Quebec City shooting; political

[Dythbringer]

PM "Selfie" released a statement earlier today, while data was fluid, and not certain. Instantly saying that it was a "terrorist attack".

Yet 2 years ago when Parliament Hill had the shooter, he refused to say the word "terrorist" in his statement.

Not sure what's more sickening, the act itself, or the political pandering exhibited by our leadership.

Both are infinitely nauseating.

[Fox]

PM "Selfie" released a statement earlier today, while data was fluid, and not certain. Instantly saying that it was a "terrorist attack".

Yet 2 years ago when Parliament Hill had the shooter, he refused to say the word "terrorist" in his statement.

Not sure what's more sickening, the act itself, or the political pandering exhibited by our leadership.

I agree that I do not like him or how he deals with things but if anything could be a terrorist attack this would be one. The guy on the hill was a wannabe, he shot one man and shot at others but the tone of the day ended with him for the most part, I feel like the targeted attack on a group of people like this one is more deserving of the word. I do think that the guy in Quebec that sat in his car and waiting to run down the military guys coming out of work was more deserving of the word then the idiot on the hill.

Anyway, semantics.

The most disturbing part is the almost instantaneous push by closet racists to jump out into the mainstream with the movement down south, parallels the middle eastern anti-west movement and scares the crap out of me, we do not need this from any side.

[Bluebulldog]

but if anything could be a terrorist attack this would be one. The guy on the hill was a wannabe, he shot one man and shot at others but the tone of the day ended with him for the most part, I feel like the targeted attack on a group of people like this one is more deserving of the word.

With the exception that the parliament hill shooter was radicalized, and Muslim. He had know associations with other radical and terrorist organizations online.

Last night's shooter for all appearances was white, and non-muslim. What would the motivations be? With the possible exception of anger at a province that seems to pander to certain special interest groups. What if the recent shooter simply has mental illness?

My point is that our PM seems to be very quick to use the word where it might not be applicable, but politically convenient, since he seems to have a special relationship with those of the Muslim faith ( see Aga Khan), yet where evidence can clearly show that it was an attack motivated by Radical Islamic ideology, he refuses to use the word.

[Fox]

With the exception that the parliament hill shooter was radicalized, and Muslim. He had know associations with other radical and terrorist organizations online.

I think they dispelled that he actually had radical ties, he had been booted out of a few mosques though because he was nuts and he was actually talked to by the police about that due to his radical views being shared by the Imam.

Ya, they just released the name, white guy, said to have views linked to France's ultra right.

[73hunter]

What?

More people in the US are killed by toddlers every year than Muslim extremists.

In the US in 2016 there were 476 mass shooting, 476, almost all of them are home grown white Christian males.

The US ban does nothing, it does not even ban anyone from the countries where the 911 hijackers came from. The mass shootings in the US are from US citizens and mainly white males.

Thank you Fox, well said. The statistics seem to confirm that Americans have far more to fear from each other than Islamic extremists. With that said, I'm not sure how many Americans understand that or care to. And I'm no lefty but I always prefer to base things on facts and truth.

[skypilot]

Thank you Fox, well said. The statistics seem to confirm that Americans have far more to fear from each other than Islamic extremists. With that said, I'm not sure how many Americans understand that or care to.

So you advocate for the US not having a travel ban and better vetting of people coming to the US? Which was the general referenced topic Fox and I were having which you just referenced.

I remember two "refugees" coming to America and settling in Bowling Green Kentucky in 2009. One of those, Ramadan Alwan's fingerprints were found on a cordless phone base wired to a roadside IED in Bayji Iraq that we dug up in 2005.

He came in under refugee asylum because he claimed he feared persecution back home.
If I remember, that caused a 6 month US ban until vetting was tightened.

Many M.E. countries have governments that promote terrorism and lie and/or provide false references to people attempting to enter the US or have those governments have no worthwhile records to provide.

In addition, conditions in the M.E. are fluid and threat levels change. What a toddler or even a lone wolf terrorist does inside the US or has done in the US has absolutely nothing of relevance to do with a sovereign nation enacting a travel ban to stop terrorist entry.

Canada's leadership should look at the US and take advantage of that past experience, whether good or bad and prosper from it rather than make a hypocritical display of virtue and take selfies.

Anyway have any comment about the actual hate crime/terrorist act in Quebec City?

[73hunter]

Well SkyPilot let me say...

I do support the idea that America is owned by Americans, period. And if a majority of Americans want a ban I guess it's their right to do.
But facts will remain facts and the ones that Fox posted earlier about the origin of the recent US mass shooting perpetrators speak for themselves. Facts seem to matter less everywhere we look these days.

On Quebec, not much to be said that hasn't already, except perhaps "HANG him HIGH"

[bardern]

To throw this out there. how much do you think do Quebec's language laws lend to fanning these racial fires? Remember the "Ethnic Vote" supposedly cost Leveque the referendum.

[skypilot]

As an true outsider with zero background in anything Quebec and based only on visits with numerous random acquaintances there....

The words that comes to mind as I replay previous conversations, is summed up as their view is government forced encroachment.

They seem to feel their heritage(language, religion, status and majority)is being threatened. Those are my words describing what I hear them telling me.
They were however somewhat cautious and reserved with me as an anglophone (I guess) until they realized I was American and then very friendly and open.(maybe they saw me as a temporary novelty)

Anyway, they are not unlike friends in La. If they like you or something they like you or that thing, if not they are somewhat unmovable.

They seemed fiercely independent, loyal to themselves and I don't see that as bad in the context of "Canadianism."

So, it appears to me to be that they feel further marginalized with another special interest group being forced into their "world."

One in particular was particularly proud to be Canadian and would be considered "right wing" although I suspect he was no Conservative and likely not even a liberal voter.

No doubt there is resentment on several topics in Quebec.

[trimmer21]

I'm not buying that this was a "terrorist" attack. I'm particularly concerned that politicians and the media were so quick to jump all over this without any reliable information calling it such. What started out being reported as a full-blown terrorist attack by two gunmen with full-auto weapons has disintegrated into one attack by a home-grown whack job taking advantage of vulnerable,kind,decent people when they would least expect something like this to happen to them. It leaves a sick feeling in the pit of one's stomach that society has collapsed into such despicable acts by the deranged. No amount of gun control laws will ever stop these attacks from happening because the mentally ill and the criminal element simply ignore them. People with a shred of intelligence already know that....or they should.