Faisal Hussain - the evolving story

[Michael Hardner]

1 minute ago, turningrite said:

1. 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 as well as seeing an interview with a person who taught or coached him in a community-based program which suggested he exhibited pretty garden-variety mental problems similar to others from broken homes.

2. 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.

1. You ask a question then answer it.

2. We should wait and see, I think.  The truth comes out.  

[turningrite]

5 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

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

2. No, that's raquetteball.

Pontificate much?

[turningrite]

1 minute ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. You ask a question then answer it.

2. We should wait and see, I think.  The truth comes out.  

1.) No, that is up to you to do. You've made a statement which you refuse to substantiate. It's not up to me to prove it's incorrect if you can't even prove the veracity of your own claim.

2.) The truth should have come out by now. Didn't you read Ms. Malcolm's column in the Toronto Sun on the abysmal fashion in which this incident is being handled? Anybody concerned about a free and objective press should be concerned about what's going on. We're becoming a banana republic, apparently.

[Michael Hardner]

7 hours ago, turningrite said:

Pontificate much?

That is called a non-sequitur.  Not a Sequitur-Non.

Edited July 28, 2018 by Michael Hardner
added link to definition for uninformed poster

[Michael Hardner]

5 minutes ago, turningrite said:

1.) No, that is up to you to do.  

2.) The truth should have come out by now.  

1) Then I accept the answer you provided.

2) Maybe it did.  

[Centerpiece]

25 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

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

2. No, that's raquetteball.

You're a curmudgeon - absolutely no fun at all.....and perhaps just a wee bit pompous.

[scribblet]

If a white male shooter told another white male passerby that he didn’t have to worry about getting shot and then  went on to murder two non white young girls, does anyone here think that it would be reported abkut, a whole lot differently then the Toronto shooting currently is being reported.

If u think is is claims everthing, read this. https://www.independent.co.uk/us

[taxme]

8 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_in_Canada

There are quite a few aren't there ?  Including a mosque shooting that is still before the courts I think.  

You need to read and see as to what is going on in Birmangham in the UK to the British people who are being assaulted and being attacked by these Islamic terrorists over there just about every day thanks to their politically correct liberal politicians who have brought them all in and now have given them an opportunity to spread Jihadism in and on Britain. Crime is up and people are having acid thrown around on people's bodies. The Muslims have pretty much made Birmingham a no go place for the British people. Here in Canada we have our own Muslim leaders that have said plenty of threatening words that should start to make Canadians see as to what these terrorists are all about and bringing to Canada. Canadian non-Muslims are infidels and they must be killed if they do not convert to Islam. Even the Islam religion says that if a Muslim terrorist kills a non-Muslim then they will get to go to heaven. This is what is in their holy crap book and it cannot be denied. Only fools will deny it. Sadly there are so many fools out there in Canada land. Our own politically correct liberal politicians know this but refuse to comment on it for fear of being called a racist. What a joke and what such cowardice on their part to purposely try to avoid talking about it. They may be forced to talk about it in the near future if they keep bringing in more of them. The more of them the nervy they will get. That is a fact.  

[OftenWrong]

10 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

The National Post and the Sun have the same publisher but the latter is very happy to inflame people to get attention.  It's shameful.

I suggest that they are reacting to the same thing that gets the ire of many ordinary folks. We know was BS looks like and smells like. We don't need to taste it, to figure it out. IE. The thing that causes such wild speculation, that leads to inflammatory comments is because liberals speak out of both sides of their mouths. The guy was a deranged person, that's clear. The guy expressed his desire to kill someone, anyone. The guy went to ISIS web sites. I'm no Einstein but I can figure out that he did it "in the name of" something. We've seen this before... disconnected terrorist sympathiser gets a bad idea.

The authorities need to control the message, to prevent people from associating any such crackpot with Muslims at large. But leaving an information vacuum does not do the trick. People seek to fill in the blanks. In that regard, the government does ordinary Muslims a disservice. 

Edited July 27, 2018 by OftenWrong
enhanced clarity for liberals

[Michael Hardner]

13 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

1. We know was BS looks like and smells like. We don't need to taste it, to figure it out.

2. The guy went to ISIS web sites. I'm no Einstein but I can figure out that he did it "in the name of" something.  

3. The authorities need to control the message, to prevent people from associating any such crackpot with Muslims at large. But leaving an information vacuum does not do the trick. People seek to fill in the blanks. In that regard, the government does ordinary Muslims a disservice. 

1. Ok, well if your intuition is telling you something then I can't dissuade you.

2. Of course.

3. I guess so, but when people are more than willing to go after innocent Muslims in public, can you blame them ?  If we want the public to be treated responsibly then we should expect the public has to respond responsibly to information.

[OftenWrong]

4 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. Ok, well if your intuition is telling you something then I can't dissuade you.

2. Of course.

3. I guess so, but when people are more than willing to go after innocent Muslims in public, can you blame them ?  If we want the public to be treated responsibly then we should expect the public has to respond responsibly to information.

Intuition gets raised when there is conflicting information coming out (both sides of mouth reference). If you agree on 2 and 3, then you must acknowledge that speaking the whole truth is the right and only approach, that gives the public the answers it deserves AND protects normal everyday Muslims. The PLAIN truth.

If I were king...

[Hal 9000]

What makes young white guys shoot up a school?  Does anyone know that?

[Michael Hardner]

5 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

 AND protects normal everyday Muslims.  

That's entirely debatable.  The fact is that the next step for those who claim to seek 'the truth' are going to start seeking a ban as the next step if he went to ISIS websites.  

If you can find a way to have an open conversation with the same 'public' that harasses and assaults innocent people in public so that doesn't happen, well I'm in.  Until then, I don't much give a shit about these conspiracies.

[OftenWrong]

47 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. That's entirely debatable.

2. The fact is that the next step for those who claim to seek 'the truth' are going to start seeking a ban as the next step if he went to ISIS websites.  

3. If you can find a way to have an open conversation with the same 'public' that harasses and assaults innocent people in public so that doesn't happen, well I'm in.  Until then, I don't much give a shit about these conspiracies.

1. It's all debatable. 

2. No. It is not a fact. It is debatable. Telling the truth, as in the WHOLE truth, will marginalize those who seek to raise the spectre of the "evil Muslim" in our society. Facts for example like:
- How many Muslims are there in Canada?
- How many are at risk of being radicalized?
- How many are just as horrified at this tragedy as non-Muslims?

Then people who are normal and rational will understand the scale of the problem. But if the government is trying to hide the person's name, or that they were a Muslim, or that they came from Pakistan, what exactly is the message coming from the government? They're saying that these facts present a problem for their "meme".

3.If I were King...

[OftenWrong]

1 hour ago, Hal 9000 said:

What makes young white guys shoot up a school?  Does anyone know that?

Can't say I know. Infamy? Alienation? Just not getting any? Or too many video games

[turningrite]

3 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

1) Then I accept the answer you provided.

2) Maybe it did.  

1.) You haven't responded to my inquiry.

2.) I seriously doubt it has, nor should any responsible Canadian believe it has. Again, did you read Ms. Malcolm's piece?

[turningrite]

3 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

That is called a non-sequitur.  Not a Sequitur-Non.

Again, huh? What are you on about?

[Michael Hardner]

1 minute ago, turningrite said:

1.) You haven't responded to my inquiry.

2.) I seriously doubt it has, nor should any responsible Canadian believe it has. Again, did you read Ms. Malcolm's piece?

1) Let me respond: I accept your answer

2) We'll see.

[Hal 9000]

28 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

Can't say I know. Infamy? Alienation? Just not getting any? Or too many video games

Well, yes you do know.  These are all subcategories, but it comes down to marginalization.  School shootings are almost entirely young white men who have been marginalized by society as a whole.  After every school shooting we talk about bullying, why?  Because we know that has a major effect.  Now, when a muslim shoots up people on the street or drives over them in  a truck, it's not because of being marginalized by society, they couldn't care less about that.  It's about Islam, plain and simple.  We can talk about upbringing, political and western policy and mental illness all day long, but those ideas just lead to the real reason - Islam.

Not all muslims pull off these attacks, just as not all young men shoot up schools, but when an attack is described on the TV, one can guess the gender, race and age span of the killer before the news announces it.  It's not rocket science.    

[betsy]

18 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

That's entirely debatable.  The fact is that the next step for those who claim to seek 'the truth' are going to start seeking a ban as the next step if he went to ISIS websites. 

The only ban being bandied about is.....banning handguns! 

Yeah.  Bring in the bloodthirsty loonies by the thousands, and dis-arm your population.

Edited July 28, 2018 by betsy

[OftenWrong]

18 hours ago, Hal 9000 said:

Not all muslims pull off these attacks, just as not all young men shoot up schools, but when an attack is described on the TV, one can guess the gender, race and age span of the killer before the news announces it.  It's not rocket science.    

Agreed, and sadly it has become a "thing", attracting all sorts of crazies, the disenfranchized, copy-cat killers who are inspired by those who've done it before. There might not be many of them but when they do their murderous act it attracts a lot of attention. There seems to be a mystique or attraction (infamy...) as in going out in a blaze of glory. Islamists have taken advantage of it in their message.

That is why anyone who is attracted to that message has to be watched by authorities, as this guy apparently was, but not closely enough. Perhaps it should be a crime to look for that kind of information, or peruse those web sites. We make other things of that nature a crime.

[taxme]

21 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

I suggest that they are reacting to the same thing that gets the ire of many ordinary folks. We know was BS looks like and smells like. We don't need to taste it, to figure it out. IE. The thing that causes such wild speculation, that leads to inflammatory comments is because liberals speak out of both sides of their mouths. The guy was a deranged person, that's clear. The guy expressed his desire to kill someone, anyone. The guy went to ISIS web sites. I'm no Einstein but I can figure out that he did it "in the name of" something. We've seen this before... disconnected terrorist sympathiser gets a bad idea.

The authorities need to control the message, to prevent people from associating any such crackpot with Muslims at large. But leaving an information vacuum does not do the trick. People seek to fill in the blanks. In that regard, the government does ordinary Muslims a disservice. 

It's funny how the left wing lieberal politicians like to put all gun owners in the bad boy column with no hesitation at all just because of one person who uses a gun to kill someone. But yet we are not allowed to consider that all Muslims may, I say may, be bad. Is there something wrong with this picture? 

The only people that are not to be shown as being bad guys are the ones that wear a non white looking face color. It was a mental illness problem for them to obviously avoid trying to get the rest of us all upset and start to give thought to those other people and what they are all about and what terrorist gang they may belong too. They are all suppose to be made to look good no matter what they do. I call that racism. With thousands of Muslims being allowed to immigrate to Canada every year this is just the beginning of what is to come and we can pretty much blame most of it on those elected fraudsters that we keep electing. I think that most politicians are worse than lawyers or car sales men/women. Come to think of it maybe most of them were once one of those before they became a politician. Just saying. LOL. 

[taxme]

21 hours ago, Hal 9000 said:

What makes young white guys shoot up a school?  Does anyone know that?

What makes any nonwhite person want to go about killing white innocent people? Does anyone know that? 

[taxme]

3 hours ago, betsy said:

The only ban being bandied about is.....banning handguns! 

Yeah.  Bring in the bloodthirsty loonies by the thousands, and dis-arm your population.

These radical Islamic terrorists do not need a gun to kill people. Schucks, they can easily kill people with a truck, knife or explosives. When a gun is used in a crime the first thing that comes out of their mouths of our dear leaders is "guns". It's guns and they must all be banned. What if someone had a gun on them when this guy started shooting people. The mental fool maybe could have been shot long before he killed that little girl. Hey, you never know, eh? 

Those bloodthirsty loonies have all been injected with too much political correctness, foolishness and emotionalism and have been trained to say by the left wing liberal media and dopey politicians to say and believe that guns are the problem. It just comes out of their mouths automatically. Guns do not kill people by themselves but people with a gun can kill people by themselves. The lack of common sense and logic these days is what is creating most of our problems. Our politicians will not tackle what the real problem is. They just want to put a bandage on it. 

[OftenWrong]

2 hours ago, taxme said:

The only people that are not to be shown as being bad guys are the ones that wear a non white looking face color.

 

Quote

I think that most politicians are worse than lawyers or car sales men/women. Come to think of it maybe most of them were once one of those before they became a politician. Just saying. LOL.

lmao