, a blow is currently being dealt.  If left unchecked, it threatens the Canadian way of life right to its core.

By now most people have heard about Chiheb Esseghaier.  He's the Via Rail terror plot suspect.  He's also having trouble finding a lawyer who will use the Qur'an or its precepts to judge his alleged attempted actions.

Let me start off by saying that I have a list of issues with this premise!  First and foremost, we are in Canada.  Although I think that some of our Charter (of Rights and Freedoms) are too permissive, nowhere in the Charter is there any provision that covers using some other code or rule of law to judge the alleged attempted terrorist actions of a person on Canadian soil.  In no other country with a democratic political system that I can think of, would anyone be seriously humouring this person.

Why is this difficult to understand?  From all outward appearances it certainly seems that his intention was to do harm against innocent Canadians and Americans simply going about their business.  Then when he is caught, supposedly in the attempt, he says that he essentially does not recognize the authority of our laws.

Well, DUH?  He has obviously displayed open contempt for all of us and for our system and only identifies his own beliefs as valid.  I cannot be the only person who sees a problem with this. 

There is something that must be directly stated: I have no interest in discussing religion at this time because it is positively a super-tanker sized vat of worms!  I am no authority on the subject so my opinion regarding religion is my own, for now.  Other than that, whatever its origin, the Canadian system of jurisprudence is secular today.

What about non-Canadian systems of law?  As far as I know, there is no country that I could go to, allegedly attempt to commit a terrorist act and then, upon being foiled in my attempt, reject the laws of the land I potentially acted against and ASK to be judged according to exclusively Canadian laws because I believe they are more virtuous or valid, regardless of the fact that those laws could be in conflict with the laws of the hypothetically attacked nation. 

With so many twists and turns it sounds like the definition of insanity, yet I do not believe Esseghaier is insane at all.  Honestly, I think he believes that what he allegedly attempted to do was right!  He was, in his mind, justified because of his belief system.

It should matter to every single person in a democratic land that any belief system that advocates violence against others is not compatible with democracy in the least.  It should matter also because safety is an illusion that we have all been duped into believing.  In spite of what well-intentioned law enforcement would have us all think, riddle me this: how many people share the same propensity for violence as Esseghaier, and aren't such people everywhere?

That question, though rhetorical, is an end unto itself.  Think about this instead; for any national rule of law to have strength or validity, it must apply unilaterally to all people within that nation.  If even ONE person can contest the law based on some other system, then anyone can contest the law based on any viewpoint that suits their fancy!

You tell me.  What could possibly be more terrifying than this: if we cannot use our own laws to protect ourselves from terrorist incursions, what then can we use?