But you are aware that they found significant.... Here's the challenge I have with, I'm going to say, the underplaying of what happened at Coutts: the intention to murder RCMP officers, the stashes of weapons found and the pipe bombs.
I'll reference an interaction I had with somebody based on intelligence, because this really is about quality of intelligence and the bias that remains in policing. There was a notation about ISIS as potentially being a threat, without any reference to Christian dominionism, to white supremacy and to the growing militia movements that we have here. Why is it that the language of terrorism is only prescribed to people of colour, to religious minorities, and is never rightly identified with what I deem to be one of the greatest threats in this country, quite frankly, which is ethnonationalism and white supremacy?
Put another way, given what we're hearing now—that this was a cell that was taking direction from somebody—I'll put it to you in another way to give you the opportunity to perhaps revisit your answer: How does that not meet the definition of a traditional terror cell?