American Suspecting Canadian Terrorist Plot is Sued in Canada

This article is not accusing anyone of any terrorism activities - but instead begs the question, can Canada and the U.S. take each other's citizens to court when no across-the-border speech laws have been broken?

Last week, a well-known American journalist and author, Dr. Paul L. Williams, began facing trial in a Canadian court for reporting the possibility of terrorist activity and possible terrorist plots being planned by people at McMaster University in Ontario. He is being sued for libel (some reports call it defamation).

Here's the catch - Williams went on American radio with his report, wrote his book about terrorism in America and was encouraged by Ontario Provincial Police to warn Americans of the threat. The police even confirm that McMaster University has been watched closely, long before Williams' reports, for suspected extreme terrorist activity (the University denies any terrorist plot's existence or involvement of anyone at the University).

Yet, Williams is standing trial in Toronto, stripped of his American U.S. Constitution rights, and Canada's law states that the person accused of offending someone must prove themselves innocent, rather than the accuser proving them guilty.

American "mainstream" media is of course not reporting this, but the news can be found currently on many progressive and independent websites. A blurb about the libel suit is in a 2008 Huffington Post article, but no trial was yet set at that time. The most official-looking current website article I can find is at the Northeast Intelligence Network, which links itself as http://homelandsecurityus.com.

Can't - or won't - the U.S. government help?
The NAFTA trade agreement between the United States and Canada could be making the across-the-border lawsuit possible and tying American hands. In the 1994 NAFTA agreement, all trade barriers were eliminated. This is an example of what broad, non-descript language in a bill can do. There is no mention of making journalists or any other business fair game for libel in each other's countries when they break no foreign law - yet it is now happening.

Williams' problems started when he traveled to McMaster University in an attempt to confirm part of the 9/11 Commission's report that there was terrorist activity suspected there; then he came back to America and reported it, never violating a Canadian law.

According to a report by nocompromisemedia, The U.S. House and Senate are both trying to come up with Free Speech Protection laws to prevent across-the-border lawsuits from happening simply because someone is offended by what a person from another country says. It is not yet known whether this type of law could protect Americans from Americans in our new upcoming hate speech crime structure. But I would suspect it would have its bad side--Americans may be rendered powerless against Hitler-type speech from other countries.

As of this writing, Williams' fate remains in the hands of a Canadian court.

This writer is not receiving any remuneration or compensation from the Sources listed below; nor does it necessarily reflect the other reporters' opinions:

Sources:
-No Compromise Media: http://nocompromisemedia.com/2009/10/01/dr-paul-williams-goes-on-trial-in-canadian-court/.
-Northest Intelligence Network: Canadian court takes aim at U.S. author - http://homelandsecurityus.com/?p=3154.
-Wikipedia on Paul L. Williams: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_L._Williams.
-Newsmax Report: http://news.newsmax.com/?ZKCvaYGu1P1Dj3s5CYWTj2YKkxbetfR1Z.
-Russ Wellen, "Terrorists crossing the border-Genuine threat or hard-right ploy to end immigration?" Feb. 2008, Huffington Post http://www.huffingtonpost.com/russ-wellen/terrorists-crossing-the-b_b_86045.html?show_comment_id=11410013.