It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: babybunnies
To call this a terrorist attack just because a couple of soldiers got run over is a complete over reaction, typical of the ridiculousness over terrorism right now.
His dad, Gilles Rouleau, called police this past summer, concerned his son wanted to join ISIS. A Twitter profile under the name @AhmadRouleau is adorned with the ISIS flag. Last month, ISIS spokesman Muhammad Al-Adnani called on followers to kill Canadians and others by various means including to "slaughter him with a knife, or run him over with your car."
originally posted by: SLAYER69
a reply to: AccessDenied
Excuse me I'm trying to make some sense here.
So according you a 'Terrorist attack' has to only be religiously motivated/affiliated? I'm asking because you've interjected a fair bit of information about his religious beliefs/association or how it may or may not be extensive enough or something to the effect.
I haven't mentioned religious radical groups etc etc etc
But I will NOT judge him based on his religious belief no matter how radical because that is why people connect terrorism with Islam and I refuse to fuel that fire
Couldn't an average 'Joe' carry out a terror attack?
I see a guy hell bent on revenge for a wrong done to him personally that teetered his sanity to the brink
What harm was done to him?
Would that wrong be justification enough to run down [killing one] two people?