A Non Terrorist Terrorist Act

WWWTT · February 16, 2015

A couple posters here earlier today made question about the lack of media attention to the FACT of the neo nazi connection.

Here's a follow up link to further this angle

http://halifax.mediacoop.ca/blog/robert-devet/33121

WWWTT

jacee · February 16, 2015

You don't comprehend too good. The Crown and the courts decide which crimes meet the legal defintion of terrorism or any other law, not the government. Governments make laws and the courts apply them according to the law as written, not at the whim of government. This is fundemental to our system and guaranteed in our Constitution.

You might have missed a subtlety.

Mackay made a MISTAKE

"The attack does not appear to have been culturally motivated, therefore not linked to terrorism.

Terrorism is not defined as cultural in the criminal code.

Canadas definition of terrorism refers to acts or omission committed, in whole or in part, for a political, religious or ideological purpose, objective or cause. It does not mention cultural motivations.

The Deputy Commissioner of the RCMP, in the video linked earlier, parroted Mackay's mistake.

So where do you think the RCMP are getting their talking points?

A concerted political police collusion NOT to define NeoNazi as terrorists?

Harper wouldn't want to upset 'the base'.

.

WWWTT · February 16, 2015

The Deputy Commissioner of the RCMP, in the video linked earlier, parroted Mackay's mistake.

Wow! You would think, sorry, you would HOPE the police understand the law. No?

Guess this high ranking cop isn't much into reading the actual laws before discussing them in a press conference?

And as a side note, don't expect many conservatives here to continue contributing to this thread.

It's already fairly clear that some of them know this thread topic became too dangerous once the white neo nazi thing was revealed!

WWWTT

Edited February 16, 2015 by WWWTT

jacee · February 16, 2015

Wow! You would think, sorry, you would HOPE the police understand the law. No?

Guess this high ranking cop isn't much into reading the actual laws before discussing them in a press conference?

And as a side note, don't expect many conservatives here to continue contributing to this thread.

It's already fairly clear that some of them know this thread topic became to dangerous once the white neo nazi thing was revealed!

WWWTT

Yes I've noticed the silence.

Peace.

.

Edited February 16, 2015 by jacee

Wilber · February 16, 2015

You might have missed a subtlety.

Mackay made a MISTAKE

"The attack does not appear to have been culturally motivated, therefore not linked to terrorism.

Terrorism is not defined as cultural in the criminal code. Canadas definition of terrorism refers to acts or omission committed, in whole or in part, for a political, religious or ideological purpose, objective or cause. It does not mention cultural motivations.

The Deputy Commissioner of the RCMP, in the video linked earlier, parroted Mackay's mistake.

So where do you think the RCMP are getting their talking points?

A concerted political police collusion NOT to define NeoNazi as terrorists?

Harper wouldn't want to upset 'the base'.

.

I'm not sticking up for them but it doesn't matter, the Crown determines what charges might get them a conviction and the court decides whether those charges are proved according to the law. The opinions of the Minister and Deputy Commisioner mean nothing when it comes to the final outcome.

jacee · February 16, 2015

I'm not sticking up for them but it doesn't matter, the Crown determines what charges might get them a conviction and the court decides whether those charges are proved according to the law. The opinions of the Minister and Deputy Commisioner mean nothing when it comes to the final outcome.

Harper is trying to control public opinion.

NeoNazi rampage is so much more politically correct than 'terrorism'. :/

.

Wilber · February 16, 2015

Harper is trying to control public opinion.

NeoNazi rampage is so much more politically correct than 'terrorism'. :/

.

A prosecutor will charge a person according to what they believe will ger them a conviction. If they charge a person with terrorism and a judge looks at the evidence and decides it doesn't meet the definition, their case goes up in smoke. Politicians are about politics and politics are about influencing public opinion. The courts are about the law.

jacee · February 16, 2015

A prosecutor will charge a person according to what they believe will ger them a conviction. If they charge a person with terrorism and a judge looks at the evidence and decides it doesn't meet the definition, their case goes up in smoke. Politicians are about politics and politics are about influencing public opinion. The courts are about the law.

The police submit the charges. They've already decided they won't submit terrorism charges and announced it publicly.

NeoNazis are not terrorists we are to conclude I guess.

Will the Crown rock that boat?

I doubt it.

.

Wilber · February 16, 2015

The police submit the charges. They've already decided they won't submit terrorism charges and announced it publicly.

NeoNazis are not terrorists we are to conclude I guess.

Will the Crown rock that boat?

I doubt it.

.

If the evidence isn't there to substantiate a terrorism charge, they would be fools to lay one. The Crown will do what it thinks best. The Crown doesn't answer to government.

Bob Macadoo · February 16, 2015

Uh, Mexico? It's full of Mexicans, of course it'll be mostly them committing crimes in that country. How about Latino terrorism in a civilized western country. Which is what I thought we were talking about here.

Yeah that wasn't a bigotted comment.

jacee · February 16, 2015

There's a very strange but real media chill on reporting the Neo-Nazi connections and postings of the perpetrators.

Is 'NeoNazi an ideology?

CBC purports to TELL us ...

why-halifax-shooting-plot-charge-isn-t-considered-terrorist-event

And doesn't even mention Neo-Nazi ideology, symbols and writing.

Unbelievable.

I think Harper's communications team writes for the CBC now. :lol:

Here's the whitewash (pun intended).

As far as the Canadian government is concerned, Raed Jaser and Chiheb Esseghaier are terrorists. The pair allegedly plotted to derail a passenger train en route between Toronto and New York.

By contrast, Lindsay Kantha Souvannarath and Randall Steven Shepherd are not considered terrorists.

The pair ... were part of a plot to shoot people at the Halifax Shopping Centre on Valentine's Day.

OK, 2 people with an ideology plan to kill random innocent people by trying to derail a train (which may or may not work), they're terrorists.

3 people with an ideology and a death wish armed with lethal weapons plan to target?/shoot random? people and themselves in a mall, they're not terrorists.

"The attack does not appear to have been culturally motivated, therefore not linked to terrorism," federal Justice Minister Peter MacKay said Saturday in his first public comments on the alleged plot.

AHH ... not CULTURAL ... ?

Not what culture?

'Culture' isn't in the law.

Ideology is.

And NeoNazi IDEOLOGY isn't in this CBC whitewash report.

Valentine's Day it's going down" and "What doesn't kill me might make me kill you."

Questions on motivation

While dark and vaguely threatening, the posts don't shed any light on motive. And on the surface, they don't appear to meet the Criminal Code test for terrorism.

On the SKIN surface?

The media are silent.

Where the hell is the opposition?

.

Edited February 16, 2015 by jacee

Argus · February 16, 2015

You might have missed a subtlety.

Mackay made a MISTAKE

"The attack does not appear to have been culturally motivated, therefore not linked to terrorism.

Terrorism is not defined as cultural in the criminal code.

Canadas definition of terrorism refers to acts or omission committed, in whole or in part, for a political, religious or ideological purpose, objective or cause. It does not mention cultural motivations.

And since there was no political, religious or ideological purpose, objective or cause it wasn't terrorism.

Happy now? No, of course you're not. Conspiracy nuts never are.

Keepitsimple · February 16, 2015

There's a very strange but real media chill on reporting the Neo-Nazi connections and postings of the perpetrators.

Is 'NeoNazi an ideology?

You're one of several posters who is horribly afraid that terrorism legislation will have government and police expanding the term "terrorism" to include all sorts of crimes. Clearly in this case, they are not. And yet you and WWWTT are encouraging them to do so. Puzzling to say the least.

jacee · February 16, 2015

You're one of several posters who is horribly afraid that terrorism legislation will have government and police expanding the term "terrorism" to include all sorts of crimes. Clearly in this case, they are not. And yet you and WWWTT are encouraging them to do so. Puzzling to say the least.

We have laws for criminal acts and conspiracies.

It is perfectly apparent today that the anti-terror act is only meant to apply to certain 'cultures'.

It's not applied to a white supremacist ideology conspiracy.

The discrimination of inflicting additional punishment (via the anti-terror act) if a 'murderous misfit' is of a certain 'culture' (ie Muslim?) is abhorent.

Do you think the NeoNazis might have yelled 'Heil Hitler' as they killed and died?

.

Moonlight Graham · February 16, 2015

It appears that people can plan an act whose intent is to instil terror in Canadians but they are not terrorists and not involved in terrorism;

Here we have a few rationale(?) individuals who plan to kill innocent civilians in Halifax but we are assured that they are not terrorists - not like that guy who ran the soldier over or shot the soldier in Ottawa and got into the parliament buildings.

I guess it is up to our government to decide, according to the Conservative agenda, just what is a terrorist act and what is not.

I guess if some soldier had been one of those killed in the planned Halifax attack then it would be a terrorist act - or would it?

There's no political motive.

Exactly Smallc, there's no political motive, so you can't really call it terrorism. I mean, a serial killer going around raping & killing women also instils fear but we'd never call that terrorism either. It's just mass murder.

However, I would dispute the attacks in Ottawa and the hit-and-run in Quebec last October were acts of terror. They had political motive, but they did not target civilians. They specifically targeted military members and federal politicians. I would categorize those attacks as acts of war and/or acts of violent treason, not terror.

WWWTT · February 17, 2015

There's a very strange but real media chill on reporting the Neo-Nazi connections and postings of the perpetrators.

Is 'NeoNazi an ideology?

Damn straight it is!

I just as well not bother with words like terrorism or radicalization because of their wide definitions.

But we're not discussing my preference in how I interpret myself, we're talking about the media and the conservative party!

They want to use these words to paint themselves like they're saving us from a foreign threat!

Meanwhile, we're letting in foreigners do the same freekin thing from the US and the police tell us that we were saved by a tip? A freekin TIP PREVENTED THE VALENTINES INCIDENT!

WOW!

Someone want to remind me again how Canadian airstrikes in Iraq helped prevent an radicalized ideologically driven terrorist from a foreign country entering into Canada to commit destruction?

WWWTT

WWWTT · February 17, 2015

You're one of several posters who is horribly afraid that terrorism legislation will have government and police expanding the term "terrorism" to include all sorts of crimes. Clearly in this case, they are not. And yet you and WWWTT are encouraging them to do so. Puzzling to say the least.

LOL!

Just reading what the law ALREADY SAYS!

Guess you missed the part about Harper belonging to a group with neo nazi ties and white people verses non white!

Why do you keep spinning this one around to justify Harper's past?

WWWTT

WWWTT · February 17, 2015

Exactly Smallc, there's no political motive, so you can't really call it terrorism.

Go back and read the law, until then, you are debating from an ignorant perspective.

WWWTT

Moonlight Graham · February 17, 2015

Go back and read the law, until then, you are debating from an ignorant perspective.

WWWTT

What law? Post this law you're talking about. I don't expect you to respond...

WWWTT · February 17, 2015

What law? Post this law you're talking about. I don't expect you to respond...

Already was through one of my links and I think Derek did something on the same lines all earlier in this thread.

You can also easily look it up.

It's worth the read and you'll probably change your opinion and come on board after reading it.

WWWTT

Argus · February 17, 2015

LOL!

Just reading what the law ALREADY SAYS!

Guess you missed the part about Harper belonging to a group with neo nazi ties and white people verses non white!

Still waiting for a cite on that which isn't on a wackjob web site.

WWWTT · February 17, 2015

Still waiting for a cite on that which isn't on a wackjob web site.

Wackjob web site= I hate freedom of speech!

WWWTT

jacee · February 17, 2015

Exactly Smallc, there's no political motive, so you can't really call it terrorism. I mean, a serial killer going around raping & killing women also instils fear but we'd never call that terrorism either. It's just mass murder.

In Canada, section 83.01 of the Criminal Code[1] defines terrorism as an act committed "in whole or in part for a political, religious or ideological purpose, objective or cause" with the intention of intimidating the public "

" political religious OR ideological"

To be clear: I'm not in favour of anti-terror legislation. We have laws for criminal acts and conspiracies. We don't need to give police excuses to evade constitutional rights and principles of fundamental justice... ESPECIALLY if it appears that such laws are targeted at a particular 'culture'.

According to the legal definition, the NeoNazi murder conspiracy in Halifax qualifies as terrorism as it' s ideologically based.

According to government and police, it's not terrorism because they are the wrong 'culture'.

They have confirmed the discriminatory nature of the anti-terror act: It's an unnecessary law designed and implemented in a way that inflicts additional punishment on criminals of a certain 'culture'.

Other ideological criminals get more rights and less punishment.

.

Edited February 17, 2015 by jacee