Peter F

So you again admit there is no evidence worthy of a courtroom against any Khadr's. I would say thats why they (and for that matter you or me) have never been put on trial for their supposed crimes. And no, I'm not dick-measuring anything: Bissonnette has been charged with 6 murders , trial forthcoming. Khadrs have been charged with nothing at all (outside of Omar) Point of order: "Medic by trade' . Big effin whoop. He wasn't wearing a uniform or appropriately marked as a medic. Nor behaving as a medic by laying down covering fire , Just like every other SF soldier is trained to do. That he was a medic by trade don't mean shit.

I see no problem. Should FOX have left the tweet naming Belkhadir up then that risked Belkhadir - who was soon to be, if not already released from police custody - subject to other possible wing nuts out for vengeance. It is also very possible that the tweet came to the governments attention when others had notified FOX that the tweet was incorrect to no avail. Good for the government in this case.

He wasn't a medic! He was Special Forces - They're all medics in the SF, for god sakes. But thats a point of order. So you admit that you have no idea how many the Khadr's have killed. Outside of the SF sgt - which the USofA tried, convicted and sentenced Omar for - you have no idea. But you suspect that one of the Khadrs might have and have the audacity to claim that your suspicions of what may be are equivalent to Bissonnette actually killing 6 Get a grip

How many people did a Khadr kill?

Ok and what was so insulting about Trudeau's tweet? That Canada welcomes refugee's when the US doesn't? Was that news to Trump? Did he feel insulted and belittled? Shall our politicians walk around on eggshell's for the sake of Trumps feelings? How PC do you want us to be?

Beats me. I'm retired. 1200/month for as long as the pension provider feels like it.

Lordy, where have you guys been for the last year? When Trump says America First he means America first; He doesn't mean an arrangement where everyones happy. When he wanted to go to Mexico to negotiate how Mexico was going to pay for his stupid wall, do you think he had Mexico's interests in mind? Not at all, he was going to arrange some sort of tariff on Mexican goods that would pay for the wall. And he was stupid enough to think - just like folks here it seems - that Mexico would agree to some bullshit deal against Mexico's interests. The Mexican president told him that he's not interested so don't even bother. When Trump seeks to negotiate Nafta he ain't coming to negotiate but to dicate. To hell with that. Sure Canada will suffer economically but so to will the USofA. There will be pressure on the Americans to stop being such asses - from Americans to boot! Have some courage folks.

So Trumps a childish twit subject to all sorts of whims and idiot resentments. So we should endeavour to seriously sit down and try to get any deal we can with such a twerp?

Yah, the presidents steps to block muslims from those middle-eastern countries really would have put the kibosh on Bissonnette shooting muslims in Quebec city. Lesson Learned!

Whats out of his control? Saying Canada welcomes refugee's ? We do! Have done for a long time. Did you miss all the stuff about Syrian refugee's? It is totally within Canada's control to welcome all sorts and the USofA has total control over not welcoming them. Does NAFTA need looking after? I thought it had all been negotiated and settled. Trump says he's gonna renegotiate it. So we'll do so. Trumps the best negotiator isn't he? He's a really great negotiator right? He won't let childish resentments over Trudeau's tweets mess things up will he? No of course not. He'll negotiate for the USofA's best interests; We'll negotiate for ours and all will be well with the world again. Trudeau's tweets won't mean shit.

Anti islamic rhetoric has certainly followed the rise of muslim violence from Muslim migrants - turning a blind eye to the rise of nationalist violence due to muslim migrants - certainly true in Europe, but how does that extrapolate to Canada? Is there a rise in muslim violence in Canada from all those tens of thousands of islamic immigrants? If there isn't any noticeable rise is muslim violence in Canada then your point only applies to Europe , not Canada . You and others have posted many times about islamic violence in Europe but cannot show that the same is happening here. The best you can do is, in the manner of Mark Steyn, propose that all those things happening in Europe will also happen here. But they haven't. Those may or may not be the punishments in Muslim lands BUT those are not the rules that apply in Canada (and they only became enlightened within the last 15 or so years, I wish to add). So whatever the laws are in other lands do not matter here, in Canada. Your contention seems to be that if we allow non-criminal muslims to immigrate here then those muslims will start killing gays or advocate for the killing of gays. Yet, with tens of thousands of Muslim immigrants already here this has not happened. Again you are ignoring what Canadian muslims haven't done and continue to claim that they will. Also ignoring all the Canadians who fought tooth and nail for years to make sure Gay people only had very limited rights in this country. Its ok that we Canadians can take part in the democratic process of arguing who should or should not have what rights when but goddamn if any muslim should take part in that process - Thats just wrong. If half the group are fine according to your broad brush, then why should the individuals of that group be denied? Does your broad brush recognize that, yes there are gays muslims in Iran that will be killed or otherwise unjustly punished if they remain but - hey, sorry - the broad brush says the individual in danger is a barbaric killer of gays? You keep saying this same argument. This is what the group is like therefor, while acknowledging there are exceptions, never mind the exceptions and don't allow anyone from that group in. True lots of Muslim nations are intolerant, or nonsecular and intolerant or don't recognize equality of the sexes or even of religion or even all of the proceeding put together! Who gives a shit? This is Canada not Saudi Arabia! We DO recognize all those things that they don't. So whats the problem? That someone wants the hell out so's they can enjoy the wonders of Canada should on no account be allowed in because they come from a barbaric and backwards country? Doesn't make any sense to me. They can come to Canada and enjoy being a muslim in a non-sharia secular land - just like the tens of thousands of muslims already here. And so can their kids and maybe even grandchildren. Oh my goodness. There's a bunch of elites and people like me that recoil in horror at the thought of your stupid broad-brush Canadian values ideas! Why, how very undemocratic. How very unfree-speech. Where do we get off being horrified by such a prospect? And they (and I) gave some consideration to that goofy idea and rejected it. I, among others, have repeatedly pointed out that such a goofy values test is applied to immigrants then why would it not be applied to Canadians? If good ol Canadians are allowed to hold non-canadian values then why the hell can't immigrants hold non-canadiana values? Your broad-brush macro thing answers that question: Canadians cannot possibly have non-canadian values! Only immigrants do! And you have a poll that shows 70% of Canadians support the idea! Wonderful...get the political machinery in gear and get such a policy enacted! Don't rely on a poll to do it for you. Its just a poll of a handful of people why by answerring that poll in one way or the other, have no ramifications or accountability for their answers. Not that I am trashing the science of polls! As you say, 70% support a stupid canadian values test. Then whats the problem? 70% support should make such a policy easy as pie to push through parliament, right? I will be among the 30% who will contest such a thing, a mere flunky of a minority. Should have no problems whatsoever enacting such policy. Right? As far as wether 'guys feel driven to violence' by shooting a bunch of folks minding their own business: Fuck guys who feel driven to violence. Fuck them completely. Or is that some Canadian value i'm treading upon?

in answer to Topaz above: It's not unusual in these situations (where cops enter a building where shootings occurred with no information of exactly how many shooters there are or what they are armed with) for cops to grab whoever they think needs grabbing. According to the guy who was held but later released, he fled when he saw black suited armed men not realizing they were police. these black suited armed men caught him and arrested him (he was fleeing) and hauled him off to be questioned. Things were cleared up and he was released. Is that strange and bizarre and totally against what is normal? Of course, there is the hypothetical possibility that he really was a shooter and the cops knew he was a shooter and then somebody somewhere ordered this guy to be released and the Quebec cops just realeased him knowing very well he was a shooter because somebody somewhere told them to etc etc. But that sort of hypothetical requires conspiracy thinking wherein if I could imagine it working that way then how I imagine it must be the truth . Which is something that leads to all sorts places where there is no factual support for such travels of the mind.

Because the powers-that-be had only just arrested him a few hours before. It takes some time for the legal types to figure out exactly what charges are going to be laid. But they need to charge him with something in order to keep him under arrest so he is charged right now with six murders Further charges will be added on when they are ready to prosecute. Maybe terrorism will be one of them. I'm not sure what the point of a terrorism charge would be when he has apparently already copped to 6 murders and lord knows how many attempted murders. I think an actual charge of terrorism in this case would be an unnecessary complication. If he had have been sombody else who, say, drove the car or supplied the weapon or helped plan, well then yes , terrorism would be a fine thing to charge him with. But he wasn't so no immediate need. Maybe a terrorism charge will be there when they have all the charges neatly set up for his pleading before a judge.

and there's the goon; To many a muslim, by virtue of being a mulsim, cannot possibly be compatable with Canadian values.

What level of accountablility? That they should be assassinated? That they should be charged with some crime? That they shoud be ridiculed in public? What level of accountability would you like ?

Held accountable for what? I don't think Trump or Le Pen ever advocated that muslims should be shot. It takes a special kind of stupid to listen to bigots and assume then that the targets of bigotry should be killed. Even if Trump/Le Pen/Argus/Dogonporch advocate for restricting immigration from muslim lands - or just muslims - i have not heard one of them saying kill them. although there are lots of blathermouths on internet sites who do actually say such things but unsurprisingly never do so themselves. The one who needs to be accountable is the perpetrator of the crime - not all those who say things that the perp may agree with. On the other hand, I do agree that idiot talk emboldens crackpots, so one must be careful what one says or at least have the brains to point out that the targets of thier bigotry also have legal rights that must be respected.

....and all that was surmised from the Facebook page of mr Bissonnette who may or may not be the actual guy arrested.

I am under the impression that the shooter at the church in the USA was motivated by racial claptrap and not islamic terrorism. Perhaps you are saying that if islamic terrorists hadn't have done killings then the shooting at the church would never have happened since the shooter there was merely copy-catting Islamic terrorists?

Provincial police confirmed that only one of the individuals arrested yesterday night is a suspect.

Lapresse.ca says that the two suspects arrested are Alexandre Bissonette et Mohamed Khadir. But doesn't say where they got that info from. it says the first arrest was at the crime scene and the second arrest was at about 8:10pm somewhere else and doesn't say where that arrest took place. Lapresse says the two arrested were students from Laval University according to Le Soliel (local Quebec City newspaper). But they (Laval University or Le Soliel - I am not sure which establishment LaPresse is referring too) were unable to confirm this information as of press time at 8:30am. Nevertheless, security was increased on the campus notably at the student residence and also at (i get iffy here...) two cultural / Muslim areas/meeting places/ at the University. The RCMP have only confirmed that two suspects have been arrested without saying anything more about the suspects identities and indicated that the investigation is continuing. The only other information provided is that the arrested age between late 20's and early 30's. there then follows a few paragraphs about what the mayor says and what the Premier says and a general blurb about how the Quebec provincial police assumed this was a terrorist attack and responded accordingly. Then, immediately after useless map picture: One assailant was arrested at the scene the other fled in a car but was arrested close to the Isle d'Orleans bridge some 20 km away. Confessing to the crime, the young man of 27 years explained that he was sickened after the attacks and threatened to kill himself, said Le Soliel. His vehicle, a black Mitsubishi, was stopped/arrested at traffic lights. He was taken to the Victoria Park police station. Knives and an AK47 were found in the vehicle. The area was sealed off by police for almost 5 hours causing a traffic jam. According to witnesses on television (that is to say that the Lapresse writers are writing about what they saw on the television reports) the Quebecois accent of one of the two assailants left no doubt about his origin. (Did they hear the assailant speaking? or are they saying that people interviewed on television said that? The latter I suspect) A few minutes before 8pm, the two killers started shooting. One of them cried out 'Allah akbar' wich is a thing that Islamic terrorists often do. The shooters had enough time to reload their weapons three times according to a witness. ( I assume a witness on the television reports) the rest of the article mainly concernes how frightened and shocked the locals are. So, this LaPresse report is mostly second hand stuff gathered from Le Soliel and what was seen on television. The only First hand info provided is that the RCMP claim that two people have been arrested and their ages of late twenties and early thirties. and thats it.

Yah, it's a mystery. What the hell is it these Seperatists want?

I think that's it exactly.

Yah, Disgusting. We should make no effort to get them outa there and when they want out we should close the door because they are Barbarians.

So? The VP of the USofA (a very important country - to Canada anyways) requests a visit way back when and Trudeau is supposed to tell him 'No' for fear that maybe somebody will write something nasty about his very self? What kind of chickenshits do you want running this country?

But he is an Obama fanboy. Why create some bullshit pretence that he isn't? To please Trump? Trump can kiss his rose red liberal arse.