Terror attack in Canada

a reply to: canucks555

I don't doubt for a moment he was a homegrown terrorist. My suspicion lies with Harper answering a direct question about it so soon afterwards in the House. That's some strange stuff for anyone that follows Canadian politics. Harper doesn't usually even acknowledge questions and lets Ministers, Junior Ministers, Parliamentary Secretaries or back benchers give the obtuse non-answers for him.

a reply to: GAOTU789

That got my hackles up as well.

a reply to: samsamm9

Saffron terror

"Ajmer Dargah attack
Main article: Ajmer Dargah attack
The Ajmer Dargah blast occurred on 11 October 2007, outside the Dargah (shrine) of Sufi saint Moinuddin Chishti in Ajmer, Rajasthan, India allegedly by the Hindutva organization Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh and its groups.[44] On 22 October 2010, five accused, of which four allegedly belonging to the Hindu nationalist group Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh were arrested in connection with the blast.[45] CNN-IBN has reported that it was Home Minister Sushilkumar Shinde who forced Bhavesh Patel to implicate Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) chief Mohan Bhagwat and senior leader Indresh Kumar in the terrorist strike.[46] It is also reported that other senior Congress ministers and leaders were also involved.[

a reply to: GAOTU789

Harper is always always always electioneering. Why do you think he spent 5 million on promoting what he was doing for veterans instead of just forwarding that same funding to improve services to them? He was briefed pretty quickly though, so kudos on that aspect of it. Perhaps he does want people to be vigilant, let's say, or else he wanted his party to address the topic instead of allowing the opposition parties to do that. Always the strategist, I'll bet you a case of 24 on the latter.

a reply to: aboutface
Public support for invading Iraq has been faltering, you can bet hes capitalising on this event. Hence the odd behaviour. "Never waste a crisis" eh...

Harper needs to stop bankrupting us with other people's wars and then paying it off by selling our resources out to the Chinese. Iran and Russia are sending troops there, let them handle it...

Harper needs to go to jail for taking us to war with Iraq,Libya and Syria, without our consent ,ruining our legacy of being a peaceful nation
and this attack is a direct result..

Looks like a " lone wolf " type of attack that ISIS has been calling for. ...I'm glad the cops shot him. ...making the world a better place , one less terrorist at a time!

We are not immune in Canada and for that matter are far to lenient with Muslims in General for fear of being seen as bigots...but it is a real problem and is growing. We are a country that encourages people to stay separate not assimilate into our Canadian culture and ideals...we can thank our dip # prime minister Trudeau for multi culturalism and other "great" ideas he had in the 70's and 80's.
These extremist groups exist and are thriving in places like Toronto and Montreal ..it's only a question of time until we are in the same boat as Britain and France with these religious zealots after all it's not a sin to kill an infidel.

originally posted by: parker
We are not immune in Canada and for that matter are far to lenient with Muslims in General for fear of being seen as bigots...but it is a real problem and is growing. We are a country that encourages people to stay separate not assimilate into our Canadian culture and ideals...we can thank our dip # prime minister Trudeau for multi culturalism and other "great" ideas he had in the 70's and 80's.
These extremist groups exist and are thriving in places like Toronto and Montreal ..it's only a question of time until we are in the same boat as Britain and France with these religious zealots after all it's not a sin to kill an infidel.

You better watch your back, then...as anyone who is not Muslim is an Infidel ! ...and yes it is a big problem , and becoming bigger.

I'm not surprised Harper spoke of this right way. The government was probably waiting for signs of backlash after making the decision to send planes to fight ISIS. It only makes sense that something like that would draw the crazies out of the wood work.

If this is the best they can do, I'm not too worried.

What concerns me more is the real criminals, through incompetence and greed ruin the environment and ruin lives everyday all over the world - the greedy, negligent, short-sighted corporations.

Quebec oil spill

Holy hell people, the police's job is to ARREST people, not shoot them. At the very LEAST, shoot to incapacitate, not kill.

The police said they didnt even know if the knife had been in his hands! And they shot him SEVEN times! Now they cant even interrogate him and find out what he was doing. Maybe they like it that way, dead men tell no tales.

When I first read this story on a local news site, I had to give my head a shake. To use the words " Terrorist attack" here in Canada is almost unfathomable. Then after reading the entire article, I could not piece together how the words related to the incident. After reading this thread, I still can't. That broad term, TERRORIST ATTACK has now invaded the borders of my country, for whatever reason Harper was persuaded, and though I may not have much political knowledge of what goes on in Parliament at any given time, or the proper procedures, it does seem odd that the Prime Minister was not shocked at the news of the incident, nor questioned the label of "terrorism". So because of what this young persons beliefs were, or had changed to in the past year, and because of who he targeted, we are now able to label the incident as terrorism, and the police are within their rights to shoot him 7 times? I cannot help but think of the Moncton shooting, and wonder why that differed so much in police action? A deliberate act against the RCMP, a manhunt,a city shut down for days, citizens on high alert, and he gets arrested and allowed to speak on his own behalf , no matter how askew his state of mind or his religious beliefs or lack thereof. No matter how you slice it, this story STINKS to high hell.

a reply to: babybunnies
a reply to: PlanetXisHERE
a reply to: AccessDenied

What?

Not the correct type of victims?

The incident was not violent enough?

There wasn't enough people harmed, maimed or killed?

Not enough "extremists" involved carrying out the vehicular attack?

Not the 'Right type' or means of activity to be considered a terrorist attack?



I'm not Canadian, but I see a good amount of near superhuman mental gymnastics in an attempt to avoid the possibility of this being a terrorist act. Yes, I wrote "Possibility" because the original title of this thread was posted as "Possible Terror attack in Canada" which was later changed to simply read "Terror attack in Canada"

I'd like to know why the OP felt the need to change the title?

Also, just out of curiosity, What in your opinions would constitute a 'Terror attack in Canada'

originally posted by: SLAYER69
a reply to: babybunnies
a reply to: PlanetXisHERE
a reply to: AccessDenied

What?

Not the correct type of victims?

The incident was not violent enough?

There wasn't enough people harmed, maimed or killed?

Not enough "extremists" involved carrying out the vehicular attack?

Not the 'Right type' or means of activity to be considered a terrorist attack?

ALL OF THE ABOVE.

I'm not Canadian, but I see a good amount of near superhuman mental gymnastics in an attempt to avoid the possibility of this being a terrorist act. Yes, I wrote "Possibility" because the original title of this thread was posted as "Possible Terror attack in Canada" which was later changed to simply read "Terror attack in Canada"

I'd like to know why the OP felt the need to change the title?

Also, just out of curiosity, What in your opinions would constitute a 'Terror attack in Canada'

I believe originally news sources posted their own titles as "Possible" Terror attack, and it was later changed as new information came to light. Hence why the OP is changed.
This is only my opinion, as a Canadian. The words, TERRORIST, TERRORIST ATTACK, may be common place to those living in the US since 9/11. Not so here. We don't think about it, focus on it, or fear it. It doesn't make our headlines on a daily basis within our own borders. When I read this story, yes, I take it with a heavy dose of skepticism. ONE PERSON, committing an act such as this, denotes a mental health issue to me, not a " Terrorist" issue. Even elsewhere in the world, who has ever heard of a "Terrorist hit and run while wielding a knife"? I can't help but laugh even as I type that because it sounds so absurd.What would constitute a terrorist attack to me? Likely similar to what happens in other parts of the world, but with a group claiming responsibility, for a cause. We will never know for sure if this person went "radical" or those are just ass covering claims. That is why I brought up the Moncton shooting. A premeditated, deliberate act, and he is still alive. So to attack RCMP without claiming it to be on radical religious grounds, is worthy of arrest and trial...but to attack others on the grounds of religion/ political beliefs that differ from the norm here will get you shot on site multiple times? Perhaps it is simply the difference between police forces that led to this, but because the perpetrator is dead we only have the "official story" to go on. Would this still be labelled a terrorist act if the person claimed to worship the devil? Likely not.

a reply to: babybunnies

How inane, truly, the man is a suspected radical Muslim who intentionally ran over two Western military personnel in Canada. What do you call that?

I swear, some people truly show their dull side, opting to resort to being politically correct as the thought of reality where a certain group of people are indeed out to cause harm is either distasteful to their point of view or too frightening.

originally posted by: AccessDenied
Even elsewhere in the world, who has ever heard of a "Terrorist hit and run while wielding a knife

The guy intentionally runs over two people with an automobile *wielding a knife or not, is besides the point. Is it possible that had he other means in which to inflict harm he would have used it?

Intentionally running people over is a pretty direct act. Also back to his knife, it wasn't what most consider a simple pocket knife.

off the top of my head a terrorist attack is the intent/act of killing on a mass scale
this was not a terrorist attack.