Shots Fired On Parliament Hill

dre · October 29, 2014

And they're only there because people in Syria are sick of Assad.

Yup, and because while there is only a small sunni minority in Iraq, theres 20 million sunnis in Syria, so it made good sense for Isil to consolidate those two goals.

Plus... ISIL was ISI in Iraq before the Syrian expansion... so all they really had to do was add an L.

The_Squid · October 29, 2014

And they're only there because people in Syria are sick of Assad.

They were only allowed to flourish in Iraq due to American intervention and incompetence.

jbg · October 29, 2014

As to Islam being the breeding colony for "terrorism", I believe that is a simplistic view for those looking for easy answers and satisfying their xenophobic leanings.

Why do people persist in ignoring the obvious?

Big Guy · October 29, 2014

Ok Let me rephrase that;

As to the Jewish faith being the breeding colony for JDL terrorism, I believe that is a simplistic view looking for easy answers and satisfying their anti-Semite leanings.

Is this ignoring the obvious?

jbg · October 29, 2014

No im not walking on eggshells in any way at all. Terrorism does not even make the top 1000 list of things that frighten me. But we definately shouldnt go out of our way to provoke people in a way that damages our own interests and puts us in danger. Its just stupid behavior.

I mean... this policy may have already gotten a couple of Canadians killed, and now our government is going to react to that by giving law enforcement new domestic powers.... All so that we can send a token force that really accomplishes nothing more than allowing the axis of OOPS to wave our flag around?

OK. Canada recognizes many countries, including Cuba and North Korea. Are you saying that recognizing Israel puts Canada in danger?

dre · October 29, 2014

OK. Canada recognizes many countries, including Cuba and North Korea. Are you saying that recognizing Israel puts Canada in danger?

Dude... do me a favor and dont respond to me unless you have something lucid to say ok?

overthere · October 29, 2014

And they're only there because people in Syria are sick of Assad.

They are only there because Syria is vulnerable.

jbg · October 29, 2014

Dude... do me a favor and dont respond to me unless you have something lucid to say ok?

You said that Canada should avoid actions that antagonizes groups and puts Canada in danger. I recognize that I'm paraphrasing but isn't that what you said?

And I think the implications of that are alarming.

cybercoma · October 29, 2014

They are only there because Syria is vulnerable.

That's what I'm saying.

The_Squid · October 29, 2014

This whole ISIS thing has nothing to do with the OP...

the man who did this was on crack and had mental issues. He tried to have himself arrested several times. This was not a terrorist attack, but one lone nutbar.

We need a war on drug addiction and mental health issues, not a silly war on ISIS... let the Americans sort out their own mess.

bush_cheney2004 · October 29, 2014

... let the Americans sort out their own mess.

They will...it's not like Canada is the key to defeating ISIS. Legalize crack.....

On Guard for Thee · October 29, 2014

This whole ISIS thing has nothing to do with the OP...

the man who did this was on crack and had mental issues. He tried to have himself arrested several times. This was not a terrorist attack, but one lone nutbar.

We need a war on drug addiction and mental health issues, not a silly war on ISIS... let the Americans sort out their own mess.

Harper seems convinced it was a terrorist attack or at least that's the tool he's using to amend various laws, mostly around CSIS. It sounds to me like he wants to incorporate laws that would protect the anonymity of witnesses. I can see Charter challenges written all over this. Well it will keep the SCC agenda filled I guess.

Army Guy · October 29, 2014

To Army Guy - (Sorry, my cut and paste is not working). Terrorism is using terror to achieve an end. To declare a "war on terror" is to declare to stop using terror as a tool. Waterboarding is an attempt to instil terror into an individual to get them to tell you want you want to hear. Dropping bombs on civilians is an attempt to instil terror into the populace to get them to do what you want them to do.

The War on Terror may not of been properly named, but for most of the population they get what it means...We as a nation do not con.done terrorism in any form and we have decided it is a worth while endevor to stop it where we can.....As i explained already terrorism main focus is to tear down everything we hold near and dear about our own current freedoms...We can't allow one person with a gun or some explosive dictate his agenda over the majority that is not how our type of government works.

Waterboarding while may be horriable act, is form of torture. Something else we do not condone. As for dropping bombs on civilians may also be a horriable event it is called war. it is another act we do not condone, as in diliberatly dropping bombs on civilains to cause terror, but rather it happens by mistake, and is known as colaterial damage....i think your grasping at straws here as alot of things can cause terror.

In the past, a country would declare a war against another country. The target was easily identifiable, success could easily be evaluated and a win or loss would result. Our governments have created an ambiguous group, placed into that group everybody who disagrees with them and has called that group "terrorists". If you are a member of this group then you are deemed to be at war with the American coalition and susceptible to be killed on sight. Your cause does not matter and you lose any right to be treated normally.

You say "Our" governments , who is "our" governments and what group have they declared a terrorist group that is not fit to wear that title...questions need to be asked Have they used terror as a wpn, if so what title do we give them?

Killing any enemy on the battle field has it's rules, we don't just kill someone that we think is a terrorist, it is what we can prove, for example an armed man in IRAQ operating in enemy terroritory, while conducting some sort of military mission , or crime, is a target....a man on the side of the road armed with a ak, just walking is not a target.....you may stop and ask him what he is doing, you can even detain him for questioning, but you can not just kill him....

treated normally not sure what you mean here, as operating in a war zone is not normal please explain.....

Who decides who is put into that group? Why anybody our country wants to put into that group. Look up those 50+ organizations which are deemed to be "terrorist" by Canada. Many of these groups are nationalists who are trying to gain freedom from an oppressive government but because our current government does not side with them then they are terrorists.

ISIL are on that list do you consider them nationalists, are they trying to gain freedom or are they the few trying to push an agenda down the throats of the majority. see Taliban, Alquada, shit the list is to long to mention. who decides a freely elected government decides,

It really is stupid. Right now our jets are in Syria dropping bombs in support of troops from organizations which are on our "terrorist" list. Right now our governments have a convenient box called "terrorists" into which it can place anybody (any nationality, culture, race, religion or whatever) because IT decides that the person is a bad guy - with no explanation

Our jets are going to be involved in Iraq only, they do not have the governments approval for operations in Syria. Not sure is the Iraqi government on that terrorist list, i don't think so. Are there going to be other terroist in the area , possiably but our fighters will not be supporting them, they are going to be called in by Iraqi or coalition ground forces...no of them are on the terrorist list.

Yes our government decides alot of things that we are not directly involved in, and yet we did know that when we elected them. Our system is not perfect but it has served us well in the past....for the most part.

As to what is happening in Syria and Iraq, I suggest that it is a civil war with Iraq and Syrians soldiers fighting other Iraq and Syrian soldiers. As to what atrocities are taking place, I will wait until this conflict is over when an objective assessment takes place. As to cutting somebody's head off, who is not a soldier, is abhorrent - but no more abhorrent than obliterating innocent civilians with bombs.

last time i checked the Iraqi government has asked for assistance, are you saying we should refuse any help to anyone in the same situation. And what if this situation decides not to stay in just Iraq or Syria, what if it spills over involves other countries, when do they cross your line to call for direct military action, and is it recoveable from your line meaning will it take more than 6 fighters to stop, and contain it...Will Canadian soldiers pay with their blood sweat and tears , because it grew into something we may or may not be able to handle.....

War is a terriable thing, and i won't blow smoke up your ass, and say nobody else will die, the first to do that is always the civilian population, that is a fact, i know it does not matter to you how they die, as dead is dead ....but there are rules to how we wage war, those rules already take into account civilian deaths...the rules are there to limit that, not to totally stop that which is impossable. Comparing the two acts is apples and oranges....if that was not the case why would we bother keeping our soldiers from doing the same deeds. meaning not taking POW's just cutting the heads off as they are captured....

I would be interested in what criteria you would use to place a person or an organization on your personal "terrorist" group.

It's a good question, for me it is a person or group, that uses violence or terror to make a piont. be it political or ideal, For instance if i don't like the way you conduct yourself on this board, i walk over to your house kill your dog on the front lawn, then tell you if you don't do as i say i'll be back, your children are next....that would be a terrorist act.....one that we have laws for, which makes sense as we don't tolerate that kind of thinking or actions. if we did our current way of life would not be able to exist....

As to Islam being the breeding colony for "terrorism", I believe that is a simplistic view for those looking for easy answers and satisfying their xenophobic leanings.

I did not say that Islam is a breeding ground for terrorism....i did say most of the terrorists happen to have the same religion....As for it being a breeding ground, well thats is true in some countries, where the medium of religion is used to teach hatred, see the Taliban, terrorist groups,and many more....you see it as a peaceful religion, but i see it as a religion that can be easily swayed for peaceful , to war like with a words, or pictures....i can list you dozens and dozens of instances of this. most have resulted in death occuring....i Can also list dozens of dozens of instances where i have been treated as a normal person, as per their culture and religion....

dre · October 29, 2014

ISIL are on that list do you consider them nationalists, are they trying to gain freedom or are they the few trying to push an agenda down the throats of the majority. see Taliban, Alquada, shit the list is to long to mention. who decides a freely elected government decides,

ISIL is a garden variety independance movement that uses terror tactics. They are welcomed by some in the communities they have taken control of but not others. I havent seen any datapoints on how many people support them, but theres no question that among sunnis in general they dont want the central shia government... And ISIL has managed to position themselves as an alternative. And they dont just show up take over cities by force... they have a lot of local cooperation... for example when they took Mosul they had the aid of 15 different baathist factions. Thats why they have been able to take so much territory with such a small ammount of military force.

last time i checked the Iraqi government has asked for assistance, are you saying we should refuse any help to anyone in the same situation

The "Iraqi Government" is a shia Iranian proxy that has deliberately antagonized Sunnis and excluded them. Sunnis dont want them, and we should not force them accept shia rule... It just wont work.

I did not say that Islam is a breeding ground for terrorism....i did say most of the terrorists happen to have the same religion

Maybe... but they also share the same geographic region, which just happens to be a region that has been invaded by outsiders over and over again since the early 1900`s. Maybe THAT is a more important common factor than religion.

It's a good question, for me it is a person or group, that uses violence or terror to make a piont. be it political or ideal, For instance if i don't like the way you conduct yourself on this board, i walk over to your house kill your dog on the front lawn, then tell you if you don't do as i say i'll be back, your children are next....that would be a terrorist act.....one that we have laws for, which makes sense as we don't tolerate that kind of thinking or actions. if we did our current way of life would not be able to exist....

The problem is that terrorism is simply the use of acts that cause fear to accomplish a specific objective. Nation states do that on a regular basis including some western ones. Since 911 we have changed the definition to something like "non-state actors that we dont like". We have a different definition for guerilla groups that are attacking our enemies... "freedom fighters" or some such thing.

At the end of the day its just guerilla warfare... its how people fight superior opponents if they dont have the luxury of tanks, jets, etc.

I personally think we make way too much of it. These type of tactics have been used for thousands of years. Nation states dont like them, because they tend to even the playing field which is why they have tried to push the narrative that these guerilla groups are pure evil. But the reality is that national armies have killed more innocent people in the last century than guerilla groups could hope to kill in the next 10.

Topaz · October 29, 2014

I just finished reading an article about the shooting and how the government could be using it for its agenda and I like for those who want to, to read it and say if you agree or disagree on the views. http://www.globalresearch.ca/ottawa-attack-isi/5409706

Moonlight Graham · October 29, 2014

How about more dictators?

As long as they aren't Islamists bent on destroying, dictators are preferable.

Moonlight Graham · October 29, 2014

That's totally illogical. Past performance is no guarantee of future behaviour. We don't know that any actual, trained and motivated terrorist group has ever attempted to launch an attack in Canada, so we can't even know if what the government has done to date was or was not effective.

Uhm the Toronto 18?

Also, past performance isn't a guarantee of future behaviour but it's an excellent predictor. For example, I can predict with good accuracy what parties and candidates each federal riding in Vancouver will vote for next federal election based on how they've voted the past several elections.

dre · October 29, 2014

I just finished reading an article about the shooting and how the government could be using it for its agenda and I like for those who want to, to read it and say if you agree or disagree on the views. http://www.globalresearch.ca/ottawa-attack-isi/5409706

Important details have emerged that strengthen the case against the Harper Government as intellectually dishonest opportunists.

Theres no question that theres a lot of political opportunism going on. This isnt about terrorism, this is about ideological authoritarianism.

Even before these events the government has been trying to pass legislation eroding civil rights and expanding the power of the government. They have tried justifying them using a number of different avenues (pedophilia, cyberbulling) and terrorism is the latest attempt.

Luckily for us, the courts and canadians keep shoving all this authoritarian legislation back up their asses, but who knows... it could be different this time.

Moonlight Graham · October 29, 2014

No I expect the west to do the stupidest thing available.... and get bogged down in someone elses civil war. Thats what created ISIL in the first place... our "keystone cops" style bungling.

The West? What about Canada specifically? This isn't NATO's war, or Canada's war, or the UN's war. This is the US and Britain's mess to clean up mostly, from a Western perspective. The French also are culpable since they had a hand, with the British, in drawing the arbitrary borders in the Middle East after the fall of the Ottoman Empire and sticking Shias, Sunnis, and Kurds inside the same borders. Above all, this is a problem the ME countries themselves need to deal with.

Point is, Canada shouldn't even be in Iraq.

Big Guy · October 30, 2014

To Army Guy - (still cannot get cut/paste to work) These boards were set up to allow for civil discourse on issues on which posters disagree. I thank you for using it for using it in this manner. While I continue to disagree with many of your assertions I do appreciate you sharing them here. I am better informed for your participation.

October 30, 2014

Have you tried Firefox? I basically have it just for this site.

Big Guy · October 30, 2014

The last 10 posts on this controversial topic have been on topic, informative, not adversarial but certainly civil in nature and reflected differing opinions. There may yet be hope for this board.

eyeball · October 30, 2014

This makes no sense whatever. The government already has all your economic and health information. What more do you think they care about? Do you think they want to know about your video game activity or what you write in on-line forums?

Yes I do think they want to know what people write in online forums. I've been accused of supporting terrorists several times in this forum over the years and I don't think it will be long until voicing strong opinions that are considered radical will be criminalized - we're already allied with other governments that do this.

I mean, we're not even talking about them reading emails. We're talking about them having a massive databank of connection history in which your calls would be a miniscule piece and almost certainly never, ever even looked at.

The next round of shots will trigger a call for changes to that I've seen no reason to believe you won't be here leading the parade.

Army Guy · October 30, 2014

ISIL is a garden variety independance movement that uses terror tactics. They are welcomed by some in the communities they have taken control of but not others. I havent seen any datapoints on how many people support them, but theres no question that among sunnis in general they dont want the central shia government... And ISIL has managed to position themselves as an alternative. And they dont just show up take over cities by force... they have a lot of local cooperation... for example when they took Mosul they had the aid of 15 different baathist factions. Thats why they have been able to take so much territory with such a small ammount of military force.

"Come on" garden variety .......I think i strongly disagree that ISIL is a garden variety group, that just happens to use terrorist tactics. they are involved in much more than that, ethic cleansing, murder, rape,slavery, their tactics have caused hundrds of thousands to flee their homes concerned with their safety. What is their idealogy again....oh yes to take over the world, and destroy any of the non believers, hard to take these guys serious at any level....not to mention the savoirs of Sunnis....Would you follow these guys....And i'm sure not all Sunnis want them in power either....

Baathist factions, you mean Sadam's old party because they have such an assume record as well, that makes it all right....

The "Iraqi Government" is a shia Iranian proxy that has deliberately antagonized Sunnis and excluded them. Sunnis dont want them, and we should not force them accept shia rule... It just wont work.

Let me get this straight you think the US disposed of Sadam , and set up a government that is controled by Iran. does that make sense to anyone.

And where was everyone when the Sunnis were in power, who are the minority in IRAQ , when they were in power under Sadam, who did more than antagonized the Shia majority. Oh that was all right...sorry....people have long memories it is going to take a generation or two before things return to normal.

Maybe... but they also share the same geographic region, which just happens to be a region that has been invaded by outsiders over and over again since the early 1900`s. Maybe THAT is a more important common factor than religion.

Maybe my history is bad, but muslim countries have invaded more countries than outside countries have invaded them. which would negate your piont. also you could look at the types of regimes or governments that rule most muslim countries....not many are freely elected, and most rule with an iron fist, which goes to the piont violence breds violence...

The problem is that terrorism is simply the use of acts that cause fear to accomplish a specific objective. Nation states do that on a regular basis including some western ones. Since 911 we have changed the definition to something like "non-state actors that we dont like". We have a different definition for guerilla groups that are attacking our enemies... "freedom fighters" or some such thing.

At the end of the day its just guerilla warfare... its how people fight superior opponents if they dont have the luxury of tanks, jets, etc.

I personally think we make way too much of it. These type of tactics have been used for thousands of years. Nation states dont like them, because they tend to even the playing field which is why they have tried to push the narrative that these guerilla groups are pure evil. But the reality is that national armies have killed more innocent people in the last century than guerilla groups could hope to kill in the next 10.

I think you should relook at the defination of Guerilla warfare, which is a smaller force using hit and run tactics again'st a larger force....in most cases they are uniformed, and there targets are military in nature...not murder, ethinic cleansing, slavery, rape, forced marriages....again apple and oranges.

So just to be clear, we are making way to much of ISIL, or better yet do you think ISIL tactics are within reason.....Do you not see the danger that they pose to our way of life....one man or group with a opinion can take up arms and use terror to make his piont....Our current way of life survives on our rules and laws....show me any where , that says this type of action is OK...

So because National armies have killed more it's ok....like it was a game and we are trying to keep score.....and yet the last couple of conflicts more civilains have been killed by insurgents than national armies....thats ok....i wonder if we would change our outlook if this was Quebec and english Canada

involved in the same type of conflict.....

GostHacked · October 30, 2014

The War on Terror may not of been properly named, but for most of the population they get what it means...We as a nation do not con.done terrorism in any form and we have decided it is a worth while endevor to stop it where we can.....As i explained already terrorism main focus is to tear down everything we hold near and dear about our own current freedoms...We can't allow one person with a gun or some explosive dictate his agenda over the majority that is not how our type of government works.

The government restricts our rights through legislation based on lone gunman activity that is very rare in frequency. Do we cave in to terrorism and take away more rights just our intelligence agencies can go after the bad guys? The lone gunman did not dictate how our government reacts to terrorism. The government was going to head in that direction anyways. Like they tried on three separate occasions. Each time the SCC said it would violate our constitution and rights.

Whatever is in place will stop mass attacks like the one with the Toronto group. About 17 were tried, and the plot was stopped. You will never be able to stop a lone gunman that acts on their own without anyone else. In groups, someone is gonna fess up and rat the others out. And for the Toronto group, our intelligence agencies had already infiltrated the group. You won't be able to do that with lone wolf type scenarios.

Killing any enemy on the battle field has it's rules, we don't just kill someone that we think is a terrorist,

But that exact thing has happened in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and Yemen for some years. Missile fire from Predator military drones.

ISIL are on that list do you consider them nationalists, are they trying to gain freedom or are they the few trying to push an agenda down the throats of the majority. see Taliban, Alquada, shit the list is to long to mention. who decides a freely elected government decides,

IF that was truely the case, we would not be assisting the terrorists to take down Assad, if you want to talk about elected governments.

last time i checked the Iraqi government has asked for assistance, are you saying we should refuse any help to anyone in the same situation. And what if this situation decides not to stay in just Iraq or Syria, what if it spills over involves other countries, when do they cross your line to call for direct military action, and is it recoveable from your line meaning will it take more than 6 fighters to stop, and contain it...Will Canadian soldiers pay with their blood sweat and tears , because it grew into something we may or may not be able to handle.....

Back in January I asked those questions, at that time the response was 'Sounds like an Iraq problem'. What changed? Iraq asked for assistance back then, why was their request denied? What changed?

Edited October 30, 2014 by GostHacked