CHAND OPPOSED TERRORISM - TORONTO 18

FROM: http://www.nationalpost.com/related/topics/Chand+opposed+extremism+lawyer+says/3129574/story.html


Steven Chand staunchly opposed the extremist ideology espoused by "Toronto 18" ringleader Fahim Ahmad, openly challenging and even attempting to defraud his supposed friend, a Superior Court jury heard yesterday.

During his closing address, Mr. Chand's lawyer, Michael Moon, painted Ahmad as a young man trapped in a life of "grinding tedium" who fostered delusions of grandeur, in which he became "a lion and a leader" fighting for Muslims around the world.

"Fahim Ahmad was a frog who believed he was a jihadi prince," Mr. Moon said. "He was just a frog, and Steven knew that ... Whenever Steven was exposed to Ahmad's ideas, he opposed them."

By the time Ahmad's views had crystallized into a plot to detonate bombs in downtown Toronto and storm Parliament, the jury heard, Mr. Chand-- who often confronted Ahmad on his jihadist "rants" -- had elected to keep his distance.

Ahmad pleaded guilty to terrorism charges last month, while Mr. Chand, 29, stands charged with participating in a terrorist group and counseling to commit fraud in association with that group.

Mr. Moon placed critical emphasis on the time frame in which the terrorist faction allegedly operated. The Crown suggests it was launched in 2005, culminating in a December training camp, and then continued in 2006 up until a series of arrests that spring. Mr. Moon contends the group was not officially operating until February 2006; at the time of the camp, which his client attended, he says Mr. Chand "would not, could not and did not know such a group existed."

Rather, Mr. Chand-- who helped set up an obstacle course and consulted with Ahmad about the performance of attendeees -- believed the camp in Washago, Ont., was focused on "winter survival tactics," the jury heard.

"Steven was no more than a potential recruit," Mr. Moon said, noting his client was not present for some of the key terror-related activities, such as handgun training or Ahmad's infamous "fall of Rome" speech, in which he called for the destruction of western society.

"[Mr. Chand was] off smoking a joint," Mr. Moon suggested, pointing to testimony from star Crown witness Mubin Shaikh about how Mr. Chand frequently went for walks in the woods. When he came back from these sojourns, "his eyes were red and he would be hungry," the jury heard.

At no point was Mr. Chand involved in the "jihadist aspects" of the camp, Mr. Moon said, nor was he a part of Ahmad's "inner circle," as the Crown has suggested.

Because Mr. Chand and Ahmad differed in their political views, Mr. Moon said, they drifted further apart in the weeks after the camp.

"[Ahmad was] critical and mocking of Steven for his peaceable and non-jihadist ways," Mr. Moon asserted, noting Mr. Chand ultimately decided he wanted nothing to do with Ahmad.

Mr. Chand would later contact Ahmad about a moneymaking scheme, which the Crown alleges was a means of funding the terrorist group. But Mr. Moon contends his client was actually out to defraud Ahmad and split the proceeds with another friend; the scheme never got off the ground.

Mr. Chand is being jointly tried with Asad Ansari, who is also accused of participating in the homegrown terror cell. The Crown will close its case today, with the jury expected to begin deliberations next week.

TORONTO 18 CASE - UPDATED MAY, 2010 - TESTIMONY ENDS FOR SHAIKH

In light of the unnecessarily hostile and misleading Wikipedia entry on myself, Mubin Shaikh, I submit that I have found Wikipedia and other web-based knowledge constructs to be subject to many enormities of factual distortion and even disinformation as Wikipedia operates according to the principle of "verifiability" not "accuracy". This means if somebody wrote it somewhere, you can quote it.

This rule has allowed for the article under "Mubin Shaikh" to cloud the issue as to what is truly important for the public to know. Rather, it reads more as a tabloid posting that I am unable to properly respond to given the slavish desire to protect the integrity of our (relatively) fair and balanced adversarial system, I would want to inhibit the accused from getting a fair shaikh. :)

In regards to my understanding of the publication ban, I have not included any evidence that is not already in the public sphere on this "blog". We live in an age where information (and access to it) abounds. We have debates over how much of it can be policed and which part(s) of it may be subject to state regulation vis-a-vis the internet. Only recently has the journalist bar of ethical reporting been "adjusted" and only then by Supreme Court intervention. Therefore, any information released thus far is with the intention to be acting in the public interest and in the interest of "truth" as it relates to events surrounded this case.


UPDATE: Fahim Ahmed plead guilty on y May 3, 2010 but the press was allowed to report on this development only today (Monday May 10, 2010). This leaves only two others remaining. The trial is expected to conclude in the very near future. According to the stated ideals of our justice system, the accused are assumed innocent until proven guilty.


OTHER SOURCES ON THE TORONTO 18 CASE

As to "Unfair Dealing - The Toronto Homegrown Terror Threat" by Josh Weingarten, the facts as they stand in the case developments thus far (convictions and guilty pleas) refute the overwhelming majority of the documentary's criticism against the case. The skepticism expressed is not a reasonable one but rather, extreme.

So also, "The Toronto 18 Frame-Up" by Prof. Keefer, an alumni of Kingston Military College and Professor of English at Guelph University. He is a specialist in Renaissance literature and early modern philosophy, having published widely on contemporary cultural and political issues.

I suggest that Prof. Keefer has put the cart before the horse by way of circular reasoning and has being determined from the outset to fit the Toronto 18 case into preconceived notions that are steeped in conspiracy theories. Again, developments in the case thus far have rendered the overwhelming majority of his narrative; fiction.

Thank you,

Mubin Shaikh