Faisal Hussain - the evolving story

[scribblet]

Troubling here are the attacks on the mentally ill for fear of "Islamophobia " and the complicit media in accepting spin doctors letter without question.

Everything we know about the Danforth shooter, and everything wrong with the mainstream media in Canada: https://t.co/DPZDZYnA6Hr

 

Edited July 27, 2018 by scribblet

[turningrite]

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. Rational analysis requires objectivity.  You are not engaging in objective inquiry, but instead are looking beyond what is available.

2. This is called an opinion piece.    Here's what the police say:
 https://nationalpost.com/news/toronto/isil-claims-responsibility-for-toronto-danforth-shooting-but-releases-no-evidence-of-terror-link

If you want to provide a link to the opinion piece in the Sun go ahead.  They have been rightly criticized for speculating and fomenting angertainment by the dullened masses.  Sun Ann Levy is ridiculous and unprofessional:

https://twitter.com/SueAnnLevy/status/1021413914259554305

1.) There you go again with another gratuitous critique. It's getting tiresome. And I think you're only looking for information that suits your perspective. As I believe I've said before, your approach is consistent with what's called "bias confirmation." As per the link I provided, (if you read the piece), concern is growing about what the police and public officials actually know and are disclosing and why they and mainly compliant mainstream media outlets have permitted a narrative about mental illness, for which there is no clear confirmation, to emerge in place of the public being provided actual information. It seems pretty likely to an objective observer that the story is being spun.

2.) I believe the NP piece you cite mainly addresses the ISIS claim, which has been widely discredited as ISIS is for practical purposes, even if not symbolically, a spent force. Oddly new information that appears to be emerging about the Danforth investigation is getting little play in Canadian media. An AP report, which includes information obtained by a CBS News investigator (credible enough for you?), suggests the shooter's background may be more problematic than many mainstream Canadian outlets are willing to contemplate or, apparently, report. Below is excerpt from text of and a link to the AP article that appears on the iheartradio website. Obviously, an extremist motive may still apply even if ISIS had nothing in particular to do with this. AP gets this, and it's undoubtedly the kind of slowly emerging information Ms. Malcolm's Toronto Sun opinion piece addresses. Sometimes things are complicated, and especially so when the authorities seem intent on suppressing facts.

Investigators in Canada have indications that Faisal Hussain visited Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) websites and may have expressed support for the terrorist group, a law enforcement source told CBS News senior investigative producer Pat Milton. 

Investigators are looking into whether Hussain may have lived at one time in Afghanistan and possibly Pakistan, the source said. There is no indication that Hussain was directed by ISIS to carry out the attack. 

http://www.iheartradio.ca/newstalk-1010/news/report-danforth-shooter-may-have-visited-isis-websites-lived-in-afghanistan-1.4200280

Edited July 27, 2018 by turningrite

[dialamah]

11 hours ago, turningrite said:

Are you a troll? You seem obsessed with trying to cast rational analysis as conspiracy theory. I suspect you understand my arguments but have no good counterarguments to provide.

Perhaps before making gratuitous swipes about conspiracy theories you might read Candice Malcolm's column in today's Toronto Sun, 'Media spin on Danforth shooting is troubling', wherein the author states:

"Journalists in this country are deliberately spinning the news. They have their own agenda and don’t want Canadians to know the truth — in this case, that police are still probing whether or not the shooter was indeed motivated by his Islamic faith. Instead, media outlets across the country downplay ties to terrorism, while frantically pushing an unverified claim about mental illness."

Ouch!

Perhaps Candice Malcolm has an agenda and is the one who wants to mislead Canadians, ever think of that?   Or maybe you just believe her because what she says supports your views.  This would be called confirmation bias.

My opinion, based on what I have read thus far, is that this guy had a history of mental illness, probably did visit Islamist websites and something triggered him to shoot people.  The trigger may have been the websites he visited, paranoia due to his mental illness, depression due to his own or his family circumstance or a combination of any/all of those things.

The desire demonstrated by some people here to remove any motive or explanation except Islamic terrorism isn't any more helpful than ignoring the possible motivation an extremist site might have provided.  

When Bissonett killed those Muslims his association with and admiration for far-right people, websites and rhetoric as a motivator was dismissed by many posters here.  Now, oddly, many of those same people want to insist that Faisal's association with similarly extreme Islamist elements was the primary and perhaps only motivator.

That double standard is exactly why I consider this thread merely an excuse to bolster their anti-Muslim sentiments and conspiracy theories about the media.  

[turningrite]

Just now, dialamah said:

Perhaps Candice Malcolm has an agenda and is the one who wants to mislead Canadians, ever think of that?   Or maybe you just believe her because what she says supports your views.  This would be called confirmation bias.

My opinion, based on what I have read thus far, is that this guy had a history of mental illness, probably did visit Islamist websites and something triggered him to shoot people.  The trigger may have been the websites he visited, paranoia due to his mental illness, depression due to his own or his family circumstance or a combination of any/all of those things.

The desire demonstrated by some people here to remove any motive or explanation except Islamic terrorism isn't any more helpful than ignoring the possible motivation an extremist site might have provided.  

Read my response to Michael Hardner's post before making up your mind. Leaks have emerged from inside the investigation suggesting that the situation may be much more complicated than the "mental illness" explanation accommodates. You and some other commenters on here seem to think that anybody who doesn't accept the mental illness explanation, which by the way has been confirmed by none of the relevant authorities, has an agenda and that those who accept the unconfirmed mental illness narrative are somehow more informed and enlightened than those who don't. Your "based on what I've read" rationale provides evidence of nothing in this case as it's been a largely speculative narrative from the get-go. Further, twenty percent of the population suffer mental illness at some point in their lives and there's anecdotal evidence that Mr. Hussain recently seemed quite stable. You seem to be operating on quite the double standard, if you ask me, where speculation about mental illness is portrayed as amounting to credible evidence and granting slowly emerging facts increasing weight is somehow construed as proof of discreditable motivation.

 

[dialamah]

26 minutes ago, turningrite said:

You and some other commenters on here seem to think that anybody who doesn't accept the mental illness explanation, which by the way has been confirmed by none of the relevant authorities,

Read my response.  I allowed for other things as well as mental illness. 

And why does "mental illness" have to be confirmed by 'relevant authorities' when visits to radical websites doesn't have to be confirmed by those ame "relevant authorities" but you will accept that while questioning mental illness?

Anyway, the fact that police have a history with this guy due to mental illness issues seems pretty good confirmation.  

 

A police source told Global News that 29-year-old Faisal Hussain had previously been apprehended by Toronto police twice under the mental health act.

This Toronto Sun article is the only one I can find that mentions "sources" for the Islamist website contact: not even "police sources".  But here people are happy giving that more credence than "police sources" and the statement released by his family.

Ultimately it wouldn't really matter if he'd left a detailed note disavowing Islam, and declaring himself the expression of (the Christian) God's wrath on earth, the conspiracy would simply claim the note was forged by those determined to fool Canadians.  His name and the act of violence is enough to convict him of terrorism, regardless of the truth.  

[capricorn]

Here's new info regarding the gun used by the Danforth shooter.

Quote

The semi-automatic handgun used in Sunday’s deadly rampage in Toronto’s Greektown that killed two people and injured 13 others was stolen during a break-and-enter in Saskatoon in 2015, a police source told CTV News.

A source familiar with the case told CP24 on Wednesday that the gun used by Faisal Hussain, the 29-year-old man who police claim carried out the shooting before dying of a self-inflicted gunshot wound, was likely obtained from a “gang-related source.”

The theft of the firearm used by Hussain occurred around the same time that Hussain’s brother Fahad, who is currently in a drug-induced coma, was arrested in Saskatoon on drug charges, court documents seen by CTV Saskatoon show.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/gun-in-danforth-shooting-stolen-in-saskatoon-break-and-enter-source-1.4030454

[GostHacked]

12 hours ago, turningrite said:

And do you have any evidence that any of this applies to Mr. Hussain? Do you know something about him that the rest of us do not? I strongly suspect you don't. It's all speculation at this point.

You've put out your fair share of speculation, and most of it can be ignored bases on the facts released.

[Centerpiece]

1 hour ago, dialamah said:

Read my response.  I allowed for other things as well as mental illness. 

And why does "mental illness" have to be confirmed by 'relevant authorities' when visits to radical websites doesn't have to be confirmed by those ame "relevant authorities" but you will accept that while questioning mental illness?

Anyway, the fact that police have a history with this guy due to mental illness issues seems pretty good confirmation.  

This Toronto Sun article is the only one I can find that mentions "sources" for the Islamist website contact: not even "police sources".  But here people are happy giving that more credence than "police sources" and the statement released by his family.

 

You're engaging in the same "confirmation bias" that you accuse others of. This CBS report uses the term "Law enforcement sources".  Please don't run off and move the goalposts by splitting hairs on something else. Until we get the full story, we can only try and put the pieces together - because that's what us amateur sleuths do!

The fact that there is a reasonable chance that this is a terrorism related crime doesn't make us all racists. Contrast the recent "walk on eggshells" reporting on Faisal Hussain with the Israeli/Palestinian conflict and all the questionably biased reporting (to put it mildly).........

Quote

But a law enforcement source told CBS News that Faisal Hussain visited Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) websites and may have expressed support for the terrorist group. They were looking into whether Hussain may have lived at one time in Afghanistan and possibly Pakistan, the source said. There is no indication that Hussain was directed by ISIS to carry out the attack.

Link: https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/faisal-hussain-toronto-shooting-rampage-new-details-emerge-about-gunman-2018-07-24/?setDevice=amp

Edited July 27, 2018 by Centerpiece

[scribblet]

So now the Liberals are once again planning to further curtail the rights of law-abiding citizens even as they are getting softer on criminals and on potential terrorists, arm smugglers and gang members who don't  gIve a fig abot the law. A total ban on handguns will not reduce crime. Cracking down on criminals will.

meanwhile our illustrious pm is still surfing but I bet if this had been an attack on a mosque we would hear from him.  Actually this is an abdication of leadership but I bet he shows at the funerals for photo ops

Edited July 27, 2018 by scribblet

[Centerpiece]

6 minutes ago, scribblet said:

So now the Liberals are once again planning to further curtail the rights of law-abiding citizens even as they are getting softer on criminals and on potential terrorists, arm smugglers and gang members who don't  gI've a fig abot the law. A total ban on handguns will not reduce crime. Cracking down on criminals will. 

Canada altready has a reasonable balance on gun laws. Before curtailing responsible ownership further, step ONE should be to make penalties for use of a gun in a crime severe - and if you shoot someone, the book should be thrown at you. Let's not mince words, nowadays, slap on the wrist sentencing is watered down even more with early parole and almost mandatory release after serving two-thirds of any sentence (Statutory Release). To criminals, this is simply the "cost of doing business". We need to send a message - loud and clear - that criminal gun use is totally, totally unacceptable.....we should teach it in schools, make it clear at our borders, and hammer it home in the citizenship process. There should be no room for excuses. Do the crime - do the time.

That's step one - curtailing more rights is a last resort.

[turningrite]

1 hour ago, GostHacked said:

You've put out your fair share of speculation, and most of it can be ignored bases on the facts released.

My point, of course, if you actually read my posts, is that at this point there's absolutely no officially confirmed evidence of ANYTHING to substantiate ANY narrative. So, why is the mental illness narrative assumed to be valid when emerging leaks suggest there may be a much more disturbing aspect to the story? Isn't your approach an example of wishful and uncritical thinking? My guess is that the alleged leaks suggest growing frustration on the part of some officials that important information  is being withheld from the public. That's a pretty normal assumption when such leaks emerge. Why did the AP/CBS information get little play in Canadian media outlets? Why are more mainstream media investigators and reporters, who seem to be coming to realization that evidence is being withheld and/or manipulated, not speaking out in the fashion that an obviously frustrated Candice Malcolm of the Toronto Sun has? Are jobs on the line? Who knows, but this debacle appears to illustrate the sorry state of Canada's "free press" in the post-M-103 era. If this is the best our public officials and mainstream media can do, we no longer live in an actual democracy. The apparent political/media suppression to date of details about this event has become the emerging story, which unfortunately undermines the respect deserved by the true victims, those who were shot and killed on the Danforth.

Edited July 27, 2018 by turningrite

[Argus]

15 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

The story ended a few days ago.  This part of it is the 'no story' part.  Yes, crazy people kill people all the time - do you need a cite ?

Evidence of his being crazy would be at least some help. So far all we have is the family saying he was.

[Michael Hardner]

1 hour ago, Argus said:

Evidence of his being crazy would be at least some help. So far all we have is the family saying he was.

I think the National Post article had another source no?

[capricorn]

15 hours ago, turningrite said:

"Journalists in this country are deliberately spinning the news. They have their own agenda and don’t want Canadians to know the truth — in this case, that police are still probing whether or not the shooter was indeed motivated by his Islamic faith. Instead, media outlets across the country downplay ties to terrorism, while frantically pushing an unverified claim about mental illness."

Ouch!

Journalists may unwittingly be playing into the hands of the Liberal government who would like nothing more than to sweep this matter from the front pages and social media. Persuading the public that mental illness is at play and not terrorism is most probably a very good outcome for the Liberals.

[turningrite]

1 hour ago, capricorn said:

Journalists may unwittingly be playing into the hands of the Liberal government who would like nothing more than to sweep this matter from the front pages and social media. Persuading the public that mental illness is at play and not terrorism is most probably a very good outcome for the Liberals.

The point you make is essentially identical to that a friend discussed with me earlier today. He suspects a political agenda underlies the bizarrely secretie fashion in which the Danforth investigation has been handled.

The most chilling aspect of the quotation you cite from my post is that it's from a column written by Candice Malcolm, a journalist who clearly seems to be frustrated by the extent to which information about the Danforth investigation is apparently being managed and media coverage is being manipulated. One has to be concerned about how and why this is happening in a democracy. I feel sorry for the shooter's victims and the fact that those deaths and injuries may have been eclipsed while the perpetrator is somehow morally absolved of his crimes on grounds of, as Malcolm puts it, "an unverified claim about mental illness." It sets up an outrageous equivalency, if you ask me.

Edited July 27, 2018 by turningrite

[turningrite]

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

I think the National Post article had another source no?

I've read nothing of the sort in the NP,  although I may have missed something. Please provide a link to substantiate your position. Otherwise, your post is pointless and meaningless.

[scribblet]

2 hours ago, Argus said:

Evidence of his being crazy would be at least some help. So far all we have is the family saying he was.

The actual family or an unsigned media piece crafted by a professional spin doctor.  

[Michael Hardner]

 

18 minutes ago, turningrite said:

Otherwise, your post is pointless and meaningless.

Chief Saunders said he had had experience with mental health groups.

[Argus]

3 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

 

Chief Saunders said he had had experience with mental health groups.

I've seen two reports. One which says he joined some kind of group for those with poor self-confidence for a month or so. And one which says police made him do a mental health assessment at some point after threatening a teacher. Neither is confirmed and we've seen nothing from a professional giving any sort of indication he was actually under treatment or had ever been under treatment for something severe.

[Michael Hardner]

5 hours ago, turningrite said:

1.) There you go again with another gratuitous critique.

2) yourapproach is consistent with what's called "bias confirmation."  

1) If there is no confirmed information then pursuing one hypothesis, rather than waiting, serves only one purpose.  Give me a reason to believe another purpose.

2) It's called 'Confirmation Bias' actually and I studied it before the web existed so I know about it.

[Michael Hardner]

2 minutes ago, Argus said:

I've seen two reports. One which says he joined some kind of group for those with poor self-confidence for a month or so. And one which says police made him do a mental health assessment at some point after threatening a teacher. Neither is confirmed and we've seen nothing from a professional giving any sort of indication he was actually under treatment or had ever been under treatment for something severe.

Well let's wait and see then.

Or, if we are bored and in need of angertainment let's jump to a conclusion now.

BTW if he is a terrorist, do we all relax at that point?  Are we all waiting to divert budget billions to mental health or security based on the result?  Kind of like red/black in roulette?

[Argus]

1 minute ago, Michael Hardner said:

Well let's wait and see then.

I believe I have been doing so, and so have most people. A few have merely voiced suspicions that the facts are being withheld for progressive ideology.

1 minute ago, Michael Hardner said:

BTW if he is a terrorist, do we all relax at that point?  Are we all waiting to divert budget billions to mental health or security based on the result?  Kind of like red/black in roulette?

If he's a terrorist we look at what caused his beliefs, and perhaps we look again at the advisability of importing tens of thousands of people every year from places where social values and views are what we would call "extremist' were they owned by a Canadian.

[Michael Hardner]

7 hours ago, Centerpiece said:

1. So forgive us all for trying to rationalize all the tidbits of information to understand the motives behind this particular attack

2. Isn't that what this board is all about? Get our frustrations out in the open for banter back and forth? 

1. It's not objective rationalization, which is a learning process.  It's working backward from a desired conclusion.

2. No, that's raquetteball.

[turningrite]

18 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

 

Chief Saunders said he had had experience with mental health groups.

Huh? What does that even mean? He went to self-help groups, maybe? I've read anecdotal accounts indicating that he appeared quite happy and well adjusted. I also watched an interview on a TV news item with a woman who taught or coached him in a community-based program, who indicated that he exhibited pretty garden-variety emotional problems similar to others from broken families and difficult backgrounds. I've seen and read absolutely nothing to substantiate the notion that he was ever diagnosed with a serious mental illness. Personally, I think the official narrative is being manipulated, as the journalist Candice Malcolm has argued to be the case. Why public officials aren't being open about what they know of the shooter's background and motives is both puzzling and troubling. It's especially problematic that information that is coming to light is from leaks, which suggests that some (many?) involved in the investigation are becoming frustrated by the lack of transparency.

Edited July 27, 2018 by turningrite

[Michael Hardner]

Just now, Argus said:

1. A few have merely voiced suspicions that the facts are being withheld for progressive ideology.

2. If he's a terrorist we look at what caused his beliefs, and perhaps we look again at the advisability of importing tens of thousands of people every year from places where social values and views are what we would call "extremist' were they owned by a Canadian.

1. Ok well people will say such things.

2. Muslim Banning is not happening, period.  Discussion should be on another thread for that though.