How very easy it was to scoff at them, as many did, as some still do.

The Toronto 18: hapless wannabe terrorists. Couldn’t even organize a one-car tailgate party much less take Parliament hostage and behead the prime minister.

Those were but boastful aspirations, bravado stories they told each other whilst training in the woods, like weekend paintball warriors.

Nonsensical plans they revealed to an RCMP informant who — defence lawyers argued — may have nudged them towards grandiose plotting.

“Amateur does not equal not being dangerous,” that undercover operative, Mubin Shaikh, stresses, more than a decade on. “We’ve seen more than enough in the past 10 years to show what kind of damage a perceived bumbling idiot can actually do.

“So, people can remain in their denial. They were in denial 10 years ago. But seeing what’s happening with ISIS and everything else, I would hope that people would have a few more wits about themselves.’’

It doesn’t take an explosive or a suicide bomber or bristling weaponry to wreck havoc, as we were reminded once again over the weekend, with terrorist attacks in London, hardly a fortnight removed from the horror of Manchester — 22 killed, dozens more injured. And all they were doing was attending an Ariana Grande concert. Sometimes a vehicle aimed at strolling pedestrians is enough. An eight-inch knife wielded by a purposeful assailant, like the blade that stabbed an officer to death, among five killed, at Westminster in March. Go forth and rampage, ISIS — also known as Daesh and Islamic State — has urged. And too many delusional miscreants have obeyed.

The Toronto 18 long pre-dated ISIS, spawned by an earlier generation of ideological mass-murderers.

Fahim Ahmad, leader of the cabal — he surprisingly pled guilty — was yet again denied his application for parole. The parole hearing took place May 26 and a decision was rendered that day; the board’s written reasons for the decision were released last week.

A husband and father, Ahmad was no impressionable recruit, no marginalized young man playing terrorism dress-up, all hat and no horse.

In convicting him on three terrorism charges, delivering a 16-year sentence, Justice John Sproat cut to the quick of the thing. “I reject the argument that Ahmad was a hapless fanatic who posed no risk,” he wrote in his judgment.

“Ahmad throughout was explicit in discussing the political, religious and ideological objectives of the group. Their actions were motivated by interpretation of Islam which required an attack upon the near enemy, including the Canadian military and Parliament. The purpose was to intimidate the public and politicians in order to secure a change in government and policy and the release of Muslim prisoners.”

Ahmad, 32, remains one of those prisoners, at least until his sentence expires next Jan. 24. It is unusual in Canada for a felon to be kept behind bars beyond his statutory date (after two-thirds of the sentence has been served). And Ahmad is a first-time offender.

At the hearing, the parole panel was presented with documentation actually favourable to Ahmad: A psychological “extremism” assessment that deduced him to be a moderate to low-moderate risk to commit another terrorism-related offense; the proposal that Ahmad would better benefit from non-institutional (outside prison) intervention “targeting thought distortions, beliefs, ideologies, attitudes and attributions that promote jihad.” Further, limiting his Internet access.

While behind bars, Ahmad has not been a problem inmate. “Overall, your behaviour is described as respectful and you have apparently used your time while incarcerated to make some positive changes in your life.”

He has a supportive family. The Salvation Army had agreed to let him reside at one of their community-based facilities. An imam had agreed to provide one-on-one counseling.

And yet the two-member parole panel said no.

Distilled to its essence, the parole board viewed dimly — dubiously — Ahmad’s assertions that he’d changed his view about terrorism. “When challenged by the Board that you appeared to minimize your role and misstate the aim of your terrorist group to the psychologist (training to fight overseas, as opposed to admission to the Board . . . of an intent to use terror to change Canada’s policy on troop deployments to Afghanistan), you equivocated between the two positions to the point that it became unclear which one you truly believed, leading the Board to conclude that you were telling the Board and the psychologist what you felt at the time each wanted to hear.

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

“This indicated a continuation of your ability to use deception and manipulation to further your own ends, consistent with your offense cycle.”

Further, Ahmad claimed to have finally got around to reading the Qur’an and now would like to fight against the scourge of ISIS. “You admitted . . . that now you are prepared to fight against ISIS, showing the Board that you are still very involved in the same mindset as you were when this began, noting simply that you have just changed sides.”

Still minimizing, still exculpating, still blaming the informant for entrapment.

“There were multiple attempts to talk him out of it,” Shaikh told the Star on the weekend, “discussions on how they were under surveillance, an actual surveillance camera that was pulled out of an exit sign. Did any of those things make him stop or slow down? No it didn’t. I’m forced to conclude that he was committed 100 per cent to his cause.”

The conundrum arises from a country that talks a lot about counter-radicalization but has done just about nothing to put imam counseling in place in prisons or hire Muslim chaplains.

“The catch-22 is that they have no specific programs for incarcerated terrorists,” says Shaikh, who now works as a terrorism consultant, mostly in the U.S. “So, because he didn’t obtain any counseling the board says, well, you haven’t had any counseling. That’s one thing. The other side of it is the larger question of how is he going to land in the new environment in which he’ll find himself? The fact that he continues to blame the agent in the case tells you a lot. It tells you that he will fall back into the usual tropes.” And yet Shaikh is a strong believer in de-radicalization as an antidote for those, like Ahmad, who fell in thrall to jihad terrorism.

“Absolutely. It’s a case-by-case basis. But, number one, where a person shows they want to change and, number two, where they receive appropriate care and counseling. Then there’s a very good chance of rehabilitation.”

Shaikh is skeptical about Ahmad’s epiphany, however.

“He hasn’t even shown remorse for his actions. There’s no guilt, just guilt for being caught.

“His particular case — he doesn’t show a lot of promise.”

But he’ll walk out of prison free and clear and un-monitored in eight months.

Rosie DiManno usually appears Monday, Wednesday, Friday and Saturday.

Read more about: