Terror attack in Canada

a reply to: Ridhya

This has nothing to do with Harper. Or politics.
As a liberal voter I feel the need to wipe the people that hate me and my country off the map. No matter what our contribution is. Canadians are nice people until you threaten us.
Call it the new Liberal. f# them, drop Jdams, they hate me, they hate you/ Done deal.

a reply to: canucks555
Vaporize them, with the help of our allies/ Who they've threatened as well. ISIS aka radical Islam is hated across the board now. You can blame ISIS for that scum bags that everyone wants to bomb.)

a reply to: canucks555
Violence didnt solve anything in Iraq or Afghanistan. We made everything worse and created more terrorists than there were to begin with. In fact, that is what eventually led me to this site. I never believed in conspiracies until the news said we had killed 45,000 Taliban, when they had originally said there were 30,000. And that was in 2006.

Anyhow, having this vicious "exterminate them" mentality is a poison. We cant claim we're better than them while promoting the same ideas they do.

Its not our problem to solve. Its on middle easterners to choose their own destiny and deal with the problem. Besides, we have enough problems with homelessness, unemployment, corrupt government that we shouldnt be spending money elsewhere.

originally posted by: Ridhya
a reply to: SLAYER69

I think what people are wary of here is the word, not the act. Terrorism is a word of pure manipulation, and its used to incite fear, to make people easier to control.

So, in essence, out of FEAR that it will be used to manipulate or control people the word usage should be avoided as to avoid the potential for it being used to incite other types of fear?

What makes one thing an act of terror and one violent act "normal"? Its absurd. Remember the south park episode about hate crimes? 'Are not all acts of violence crimes of hate?' Well, are not ALL violent act 'terrorizing' the victim?

Yet, both types happen. Calling one a hate crime and avoiding calling or identifying the true nature of the other does not seem logical.

But really, you dont know Harper like we do, he is just a traitorous, manipulative prick, and at best he is exploiting this for political gain

True, you're right, I may not be Canadian but having a crooked politician in office is universal and isn't something uniquely Canadian.

a reply to: SLAYER69
It sounds ironic when you say it! Its kind of ironic that showcasing terrorism to make people so terrified that they support war is terrorising people to make them afraid of terrorists. lol.

Thats really my point - I dont want people to get sucked into (AGAIN) Harper's warmongering and money-funneling into things we have no business being in. I could write a book on his personal bs alone.

We're all being sucked into another war and they're trying harder since the word campaign against syria failed. The US machine is saying "there actually WERE wmd in Iraq" as a way of justifying in people's minds the THIRD invasion of Iraq. They're trying so desperately to destroy the lack of credibility by parading around unrelated things - but as has been pointed out in many other threads, the old wmd were never in doubt. The justification was in alleged new chemical labs, and the media today is deliberately collating the two, to persuade people it was justified.

When we were watching a movie my filmmaker friend said something so applicable to the whole ISIS situation - "when you want to quickly establish a new character's power, you introduce him and have him dispose of an established powerful character". Just like how ISIS was apparently too extremist for Al Quaeda...

This whole mess just reeks of psychological warfare

originally posted by: Ridhya
a reply to: SLAYER69
It sounds ironic when you say it! Its kind of ironic that showcasing terrorism to make people so terrified that they support war is terrorising people to make them afraid of terrorists.

But, terrorism exists and is very real.

lol

No comment.

Thats really my point - I dont want people...

I think the 'People' should be given the information to make up their own minds, otherwise deciding what the people should think is manipulation in itself and is the very thing that's being supposedly railed against.

No?

We're all being sucked into another war and they're trying harder since the word campaign against syria failed. The US machine is saying "there actually WERE wmd in Iraq" as a way of justifying in people's minds the THIRD invasion of Iraq. They're trying so desperately to destroy the lack of credibility by parading around unrelated things - but as has been pointed out in many other threads, the old wmd were never in doubt. The justification was in alleged new chemical labs, and the media today is deliberately collating the two, to persuade people it was justified

I quoted the whole paragraph, You've made some good observations. This does not however deal with home grown terrorists who killed people locally. A separation of the two here is warranted. There are people in the West who will carry out acts of terrorism. Whether they be based on religious beliefs or Political. Makes no difference.

When we were watching a movie my filmmaker friend said

Fact follows fiction, I get it, Sometimes though, a storyline's premise is based on reality too. Not all in filmmaking and storytelling is fictional. Reality has it's own storyline.

This whole mess just reeks of psychological warfare

Agreed, seems though that in an attempt to avoid one possible situation some are willing to duck and cover from what's right in front of them. Instead of facing the nasty business at hand head on.

a reply to: SLAYER69
Of course people should be given facts and decide things for themselves, but here they labelled it terrorism before the facts came out. The police admitted that they didnt even know if they guy had the knife in his hands when they shot him 7 times. That is not what police are for. They dont shoot unarmed people.

Extremism is the responsibility of CSIS, not the police. And you know what they did? They let them back into Canada. They just #ing let them in.

Even though in September a CSIS agent said an event would happen. Coincidence?

People shouldnt be afraid of terrorism. They should be afraid of their government allowing terrorism.

a reply to: Ridhya

Thanks for the read, very interesting but letting them back in seems to be legal question. Should a Canadian be allowed back into his country of origin even if their religious or political views are deemed extreme?

Are you for preventing Canadians returning if the Government *Which shouldn't be trusted* says they may be a threat? The Government identified them as such, should that not be trusted?

See, there we have a legal conundrum.

If the Government prevents Canadians returning then it's obviously the evil Government violating people's rights, if the on the other hand, the Government allows them back in then it's viewed as some sort of greater evil plot for war.

Then if those Canadians are of 'Extremists' views and act out isn't it then considered a terror act? Or are we back to simply calling it a hate crime?

a reply to: SLAYER69
Well you read the articles didnt you? What do you think about this quote:

Of the 130 known travellers, only 30 are believed to have joined Islamic State. The rest are linked to other extremist organizations operating from Africa to the MiddleEast. Of those, not all are hardened fighters; some play supporting roles. The same dynamic is equally true for the 80 people who have returned to Canada.

Its not so ambiguous. Its not about religious views, they were outright known to have been involved - we're not talking about denying people for being muslim, but for actually joining or supporting deemed state enemies.

You're right, conspiracy is always a catch-22, should you believe the msm or not, only when it agrees with you? etc. My point wasnt about their credibility but their hypocrisy, they drone on about terrorism while ALLOWING people they deemed terrorists back into our country, then cry when we get attacked.

My whole point about the south park hate crime thing, is that either every crime is a hate crime/act of terror, or none are. Its just a semantic argument.

originally posted by: Ridhya

Its not so ambiguous. Its not about religious views, they were outright known to have been involved - we're not talking about denying people for being muslim, but for actually joining or supporting deemed state enemies.

Did I mention 'Being Muslim'? I wrote 'extremists' which could be anything from religious, political in nature to even hate for puppy dogs...

conspiracy is always a catch-22

Well here we agree.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts and point of view.

Possibly ongoing. Ya ya we don't know yet, how rude of me to postulate the latest attack could be terrorism.
I smell another dirty, radicalized, Islamic rat. Could be related to yesterday, yup, could very well be....

a reply to: canucks555

Here's the terrorist.



another wacky-looking religeous nut-bar. Also on the watch list.
Round them all up before more innocent Canadians are killed by their perverted beliefs.

*note: what the heck type of gun is that? Looks like a 30/30 lever action?

a reply to: all2human


No they have not won, because fear can be a motivator to action. It is a defensive mechanism that each and everyone of us has within.

In this case, that fear can be used to ensure a higher degree of vigilence in our everyday travels, as we continue the work we do.

As a security specialist, my proverbial 'spidey senses' go up under these conditions.

Yes, in my opinion (and others I have spoken to) the actions of these "Terrorists" seemed to have motivated the majority of the Canadian population to open their eyes and see the true evil that exists out there. They seem to be finally removing the rose coloured glasses they are wearing.

Just a note to Ridhya. That those who resort to name calling and foul language typically do so because their arguments don't stand up to scrutiny. Better to use sound arguments then distastfull and irrelevent banter to make your point. This also encourages people to maybe take your point of view a little more seriously.

Just saying......

originally posted by: Ridhya
a reply to: SLAYER69

I think what people are wary of here is the word, not the act. Terrorism is a word of pure manipulation, and its used to incite fear, to make people easier to control.

What makes one thing an act of terror and one violent act "normal"? Its absurd. Remember the south park episode about hate crimes? 'Are not all acts of violence crimes of hate?' Well, are not ALL violent act 'terrorizing' the victim?

But really, you dont know Harper like we do, he is just a traitorous, manipulative prick, and at best he is exploiting this for political gain

Whoa!

Harper is one of the best Prime Ministers in Canadian history. He and the Conservative party have won numerous elections - the Conservatives have a Majority remember - because of the support of Canadian voters. Repeatedly. And his party is likely to win another majority next year as well.

Go ahead and express your opinion, but DO NOT presume to speak for Canada or Canadians. Many, many Canadians like him. As evidenced by their votes.

You don't like him, that is obvious. But the one making this about politics is you, not Harper. He has been characteristically low key as is appropriate. The three party leaders put partisan politics aside in Parliament this week, perhaps follow their lead.

His party is likely to win another majority next year as well.

a reply to: palg1
Excuse me? Where didnt I make my point, backing it up with news links even? Where did I use name calling and foul language? You're just making a straw man.


a reply to: Leonidas
Harper is absolutely the worst Prime Minister in history. He has done more to sell out our country, resources, and power to foreign interests (primarily the US and China) and bends over to the will of them. He's now sucking us into another war without popular support. Go figure.

Peruse this site before making fallacious statements and look up what he's done to our protected parks across Canada. Look up his policy on selling our crude and buying it back refined.
How is he not making this about politics again? He's making a Patriot Act as we speak.

Ball's in your court.

a reply to: Ridhya


The state of the economy and the repeated will of the voters would disagree with you.

a reply to: Leonidas
Hm why did he get re-elected, besides his electoral fraud and spending millions on attack ads..?

Everyone is just so happy with Harper's foreign workers. At least they get more profit for the corporations, right?

originally posted by: Leonidas



Harper is one of the best Prime Ministers in Canadian history.

That might eb a stretch but he has done a decent job.

the Conservatives have a Majority remember - because of the support of Canadian voters.

Well, the truth is it was with the support of just 25% of people who voted and 20% of actual eligible voters. That really isn't a ringing endorsement.

And his party is likely to win another majority next year as well.

I've wagered on him getting a Minority this next time but there's still time for it to go either way at this point. His response and Canadians acceptance of his reactions to the recent attacks might be the make or break point for him. Most polls prior to the attacks( and we all know how reliable polls can be ) showed the Liberals with between 7 and 10 points ahead of the Conservatives. None have been released since the attacks though, so that could change due to it.

Honestly, I see these attacks playing a huge role in the upcoming elections. Maybe more so than any other issue.

originally posted by: GAOTU789

Well, the truth is it was with the support of just 25% of people who voted and 20% of actual eligible voters. That really isn't a ringing endorsement.

And the other parties received even less.

They received more than any other party. Granted the current FPTP voting may not be everyone's favourite method of electing officials but it is the system that all the Parties are operating under.

Since the NDP support is largely based in only one Province and the Liberals are still recovering from their last catastrophe and only have about 30 seats, I think it is likely that the Conservatives will gain another majority.