Argus Posted February 17, 2015 Report Posted February 17, 2015 Whos concept of terrorism are you buying into now I wonder. The standard one already clearly enunciated earlier. Because they dot have dark skin they must not be terrorists. OMG. Do you ask yourself every morning how you can surpass the toweringly stupid comments you wrote the day before? Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted February 17, 2015 Report Posted February 17, 2015 If I threatened to take out a shopping mall, how is that not terrorism? Did you not read any of this topic so far? Terrorism, as per the law, has already been very clearly and repeatedly defined. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted February 17, 2015 Report Posted February 17, 2015 It means no more mealy-mouthed ideological definitions for terrorism. Treat it the way terrorism is usually treated. Determine the grievences that are driving the political aims of the terrorists and start dealing with them. And if the grievances are so much crap? How about if the grievance is that we're not executing homosexuals like we should be? How do you plan on satisfying that grievance? Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
PIK Posted February 17, 2015 Report Posted February 17, 2015 Shut these fools down now before others decide to try. Call them and treat them as terrorists. Quote Toronto, like a roach motel in the middle of a pretty living room.
jacee Posted February 17, 2015 Report Posted February 17, 2015 (edited) Did you not read any of this topic so far? Terrorism, as per the law, has already been very clearly and repeatedly defined.Ya. According to the government and the RCMP... Terrorism is a "cultural" thing. Doesn't matter what the law says. :/ Edited February 17, 2015 by jacee Quote
WWWTT Posted February 17, 2015 Report Posted February 17, 2015 But you have to prove the ideology motivated the crime. True. However, a predominantly white politically influenced crown/police may decide not to make those charges or pursue. The new terrorist legislation was brought in after 9/11 and a lot of it expired in 2007. But Harper fought tooth and nail to bring it back to use it to buy votes! WWWTT Quote Maple Leaf Web is now worth $720.00! Down over $1,500 in less than one year! Total fail of the moderation on this site! That reminds me, never ask Greg to be a business partner! NEVER!
eyeball Posted February 17, 2015 Report Posted February 17, 2015 And if the grievances are so much crap? How about if the grievance is that we're not executing homosexuals like we should be? How do you plan on satisfying that grievance?Offer to execute the war criminals that have been aiding and abetting their dictators. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Argus Posted February 17, 2015 Report Posted February 17, 2015 Offer to execute the war criminals that have been aiding and abetting their dictators. Which dictators were 'theirs' in the case of the two Canadian guys who converted to Islam and then killed people? What about the guys born in France who murdered Jews and cartoonists? Which dictators were 'theirs'? The guy in Denmark? Which was his dictator? Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
WWWTT Posted February 17, 2015 Report Posted February 17, 2015 It is clear now that terrorism is still not defined properly in the legislation. It has to be Muslim perpetrators to be terrorism. It can't be extreme right wing white supremacists. Not the right 'culture'. :/ . Ultimately you are right. Because in the end, the only people who have been charged then/and convicted with terrorism legislation are ALL Muslim despite the fact that there is no specific group named in the legislation. WWWTT Quote Maple Leaf Web is now worth $720.00! Down over $1,500 in less than one year! Total fail of the moderation on this site! That reminds me, never ask Greg to be a business partner! NEVER!
eyeball Posted February 17, 2015 Report Posted February 17, 2015 Guys like the Shah, Hussein, House of Saud, Kaddafi etc etc. We always have to start at the beginning every time with you don't we? Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Argus Posted February 17, 2015 Report Posted February 17, 2015 Guys like the Shah, Hussein, House of Saud, Kaddafi etc etc. We always have to start at the beginning every time with you don't we? So you didn't mean 'their dictators' as in, anyone who actually ruled over these terrorists or had any influence on them, but 'any' dictators, as in your pet hobby horse which says the West is the most evil organization of vile, terroristic states the world has ever seen? Okay. So this is just a rerun. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
WWWTT Posted February 17, 2015 Report Posted February 17, 2015 There is no evidence their actions arise from that belief. There isn't even evidence two of the three had any ideological beliefs. What there is of the third suggests someone who was fixated on mass murder, torture, etc., not 'white supremacist' with any real sense of ideology. False! All kinds of evidence! But it's being ignored and tossed aside. This was also planned and all the players have a common thread. Want to guess what the common thread is? THEY ARE ALL NEO NAZI! Wow what a coincidence! Three neo nazi supporters planning a huge mass violent act. Maybe you don't know what a neo nazi is? You sure know what a Muslim extremist is. WWWTT Quote Maple Leaf Web is now worth $720.00! Down over $1,500 in less than one year! Total fail of the moderation on this site! That reminds me, never ask Greg to be a business partner! NEVER!
eyeball Posted February 17, 2015 Report Posted February 17, 2015 So you didn't mean 'their dictators' as in, anyone who actually ruled over these terrorists or had any influence on them, but 'any' dictators, as in your pet hobby horse which says the West is the most evil organization of vile, terroristic states the world has ever seen? No, not the worst, just amongst them. Okay. So this is just a rerun. No, its all the same conflict, over the same old same old, power and wealth. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Argus Posted February 17, 2015 Report Posted February 17, 2015 False! Because your toaster told you? Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted February 17, 2015 Report Posted February 17, 2015 (edited) No, not the worst, just amongst them. Uh huh. Okay. So anyway, how is it the West's support for dictators in the middle east is causing Canadians and Americans and Frenchmen and Danes who have never lived there to kill their fellow citizens? I mean, nobody is killing their fellow citizens over their government's past support for dictators in south or central America, or Asia or non-Muslim Africa. Edited February 17, 2015 by Argus Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
WWWTT Posted February 17, 2015 Report Posted February 17, 2015 Because your toaster told you? Sounds like you hate freedom of speech! WWWTT Quote Maple Leaf Web is now worth $720.00! Down over $1,500 in less than one year! Total fail of the moderation on this site! That reminds me, never ask Greg to be a business partner! NEVER!
Argus Posted February 17, 2015 Report Posted February 17, 2015 Sounds like you hate freedom of speech! WWWTT No, you can go on spouting whatever your toaster told you. Be my guest. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
On Guard for Thee Posted February 17, 2015 Report Posted February 17, 2015 No, you can go on spouting whatever your toaster told you. Be my guest. What have you got against toasters now. And where do you get your stuff, Im almost afraid to ask. Quote
eyeball Posted February 17, 2015 Report Posted February 17, 2015 Uh huh. Okay. So anyway, how is it the West's support for dictators in the middle east is causing Canadians and Americans and Frenchmen and Danes who have never lived there to kill their fellow citizens? An apparent mixture of moral dissonance coupled with religious conviction. I mean, nobody is killing their fellow citizens over their government's past support for dictators in south or central America, or Asia or non-Muslim Africa Sure fooled ourselves into believing we could just push everyone around the same way and expect the same results didn't we? Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Moonlight Graham Posted February 17, 2015 Report Posted February 17, 2015 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 Link? Quote "All generalizations are false, including this one." - Mark Twain Partisanship is a disease of the intellect.
Moonlight Graham Posted February 17, 2015 Report Posted February 17, 2015 (edited) 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'. . We don't really know much about the motives yet of the Halifax gang. Having some posts about Hitler and Nazis on your Facebook doesn't make it a neo-nazi plot...yet I don't understand what shooting up a mall has to do with neo-nazism anyways. Certainly I don't think MacKay knew their motives at the time he made his statements. His words again, which are pretty vague: When asked if the suspects had "Columbine" beliefs, MacKay responded, "I cannot confirm that, but what I can tell you is that this appeared to be group of murderous misfits … prepared to wreak havoc and mayhem on our community." Edited February 17, 2015 by Moonlight Graham Quote "All generalizations are false, including this one." - Mark Twain Partisanship is a disease of the intellect.
GostHacked Posted February 17, 2015 Report Posted February 17, 2015 They were planning an act, not making a threat. According to the law, motive defines whether an act is terrorism or not. I might agree with you but that doesn't mean I can prove it in court. This is just beginning, there is a lot more to come out, questions to be asked and answered. I see no point in jumping to conclusions before they are. How is that different from the dude who ran down the soldiers in Quebec, or the dude who shot the guy in ottawa? But if they were Muslim, we'd see many here jumping to conclusions. Including the media to perpetuate the notion. I don't buy it. What they had planned was no different from anyone else wanting to commit mass murder no matter their intentions. If this is not terrorism, then the other stuff is not either. If they proclaimed some doctrine other than one that falls within radical Islam, would anyone buy it? Would anyone really care? Why not? Fundamentally what is really different about it? Quote
GostHacked Posted February 17, 2015 Report Posted February 17, 2015 No, you can go on spouting whatever your toaster told you. Be my guest. Dude that was one of the best parts of Red Dwarf. Quote
Argus Posted February 18, 2015 Report Posted February 18, 2015 How is that different from the dude who ran down the soldiers in Quebec, or the dude who shot the guy in ottawa? It's different because they didn't plan to kill people in furtherance of any kind of cause or political, ideological or religious objective. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
jacee Posted February 18, 2015 Report Posted February 18, 2015 We don't really know much about the motives yet of the Halifax gang. Having some posts about Hitler and Nazis on your Facebook doesn't make it a neo-nazi plot...yet I don't understand what shooting up a mall has to do with neo-nazism anyways. Depends who they were planning to shoot ... Certainly I don't think MacKay knew their motives at the time he made his statements. His words again, which are pretty vague: Mackay also said: The attack does not appear to have been culturally motivated, therefore [is] not linked to terrorism, MacKay said. mackay-erred-in-saying-terrorism-must-be-culturally-motivated/ There's nothing in the anti terror law about "culturally motivated". . Quote
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.