Attack on Quebec City Mosque

[East McCauley]

Noticed a few comments posted on this attack on unrelated threads. This terrible crime will be discussed further in the coming days and weeks.

A despicable act of violence on a place of worship. Not a lot of information yet as to possible motives, but it has now been confirmed by Quebec City police that there is only one suspect.

Some initial background on the alleged shooter.

About 17 minutes after the first call of shots fired at the mosque, Alexandre Bissonnette, called 911 to police he felt guilty about what he had done, La Presse reports.
Bissonnette, a 27-year-old Quebec native, told the 911 dispatcher he was going to shoot himself. About 8:45 p.m., he told police he wanted to be arrested.

“He was armed and spoke to us about his acts,” Quebec City Police Inspector Denis Turcotte told the Montreal Gazette. “He seemed to want to co-operate. … The suspect said he was waiting for the police to arrive.”

http://heavy.com/news/2017/01/alexan...-video-motive/

[East McCauley]

More details on the suspect emerging. Any information at this stage needs to be treated with caution.

A Quebec City Facebook group called Bienvenue aux réfugié said Bissonnette “is unfortunately known to many activists in Quebec City for his positions on identity and his pro-Le Pen and anti-feminist stances at Université Laval and on social networks.”

http://montrealgazette.com/news/loca...llowing-attack

[Paul Turnbull]

Very little known so far other than some sketch details about the suspect. It'll probably be a day or two at least before we get any more substantive details. In the meantime:

How to make a tragedy fit your desired narrative

[KC]

Interesting that CBC is trusting news from Facebook groups after all that was said about Facebook and fake news (everything in moderation I suppose). No problem using the guys name either. Recall how a couple years ago there was an attempt to stop headlining accused and/or convicted murderer's names. Also someone said that this wasn't terrorism it was a hate crime. Trudeau is saying it's an act of terror. Good old semantics issues.


Quebec City mosque attack suspect Alexandre Bissonnette facing 6 counts of 1st-degree murder
Facebook group described Bissonnette as having 'pro-Le Pen and anti-feminist positions'
By Melissa Fundira, CBC News Posted: Jan 30, 2017

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montre...ette-1.3958559



'We don't feel safe': Mosque shooting sends shock wave through Quebec Muslim community
Head of mosque in Montreal's West Island says it, too, has been target of Islamophobia
By Kate McKenna, Benjamin Shingler, CBC News Posted: Jan 30, 2017

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montre...reax-1.3957857

[MrOilers]

It's hard to trust the news these days, and they've even changed their stories a few times on this shooting within a day now. The bodies weren't even cold before people were tripping over themselves blaming certain groups for this attack.

This assault was an awful tragedy, and our thoughts should be with the victims. Mass shootings shouldn't happen in Canada.

[East McCauley]

^^Fair comment, though the CBC report on the alleged shooter contains numerous qualifiers. The tweets and other sources quoted in the reporting can be readily verified through internet searches. IMO, the report is not fake news.

It seemed implausible that an Islamic extremist would have targeted worshipers at a mosque. Even for those of us who don't rush out to make tragedies fit our political narrative, it is nonetheless human nature to try to better understand the background and motivations of a person who would commit such a horrific crime.

[Paul Turnbull]

The definition of terrorism that is becoming the norm is "ideologically motivated violence" or the longer form: "the calculated use of unlawful violence or threat of unlawful violence to inculcate fear; intended to coerce or to intimidate governments or societies in the pursuit of goals that are generally political, religious, or ideological."

It is entirely possible this fits that definition although we'd need to hear more about his stated motives. That said, terrorism and hate-crime are not mutually exclusive. An act can be both.

[Paul Turnbull]

Mosque shooting victims: Six men who sought better lives in Quebec

They were parents, civil servants, academics; six men who had left their countries of origin seeking better lives in the usually sedate suburbs of Quebec City. Most of them had young children.

[KC]

The definition of terrorism that is becoming the norm is "ideologically motivated violence" or the longer form: "the calculated use of unlawful violence or threat of unlawful violence to inculcate fear; intended to coerce or to intimidate governments or societies in the pursuit of goals that are generally political, religious, or ideological."

It is entirely possible this fits that definition although we'd need to hear more about his stated motives. That said, terrorism and hate-crime are not mutually exclusive. An act can be both.

I believe we alter such definitions over time to suit our purposes. We essentially keep pounding a square block in a round hole until the hole gives way and become square.

[Spudly]

Or it's a messed-up teen doing a "Columbine in a Mosque" and not terrorism at all? Has that been an option?

[MrOilers]

^ Or "mental illness"?

Judging by the suspect's photo, he looks like a scrawny dweeb that would go postal on people because he was bullied his whole life.

[JayBee]

Terrible event, thoughts with the victims, including the families and the communities.

[Highlander II]

^^Fair comment, though the CBC report on the alleged shooter contains numerous qualifiers. The tweets and other sources quoted in the reporting can be readily verified through internet searches. IMO, the report is not fake news.

It seemed implausible that an Islamic extremist would have targeted worshipers at a mosque. Even for those of us who don't rush out to make tragedies fit our political narrative, it is nonetheless human nature to try to better understand the background and motivations of a person who would commit such a horrific crime.

We think it's implausible because we don't think of Muslims as being diverse, but they are. Most terrorist bombings in Iraq have been Shia vs Sunni sectarian violence, and extremist vs moderate in both sects. Not much different than the troubles in northern Ireland would sound to outsiders for whom Catholics and Protestants are just Christians. If that had been the case it would have made all the statements of solidarity with "Muslims" sound silly..... which ones?

It sounds now like that's not the case, but it's not hard to imagine possible scenarios where Muslims could attack Muslims in Canada, ranging from personal disputes to sectarian to false flag.

[JayBee]

Or it's a messed-up teen doing a "Columbine in a Mosque" and not terrorism at all? Has that been an option?

27 years old.

[The_Cat]

My deepest sympathies to Quebec City.

[JayBee]

Quebec police ID all 6 victims of fatal mosque attack
University professor, a grocer and 2 brothers among those killed
By Marilla Steuter-Martin, CBC News Posted: Jan 30, 2017 1:50 PM ET Last Updated: Jan 30, 2017 7:37 PM ET


According to the Quebec coroner's office, they are:

Azzeddine Soufiane, 57.
Khaled Belkacemi, 60.
Aboubaker Thabti, 44.
Mamadou Tanou Barry, 42.
Ibrahima Barry, 39.
Abdelkrim Hassane, 41.
Soufiane owned and operated the Boucherie Assalam in Sainte-Foy, less than a kilometre away from the Islamic cultural centre where the shooting took place.

Abdelkrim Hassane, 41, was one of the six men killed in Sunday's shooting. (Facebook)

Belkacemi was a professor of soil and agri-food engineering at Laval University, also in the Sainte-Foy neighbourhood.

Tunisian-born Thabti moved to Quebec in 2011. His two children are three and 11 years old.

Mamadou Tanou Barry and Ibrahima Barry are brothers from Guinea, according to CBC's French-language service, Radio-Canada.

Boubaker Thabti
Aboubaker Thabti is a father of two. (Photo from Facebook)

Mamadou, who worked in information technology, was the father of two toddlers, aged three and 1½. His brother, Ibrahima, who worked for Quebec's Revenue Ministry, was a father of four, aged 13, seven, three and two.

Hassane was Algerian, and worked as a programming analyst for the Quebec government. He had three daughters, aged 10, eight and 15 months.

Five others injured in the attack are still in hospital.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montre...tims-1.3958191

[AShetsen]

These murders, as well as the ones a year or two in Ottawa and Quebec, and for that matter the ones in Montreal in 1989, or the serial murders of 1981 in the BC interior, 1990-92 in Ontario, and the late nineties/early 2000s in the lower Fraser valley -- a reasonable list of the most notorious Canadian killing sprees of the last decades -- all have one thing in common: the culprits were all natural-born Canadians, turned to violence or sadism or basic perversion by what they found on their native soil.

I am not saying Canadians are more evil than others.

If, however, we wish to find what it is that creates public enemies in Canada (whatever it may be), we need not look at immigrants or exotic religions or anything else that the xenophobic bigoted filth always go on about. We do need to look closer to home: uncomfortably so.

[KC]

These murders, as well as the ones a year or two in Ottawa and Quebec, and for that matter the ones in Montreal in 1989, or the serial murders of 1981 in the BC interior, 1990-92 in Ontario, and the late nineties/early 2000s in the lower Fraser valley -- a reasonable list of the most notorious Canadian killing sprees of the last decades -- all have one thing in common: the culprits were all natural-born Canadians, turned to violence or sadism or basic perversion by what they found on their native soil.

I am not saying Canadians are more evil than others.

If, however, we wish to find what it is that creates public enemies in Canada (whatever it may be), we need not look at immigrants or exotic religions or anything else that the xenophobic bigoted filth always go on about. We do need to look closer to home: uncomfortably so.

I do mostly agree with you here. Just like child molesters, it's often the trusted people close to home - even family or maybe even, especially family.

However, extremists do engage in attempts to export their extremism. Just look at that recent thread on the KKK in Edmonton. These groups send out emissaries to wage their wars. Basically evil can be homegrown or imported. No need to focus exclusively on either one. The focus needs to be on something different, a different commonality among people that seek others to hate and destroy.

[Paul Turnbull]

The definition of terrorism that is becoming the norm is "ideologically motivated violence" or the longer form: "the calculated use of unlawful violence or threat of unlawful violence to inculcate fear; intended to coerce or to intimidate governments or societies in the pursuit of goals that are generally political, religious, or ideological."

It is entirely possible this fits that definition although we'd need to hear more about his stated motives. That said, terrorism and hate-crime are not mutually exclusive. An act can be both.

I believe we alter such definitions over time to suit our purposes. We essentially keep pounding a square block in a round hole until the hole gives way and become square.

This definition hasn't changed much really. It's mostly just expanded to include individual acts or the acts of small groups. This makes sense in the social media era where movements can inspire violence without having a formal organization planning and controlling the acts.

[MrOilers]

However, extremists do engage in attempts to export their extremism. Just look at that recent thread on the KKK in Edmonton. These groups send out emissaries to wage their wars. Basically evil can be homegrown or imported. No need to focus exclusively on either one. The focus needs to be on something different, a different commonality among people that seek others to hate and destroy.

Yup - you nailed it.

[Paul Turnbull]

Witness arrested in Quebec mosque shooting isn't holding a grudge

While helping victims of the attack he saw someone with a weapon and ran. Turns out it was a police officer and they arrested him thinking he was involved. Sounds like he was treated well and cooperated fully:

Despite everything that happened to him, Belkhadir says he isn't holding a grudge against the police.

"They were very nice to me," he said.

[Kitlope]

So it's a case of domestic terrorism, just some far right nutcase. Now, how is the media going to spin this act of domestic terrorism? You know they're just itching to be able to label it as "real" terrorism, to keep the narrative going.

[Paul Turnbull]

So it's a case of domestic terrorism, just some far right nutcase. Now, how is the media going to spin this act of domestic terrorism? You know they're just itching to be able to label it as "real" terrorism, to keep the narrative going.

In what way is not "real" terrorism?

[KC]

So it's a case of domestic terrorism, just some far right nutcase. Now, how is the media going to spin this act of domestic terrorism? You know they're just itching to be able to label it as "real" terrorism, to keep the narrative going.

In what way is not "real" terrorism?

Six of one, half a dozen of another.
For some reason the connotation associated with terrorism seems to be worse than hate crime, insanity, etc. However, I'd almost feel that the reverse may be true, that the later if anything can be worse. Terrorism has some detachment to it for political and such objectives, whereas hate crimes seem to create new, repetitive or worse risks.

[AShetsen]

In what way is not "real" terrorism?

Six of one, half a dozen of another.

Terrorism by definition happens when "we" are attacked by "them".

We, whoever we are, cannot be terrorists.

The terrorists are always they.

It is instructive to watch who calls whom terrorists or otherwise, in the sense that it reveals more about the speaker than whatever is being spoken of.

But actually it does not matter.

Mass murder is mass murder.

[KC]

In what way is not "real" terrorism?

Six of one, half a dozen of another.

Terrorism by definition happens when "we" are attacked by "them".

We, whoever we are, cannot be terrorists.

The terrorists are always they.

It is instructive to watch who calls whom terrorists or otherwise, in the sense that it reveals more about the speaker than whatever is being spoken of.

But actually it does not matter.

Mass murder is mass murder.

I wouldn't say that. In WWII some bombing campaigns were aimed at demoralizing the civilian population. While it was wartime, the aim was essentially terrorism. I think most of the "we"s here would agree the "we" engaged in mass murder and terrorist activities to win the war. (We just weren't the first to do so.)

Middle eastern conflicts and any classification of any activities by "we" there as terrorism would be harder to nail down.

[AShetsen]

In WWII some bombing campaigns were aimed at demoralizing the civilian population. While it was wartime, the aim was essentially terrorism.

You are confusing the aim -- to terrorize -- with the results -- death en masse.

I consider the results -- murder -- the defining feature.

You want to call it terrorism? Go ahead. I don't think it matters.

But endless blab about terrorism does help obscure blame and responsibility, and attack the victims.

[KC]

In WWII some bombing campaigns were aimed at demoralizing the civilian population. While it was wartime, the aim was essentially terrorism.

You are confusing the aim -- to terrorize -- with the results -- death en masse.

I consider the results -- murder -- the defining feature.

You want to call it terrorism? Go ahead. I don't think it matters.

But endless blab about terrorism does help obscure blame and responsibility, and attack the victims.

What?

As for blaming the victims, look back a few posts. They were all about laying direct blame on this one nut and anyone that may have egged him on.

[AShetsen]

Why do you take everything I say as subtly directed at you and/or other participants in this conversation? I am not subtle; if I want to, I address people directly.

What I am saying is that both calling AND ostentatiously refusing to call something terrorism is a cover for bashing the victims and/or the innocent fellows of the attackers.

In this case, the Moslems ARE the victims. Unusually or not, but there are people in Canada who are denying the shooting is terrorism and continuing Islamophobic vitriol.

[KC]

Why do you take everything I say as subtly directed at you and/or other participants in this conversation? I am not subtle; if I want to, I address people directly.

What I am saying is that both calling AND ostentatiously refusing to call something terrorism is a cover for bashing the victims and/or the innocent fellows of the attackers.

In this case, the Moslems ARE the victims. Unusually or not, but there are people in Canada who are denying the shooting is terrorism and continuing Islamophobic vitriol.

Your first point - is wrong - if you're talking about me.

Your second point is nonsense.

Your third point is correct.

[AShetsen]

Ok, change my words "is a cover" to "too often becomes a cover". Then the third sentence follows from the second, as an example of the case of bashing the victims. Bashing the innocent fellows of the attackers has too many obvious examples.

[Spudly]

So it's a case of domestic terrorism, just some far right nutcase. Now, how is the media going to spin this act of domestic terrorism? You know they're just itching to be able to label it as "real" terrorism, to keep the narrative going.

In what way is not "real" terrorism?

It's a mass killing, like Ecole Polytechnic (sp?). Why need it be labelled as more?

[Replacement]

The definition of terrorism that is becoming the norm is "ideologically motivated violence" or the longer form: "the calculated use of unlawful violence or threat of unlawful violence to inculcate fear; intended to coerce or to intimidate governments or societies in the pursuit of goals that are generally political, religious, or ideological."

It is entirely possible this fits that definition although we'd need to hear more about his stated motives. That said, terrorism and hate-crime are not mutually exclusive. An act can be both.

I believe we alter such definitions over time to suit our purposes. We essentially keep pounding a square block in a round hole until the hole gives way and become square.

Excellent post. Could not agree more.

[Replacement]

Witness arrested in Quebec mosque shooting isn't holding a grudge

While helping victims of the attack he saw someone with a weapon and ran. Turns out it was a police officer and they arrested him thinking he was involved. Sounds like he was treated well and cooperated fully:

Despite everything that happened to him, Belkhadir says he isn't holding a grudge against the police.

"They were very nice to me," he said.

Its nice that he thinks he was treated well. Unfortunately police response so often screws up assessment of situations misinterpreting how many shooters are there. Almost uniformly calculating more than there actually are. The guy was assisting a victim giving him medical attention. The police misinterpret he's one of the gunman. Guess how quickly that situation could go sideways.

I'd be ****** off if they thought I was one of the gunman. Especially because I realize that guy could have been shot due to the miss assessment of the scene.

In anycase overestimation of the amount of shooters is so commonplace in these situations I wonder if the police get training/briefing on how much that error occurs. Its not inconsequential either. In countless past situations police have held back because they think there have been multiple shooters thus delaying their response to the victims in need and those that are still at risk in these shootings.

[Paul Turnbull]

Witness arrested in Quebec mosque shooting isn't holding a grudge

While helping victims of the attack he saw someone with a weapon and ran. Turns out it was a police officer and they arrested him thinking he was involved. Sounds like he was treated well and cooperated fully:

Despite everything that happened to him, Belkhadir says he isn't holding a grudge against the police.

"They were very nice to me," he said.

Its nice that he thinks he was treated well. Unfortunately police response so often screws up assessment of situations misinterpreting how many shooters are there. Almost uniformly calculating more than there actually are. The guy was assisting a victim giving him medical attention. The police misinterpret he's one of the gunman. Guess how quickly that situation could go sideways.

I'd be ****** off if they thought I was one of the gunman. Especially because I realize that guy could have been shot due to the miss assessment of the scene.

In anycase overestimation of the amount of shooters is so commonplace in these situations I wonder if the police get training/briefing on how much that error occurs. Its not inconsequential either. In countless past situations police have held back because they think there have been multiple shooters thus delaying their response to the victims in need and those that are still at risk in these shootings.

I don't think the police screwed up here. He ran from the scene of a major a crime. I don't blame him for running, he didn't immediately realize it was the police, however, at that point the police couldn't take a chance. They didn't shoot him and, from his account, treated him well and cleared him quickly as these things go. Police are always going to ere on the side more shooters if there's ever a question. You can't help the victims if you become one yourself.

The media, on the other hand, screwed up by reporting names of the suspects before the police made any official confirmation. If they hadn't done that, there wouldn't have been an issue.

[Gemini]

Witness arrested in Quebec mosque shooting isn't holding a grudge

While helping victims of the attack he saw someone with a weapon and ran. Turns out it was a police officer and they arrested him thinking he was involved. Sounds like he was treated well and cooperated fully:

Despite everything that happened to him, Belkhadir says he isn't holding a grudge against the police.

"They were very nice to me," he said.

Its nice that he thinks he was treated well. Unfortunately police response so often screws up assessment of situations misinterpreting how many shooters are there. Almost uniformly calculating more than there actually are. The guy was assisting a victim giving him medical attention. The police misinterpret he's one of the gunman. Guess how quickly that situation could go sideways.

I'd be ****** off if they thought I was one of the gunman. Especially because I realize that guy could have been shot due to the miss assessment of the scene.

In anycase overestimation of the amount of shooters is so commonplace in these situations I wonder if the police get training/briefing on how much that error occurs. Its not inconsequential either. In countless past situations police have held back because they think there have been multiple shooters thus delaying their response to the victims in need and those that are still at risk in these shootings.

I think part of the reason people think there are more shooters is that these people use high powered weapons that can kill ore maim so many people in one round. When you get 10,20 plus people killed or injured in a matter of a few seconds it's hard to believe that only one person can be responsible. Plus in all the confusion if the shooter changes location by walking around that is were you get people also saying more than one shooter.

[JayBee]

So it's a case of domestic terrorism, just some far right nutcase. Now, how is the media going to spin this act of domestic terrorism? You know they're just itching to be able to label it as "real" terrorism, to keep the narrative going.

In what way is not "real" terrorism?

It's a mass killing, like Ecole Polytechnic (sp?). Why need it be labelled as more?

Because it was intended to set terror into a population?

[Spudly]

So it's a case of domestic terrorism, just some far right nutcase. Now, how is the media going to spin this act of domestic terrorism? You know they're just itching to be able to label it as "real" terrorism, to keep the narrative going.

In what way is not "real" terrorism?

It's a mass killing, like Ecole Polytechnic (sp?). Why need it be labelled as more?

Because it was intended to set terror into a population?

There's been no evidence or statements to that effect. Sounds like just another miscreant with a gun.

[Dialog]

^ Or "mental illness"?

Judging by the suspect's photo, he looks like a scrawny dweeb that would go postal on people because he was bullied his whole life.

Looks like he was emboldened by all the hate spewing out of Trump's 'America'. Which is as much conjecture—what you're going to accuse me of—as your ridiculous 'scrawny dweeb' quote. Not surprising at all to see you moving discussion away from that possibility.

[Replacement]

Witness arrested in Quebec mosque shooting isn't holding a grudge

While helping victims of the attack he saw someone with a weapon and ran. Turns out it was a police officer and they arrested him thinking he was involved. Sounds like he was treated well and cooperated fully:

Despite everything that happened to him, Belkhadir says he isn't holding a grudge against the police.

"They were very nice to me," he said.

Its nice that he thinks he was treated well. Unfortunately police response so often screws up assessment of situations misinterpreting how many shooters are there. Almost uniformly calculating more than there actually are. The guy was assisting a victim giving him medical attention. The police misinterpret he's one of the gunman. Guess how quickly that situation could go sideways.

I'd be ****** off if they thought I was one of the gunman. Especially because I realize that guy could have been shot due to the miss assessment of the scene.

In anycase overestimation of the amount of shooters is so commonplace in these situations I wonder if the police get training/briefing on how much that error occurs. Its not inconsequential either. In countless past situations police have held back because they think there have been multiple shooters thus delaying their response to the victims in need and those that are still at risk in these shootings.

I think part of the reason people think there are more shooters is that these people use high powered weapons that can kill ore maim so many people in one round. When you get 10,20 plus people killed or injured in a matter of a few seconds it's hard to believe that only one person can be responsible. Plus in all the confusion if the shooter changes location by walking around that is were you get people also saying more than one shooter.

This is exactly it Gemini. I've read several books on the topic and first responder tendency is always to overestimate number of shooters involve when in fact most mass killings involve only one shooter. Unfortunately this sometimes results in long delays of swat or whatever forces getting to the people in need of assistance. Even in instances where the one shooter killed himself there have been long delays while the police response assumed more were involved.

Would be nice if a Police force could access surveillance or security video immediately in such events. I'm not tech savvy on how that occurs. Some security cameras enable immediate police monitoring in event of emergency don't they? If not they should. This would lessen the confusion and give more information to the police dispatched to the site.

[Top_Dawg]

In addition to being a scrawny dweeb, he could be a cuck.

[Dialog]

^ You would certainly know!

[moahunter]

Looks like he was emboldened by all the hate spewing out of Trump's 'America'.

I think its a bit silly to conclude all the hate coming out of the Liberal media in the US against the executive (e.g. CNN) is to blame. This is a terrible incident - but its not condoned by anyone on the left or right except racist groups, and has nothing to do with the US. Its almost as stupid as blaming the Orlando gay nightclub shooting on Canada.

[Dialog]

Looks like he was emboldened by all the hate spewing out of Trump's 'America'.

I don't think its a bit silly at all to conclude all the hate coming out of the Conservative Government in the US against Muslims that don't originate from the countries responsible for the terrorist attacks against the US (e.g. Saudi Arabia) is to blame. This is a terrible incident - but is quietly condoned by people wanting to advance the isolationist goals of an administration moving towards fascism. And possibly, failed Calgarians.

FTFY

[Replacement]

The concern with reporting all these as Terrorist shootings should be obvious. Because these numbers are tabulated world wide and with the information then being disseminated and giving misleading information that in turn results in such things as public panic, reactionary zeal, Marine Le Pen, Donald Trump, type democratic results etc.

There is no good that comes about by reporting activities like this one as terrorism. Or any of the other mass shootings that have occurred on Canadian soil in recent years. None of them afairc really fit actual terrorist activity.

I think a definition of Terrorist of activity should maintain that the person is actually connected (not just vaguely through looking at internet pages) with a terrorist organization. One that has been trained, and has had their action setup through terrorist affiliation. That would give a better view on which countries face whatever degree of Terrorist attack.

This is the inherent problem with calling all these mass attacks terrorism. It makes the "Terrorist" problem seem much more extreme and spread out than it is.

https://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/images...ap_45Years.png

Which only serves to fuel fear and the predictable reactionary zeal political responses.

[Replacement]

Looks like he was emboldened by all the hate spewing out of Trump's 'America'.

I think its a bit silly to conclude all the hate coming out of the Liberal media in the US against the executive (e.g. CNN) is to blame. This is a terrible incident - but its not condoned by anyone on the left or right except racist groups, and has nothing to do with the US. Its almost as stupid as blaming the Orlando gay nightclub shooting on Canada.

Those that use the word Fascism so casually have likely never experienced it.

That said I agree that the media blowing these things up out of proportion rarely helps. Its the medias fascination with milking every bit of coverage out of these events for weeks and disseminating it around the world that results in inflaming fear responses to "terrorism".

[MrOilers]

This is a terrible incident - but its not condoned by anyone on the left or right except racist groups, and has nothing to do with the US. Its almost as stupid as blaming the Orlando gay nightclub shooting on Canada.

Yup. Everybody is rightfully distancing themselves from this murderer.

[Paul Turnbull]

The concern with reporting all these as Terrorist shootings should be obvious. Because these numbers are tabulated world wide and with the information then being disseminated and giving misleading information that in turn results in such things as public panic, reactionary zeal, Marine Le Pen, Donald Trump, type democratic results etc.

There is no good that comes about by reporting activities like this one as terrorism. Or any of the other mass shootings that have occurred on Canadian soil in recent years. None of them afairc really fit actual terrorist activity.

I think a definition of Terrorist of activity should maintain that the person is actually connected (not just vaguely through looking at internet pages) with a terrorist organization. One that has been trained, and has had their action setup through terrorist affiliation. That would give a better view on which countries face whatever degree of Terrorist attack.

This is the inherent problem with calling all these mass attacks terrorism. It makes the "Terrorist" problem seem much more extreme and spread out than it is.

https://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/images...ap_45Years.png

Which only serves to fuel fear and the predictable reactionary zeal political responses.

Personally I lean towards a very traditional definition of terrorism as you suggest however the general meaning of the term is shifting. What is most important is consistent usage. Going with your definition there have been almost no terrorist attacks in the U.S. since 911 but that's not how it's reported or even treated in law these days. If the Boston Marathon Bombing is considered terrorism even though the brothers had no ties to terrorist organizations then this act could, given confirmation of motivations, also be terrorism by the same definition.

[Replacement]

The concern with reporting all these as Terrorist shootings should be obvious. Because these numbers are tabulated world wide and with the information then being disseminated and giving misleading information that in turn results in such things as public panic, reactionary zeal, Marine Le Pen, Donald Trump, type democratic results etc.

There is no good that comes about by reporting activities like this one as terrorism. Or any of the other mass shootings that have occurred on Canadian soil in recent years. None of them afairc really fit actual terrorist activity.

I think a definition of Terrorist of activity should maintain that the person is actually connected (not just vaguely through looking at internet pages) with a terrorist organization. One that has been trained, and has had their action setup through terrorist affiliation. That would give a better view on which countries face whatever degree of Terrorist attack.

This is the inherent problem with calling all these mass attacks terrorism. It makes the "Terrorist" problem seem much more extreme and spread out than it is.

https://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/images...ap_45Years.png

Which only serves to fuel fear and the predictable reactionary zeal political responses.

Personally I lean towards a very traditional definition of terrorism as you suggest however the general meaning of the term is shifting. What is most important is consistent usage. Going with your definition there have been almost no terrorist attacks in the U.S. since 911 but that's not how it's reported or even treated in law these days. If the Boston Marathon Bombing is considered terrorism even though the brothers had no ties to terrorist organizations then this act could, given confirmation of motivations, also be terrorism by the same definition.

Any time a definition changes the statistical reporting and counting changes. Resulting in a false impression that Terrorism is rampantly increasing in present day and as worse as its been. Which is the standard front page copy proferred on this. I daresay, and most pundits do, that Terrorism was much worse of an issue in the 70's.

The trouble is the media, even sources like the UN like to misreport this.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-27921938

Which btw is an out and out irresponsible lie. The world is not a more violent place in present day, its nothing of the sort. Theres never been a more peaceful time for Humanity throughout recorded history.

This graph provides an interesting glimpse of conflict death rates since WW2.

https://ourworldindata.org/slides/war-and-violence/#/15


Anybody should look at that and wonder why there are presently MORE refugees than there was at any point during WW2 or any time since. That's a whole other discussion.

[Replacement]

Heres my concern boiled down.

Rhetoric about risks of terrorism are rampant in Western Europe (and NA) and with several countries courting extreme right wing protectionist responses and yet the last 50yrs has portrayed a much different story, that Terrorist risk in Europe was much worse previously.



http://www.datagraver.com/case/peopl...rope-1970-2015

Now the trouble with changing the operative reporting definition of what includes terrorism is it makes present day proliferation of terrorist events/rates look worse. With this only inflaming response to what is largely an insignificant problem.

Anybody in NA is hundreds of times more likely to die in a vehicular collision than be killed by a terrorist.

[Marcel Petrin]

This is a terrible incident - but its not condoned by anyone on the left or right except racist groups, and has nothing to do with the US. Its almost as stupid as blaming the Orlando gay nightclub shooting on Canada.

Yup. Everybody is rightfully distancing themselves from this murderer.

Perhaps. The Rebel Commander is certainly doing so, despite the fact that the suspect's political views probably align quite nicely with his. Apparently Levant deleted several tweets he made in the immediate aftermath, which I can't seem to locate a record of. So I guess he does have a limit to his own shame. But apparently, the bar's a bit low: https://www.pressprogress.ca/ezra_le...rrorist_attack

What a total creep. That scumbag even registered the "quebecterror.com" domain name within 24 hours of the attacks, as well.

[Spudly]

Yeesh. Calling him a "scumbag" is an insult to bags of scum even.

[Marcel Petrin]

Fair comment. I apologize to scumbags round the world for the unfair comparison. I mean, it's not like most scumbags have lost or settled numerous libel/defamation suits and been forced to publicly apologize for intentionally lying on a regular basis.

[Gemini]

The concern with reporting all these as Terrorist shootings should be obvious. Because these numbers are tabulated world wide and with the information then being disseminated and giving misleading information that in turn results in such things as public panic, reactionary zeal, Marine Le Pen, Donald Trump, type democratic results etc.

There is no good that comes about by reporting activities like this one as terrorism. Or any of the other mass shootings that have occurred on Canadian soil in recent years. None of them afairc really fit actual terrorist activity.

I think a definition of Terrorist of activity should maintain that the person is actually connected (not just vaguely through looking at internet pages) with a terrorist organization. One that has been trained, and has had their action setup through terrorist affiliation. That would give a better view on which countries face whatever degree of Terrorist attack.

This is the inherent problem with calling all these mass attacks terrorism. It makes the "Terrorist" problem seem much more extreme and spread out than it is.

https://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/images...ap_45Years.png

Which only serves to fuel fear and the predictable reactionary zeal political responses.

One does not have to belong to a terrorist group to be highly motivated by them. Not reporting incidents of terrorism that were motivated by a terrorists groups actions is being rather simplistic. If a 'lone wolf' decides to go out and kill people of another religious or ethnic group then they find his computer riddled with searches of that particular terrorist group then one could say that person was motivated by them, riled up by them, choose to copy them and maybe even brag that he supports their narrative. Now the vast majority of the billions in this world don't induce violence after looking at terrorist web-sites out of curiosity. It's only those that for some reason either think the same way as those terrorist in regards to those they want to target or the terrorists have somehow influenced them that much that they want to start acting out on their hate. After all, if someone with hate for a for certain segments of the population and if they have children chances are this is what their kids are being taught. It would perpetuate another generation of haters which then could turn into terrorists. Having no actual connection (as in writing) to a particular group should not exempt some one from a terrorist list. Their intention is to cause 'terror' even if they acted alone.

[JayBee]

So it's a case of domestic terrorism, just some far right nutcase. Now, how is the media going to spin this act of domestic terrorism? You know they're just itching to be able to label it as "real" terrorism, to keep the narrative going.

In what way is not "real" terrorism?

It's a mass killing, like Ecole Polytechnic (sp?). Why need it be labelled as more?

Because it was intended to set terror into a population?

There's been no evidence or statements to that effect. Sounds like just another miscreant with a gun.

Have we analysed "confirmed acts of terrorism" to the same standard? No, definitely not all.


I mean, was it personal against the specific victims? Was it an act specifically against this one mosque? Show me the "statements" that support the alternative to terrorism.

[Paul Turnbull]

Sounds unlikely he'll receive a terrorism charge although it also sounds like it wouldn't change his sentence substantially.

Why accused in Quebec City mosque shooting isn't likely to face terrorism charges

The law is written in such a way that a person acting entirely alone is unlikely to face terror charges "unless they were giving money to or leaving to participate in a terrorist group,'' Kent Roach, a law professor at the University of Toronto, told The Canadian Press.


"A truly lone wolf attack cannot result in most terrorism offences, which require participation or support of a group or commission of an offence for a group,'' Roach said in an email.

"He's facing multiple charges of murder, and the potential sentence goes beyond whatever could be imposed on him even if he was charged with terrorist activities," criminal lawyer Eric Sutton said. "There's no real purpose.