03.06.2015 12:02 PM

Michael Zehaf-Bibeau in his own words

So much for the notion that he wasn’t a jihadist, I guess. Examples of folks getting it wrong here and here and here.

MZB

61 Comments

  1. Al in Cranbrook says:

    Just watched the vid, as well as some of live broadcast of Q&A with the RCMP Commissioner.

    People need to understand that this is pretty much new ground here, particularly for our security forces. We’re dealing with intense ideological/religious motivation of a kind with no real precedence in Canada, and certainly not on the potential scale of possibilities.

    All of it compounded by the Internet, and dated laws that hamstring the RCMP and CSIS. During one part of the interview, the commissioner recalled a recent intervention in which they went to the court to get a peace bond enacted against a suspect, and were put off by the court for a month…??? WTF was that!!! Meanwhile, this person remains on the loose. Clearly the commissioner was choked about this, suggesting…diplomatically…that the courts need to get on the same page as everyone else!

    Reminded yet again of what my dad used to tell me: You can be right…and you can be dead right!

    Some of us need to get their GD heads out of their asses, and face this menace head on.

    • edward nuff says:

      Please do me one small favour. You too Warren.

      Look at the following photo I just threw up. It’s from Iraq after Georgie Boy got his rocks off bombing the shit out of Bahgdad. No beheadings. Nope, if after viewing this you still don’t understand why idiots like Bibeau did what they did then by all means go on repeating the same mistakes.
      Imagine for a moment the girl in the photo was your daughter and you were the victim. Would you be surprised if they turned into Bibeau’s if the right fertilizer were applied.

      http://theinnocentsleftbehind.blogspot.ca/

      As for you Al. Words fail.

      • Rotten Ronnie says:

        So the concept of jihad began with George Bush? Nice try but argumentum ad passiones

        Al in Cranbrook – you aren’t Aldo the lawyer, are you?

      • Steve T says:

        Wow – really? That’s the justification for deliberately killing an innocent person? The thing the apologists in the West fail to mention is that the unfortunate killing of innocent people in the Middle East by western military is almost always an accident. An furthermore, an accident that is assisted by the cowardly “human shield” approach of ISIS, Al Qaeda, etc… Contrast with most killing of innocents by those groups, which is deliberate and methodical. If you can’t see the difference, there really isn’t any point in having a discussion.

        • sezme says:

          Your comment exemplifies what Republican/Conservative apologists always get wrong: demonstrating the root causes of terrorism has nothing to do with justifying it.

          Jihadis don’t attack us because “they hate our freedoms”. I wish they were a lot smarter, but certain people, especially young, naive idealists join groups like ISIS because they see fundamental injustice in the world and are willing to give their lives to *in their minds* balance the scales. In no way do I agree that their actions balance the scales, but I do think it wouldn’t hurt to have less fundamental injustice in the world, and thus less reason for these people to commit atrocities.

          • Rotten Ronnie says:

            Yes that’s right Neville – peace in our time. Sorry but it’s not jobs they want, it’s my daughter either in a burkha or as a second class citizen. It always amazes me to see the cognitive dissonance of those who want to fight the ‘injustices of the west’ and celebrate the cultural diversity everywhere else regardless if it includes female genital mutilation, women to the back of the bus – err, sorry fruedian slip, back of the mosque/high school cafeteria on a friday, cutting off limbs for stealing or stuffing women into potato sacks.

  2. wsam says:

    So what does this prove? Very little. The fact he made a jihadi video does not mean he was not mentally ill. In fact, to my mind, making a jihadi video and then doing what he did is pretty clear proof of mental illness. It does not mean more outreach for mentally ill would not have helped prevent his attack on Parliament Hill. If jihadi propaganda did not exist would he have still done this? Impossible to say. Maybe he would have done something else, for a different reason. What is interesting is how right now a certain type of person is clearly attracted to the anti-western jihadi call-to-arms. Are these people who in an earlier generation would have become bomb-throwing anarchists?

    If ant-statist, right-wing liberatarian propaganda, of that type that has ben blossoming here under this government, did not exist would Justin Bourque atill have killed those 4 mounties? I will conceed it is harder to demonize angry white guys. Especially for this government.

    • Elisabeth Lindsay says:

      You can be both mentally disturbed and a terrorist. In my opinion you would have to be mentally disturbed to be a terrorist.

      • Elizabeth says:

        Of course he’s mentally disturbed, just like all those who are devout Islamists in Canada who view Zehar-Bibeau as a jihadi and mujahadin hero.

    • Bill MacLeod says:

      Well, there’s two votes (so far) for “you have to be insane to commit a terrorist act.”

      Great. Let’s rule all the terrorists “not criminally responsible” and send them to a cushy institution for a few years to get their heads right.

      Sheesh.

      Bill

    • wsam says:

      The justifications which existed for both those killers partially comes from right-wing ideology. That is a fact. It is not under dispute. I brought it up to highlight the Canadian government’s differing response.

      When the right wing is in power right-wing ideas gain more legitimacy, which extends out to the fringe to extreme pro-gun, anti-abortion, religious groups. The same happens with leftish ideas. You saw this clearly under the Bush administration with the celebration of all things red-neck and religious, because people in government sympathized with a more right-wing agenda, just like at present in Canada.

      Harper and his government are more anti-state than any previous Canadian government and cabinet ministers sympathize or are avowedly libertarian so that helps extreme libertarian gain legitimacy.

      You can see it now, for example, in Turkey with a previously unknown Islamism. More hard-core Islamist ideas are gaining currency in that country. Although the government is generally classified as moderate and is moderate some of its members are less moderate than others. Previously the Turkey had been aggressively secular so overt religiousness is legitimate in ways it never was.

  3. davie says:

    I think we should add more powers to our secret police so that we can stand up to the ideology that says that we should be peaceful people and not travel abroad to kill other people. We definitely have to add to our capacity to seek out and deal with durg addicted mentally ill people who fall for these abnormal beliefs, and we should get a registry going of ordinary 7 shot hunting rifles.

    (Have we enough to stand up to environmentalists as well. A lot of people are being radicalized by them.)

  4. Rotten Ronnie says:

    Bahahaha – how typically Canadian – only a Canadian would go on a murderous tirade and finish it with “thank you”

    Anyway the difference apologists such as wsam fail to discern is that people like Justin Bourque don’t commit their actions as a result of being counselled, urged, instructed, encouraged, whether it be through ideology or not, but rather create the rationale through their own twisted, perhaps mentally-ill, logic. Blaming “anti-statist, ring-wing, libertarian propaganda” for the actions of Bourque is just down-right delusional. I must have missed the ads on Hockey Night In Canada with Stephen Harper staring icily into the camera, intoning “Kill the left, Kill the state, Kill the police!”. What this video demonstrates is that there are elements who are a threat to our society that are willing to use tools such as the mentally unstable and highly gullible for the purposes of destabilizing a society that they don’t agree with – a society based upon, democracy, diversity and differences – in the hopes of establishing a theocratic state.

  5. wsam says:

    How am I an apologist? For what?

    Unlike others, Michael Zehaf-Bibeau being officially labelled a terrorist give me no emotional satisfaction. I think it raises him to a political level he does not deserve and furthermore encourages others, helping to legitimize the cluster of ideas which he claimed for inspiration. In a word: it is dangerous. (also unnecessary as he is dead and won’t be charged).

    We are making yet another mistake.

    To combat the next Michael Zehaf-Bibeau it is better to emphasize he is an insane person. That his actions are those of an insane person. They are in no way legitimate. It is not legitimate to kill Canadians because of our actions in the Middle East just as it is not legitimate to kill Canadians because you believe our tax policy is oppressive and stifles freedom or if you hate the seal hunt or think the tar sands are asphixiating the planet and must be stopped immediately.

    Yes. The police monitor people who are encouraging to join ISIL and commit terrorist acts online. They have been already, for a long time. That is a big part of what our security agencies do. What they need is more trained people.

    • Rotten Ronnie says:

      You are an apologist because you are desperately seeking some rationale why Canada shouldn’t concern ourselves with fighting a truly hineous organization, because you will do anything to try an erase the a line that connects innocent men being marched out into the desert to be murder or innocent girls being forced into sex slavery and what is being preached in mosques here in Canada. An isolationist in the mould of those who turned their backs on the jews being marched into the gas ovens. Yes bideau was probably not particularly islamic, he was a drug addict, maybe mentally ill, definitely a loser – but what labelling him a terrorist does – because what he did was at the urging of those who wish to murder and create sex slaves – is that it requires Canadians to consider whether we should be helping prevent the murders, the sex slaves the horrors akin to the march into the gas ovens or whether we are going to standby idly and offer up bags of rice.

      • wsam says:

        Ronnie,

        How does someone ‘be murder’.

        Terrible written English makes it difficult to understand your point.

        • Rotten Ronnie says:

          ok let’s ignore everything you have written because of this gem.

          “Michael Zehaf-Bibeau being officially labelled a terrorist give me no emotional satisfaction”

          Such piss-poor subject verb agreement completely invalidates your argument. Moron

  6. Elizabeth says:

    The CPC is gonna nail the NDP and Liberal hide to the wall in election campaigning claiming that both Justin and Mulcair were denying that Zehaf-Bibeau was a ‘terrorist’, just a misunderstood alienated psycho who went off the deep end.

    The upcoming election will be like a perfect storm favouring the CPC and a slaughter of Dippers and Libs on the security issue. Now we await the Spring Budget and economic issues. Massive Harper majority government on the horizon regardless of current sham polling.

    • davie says:

      You are probably right…and it sure doesn’t say anything admirable about Canadian voters.

      • Peter says:

        and it sure doesn’t say anything admirable about Canadian voters

        Yes, the Canadian people have let us down horribly. Maybe it’s time to dissolve them and elect a new people.

        • davie says:

          I regret having hurt your feelings.

          • Rotten Ronnie says:

            So the Canadian voters are wrong because they might not agree with you? How’s that democracy working out for you? Wouldn’t it be easier if you could just tell people what they should think? I guess there is a level of admiration you actually have for China because their basic dictatorship is allowing them to actually tell their people what to think and say we need to vote red, we need to start, you know, voting as I say. There is a flexibility that you know Stephen Harper must dream about: having a dictatorship where people vote however you wanted, that I’m sure you find quite interesting.

            Your disdain for the voters of Canada doesn’t say anything admirable about you.

        • davie says:

          As that American of some note once said, ” Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect.”

          (In French, it goes, ” Si cinquante millions de personnes disent une betise, c’est quand meme une betise.”)

          • Rotten Ronnie says:

            As long as we’re playing the quote game…

            You’re an idealist, and I pity you as I would the village idiot.

            Stanley Kubrick

    • reader says:

      Of course the CPC can lie and see if they can win an election that way. As the link provided by Warren shows, Trudeau said in the aftermath of the shooting that the RCMP said Zehaf-Bibeau was a terrorist, so he was a terrorist.

    • Mervyn Norton says:

      ‘No, no!’ said the Queen. ‘Sentence first — verdict afterwards.’

      “I don’t think that we have enough evidence to use that word,” Mulcair told reporters last October. Four months later, we see evidence.

      I expect that the “current sham polling” actually underestimates a majority distrust (if not disgust) with Harper, but the campaign will determine the vote splitting.

      Early campaign poster: thetyee.cachefly.net/Opinion/2015/02/08/HarperFear_600px.jpg

      • reader says:

        Mulcair went out on a limb in not believing the RCMP and he was wrong. Trudeau took the RCMP at their word and he was right.

        Personally, I often don’t trust the RCMP as they seem politicized. Still, I expect leaders to show trust in the RCMP and, if there are problems with the RCMP, to work to fix them.

  7. Ray says:

    Rest in peace Nathan.

  8. Joe says:

    Jihadi terrorism and mental illness are not mutually exclusive however one is not an excuse for the other either. I can’t remember which psychology publication I read some time ago but the article I read said the Islam attracts a lot of mentally unstable individuals and or causes mental instability among some of its followers. All that aside, I see that Egypt just shut down 27,000 mosques.

    Things that make you go hmmmm.

  9. Jamie E says:

    If world events (and, heaven forfend, domestic events) and a concerted effort by the current government allow the framing of the ballot question to be around issues of public safety, security and foreign policy, its hard to see any result other than a Harper majority. If Mr. Trudeau and Mr. Mulcair are able to force that focus onto domestic issues and the Government’s record, there will be a different result. Sadly, Mr. Mulcair’s insistence on fighting C-51 tooth and nail keeps these issues in the limelight. The NDP love fighting battles and losing wars. They can’t help but pander to their “core” instead of focussing on what they need to say and do to win Government. Mr. Trudeau has taken the smarter approach. Support the Bill, despite its flaws, pass it quickly and move onto more fertile political ground. There is no way to stop the current Bill and only a new and different government can change it. Mr. Mulcair will predictably spend more energy lashing out at Mr. Trudeau over this than he does Mr. Harper.

    Arguments above about Zehaf-Bibeau’s motivations are a waste of time. He’s dead. Its an unwinnable argument, but progressives seem content to lose elections based on unwinnable arguments. We shouldn’t be.

  10. Rich says:

    ” Others were ‘involved’ with Zehaf-Bibeau in Ottawa attack, RCMP chief says.”

    First I have read of this.

    http://ottawacitizen.com/news/politics/rcmp-set-to-release-parliament-hill-gunman-video

  11. socks clinton says:

    The term Jihad is much too freely used by muslim extremists and their detractors. Only an Iman can issue a Jihad much like only a priest can issue a holy sacrament.

  12. !o! says:

    Whether he believed himself to be religiously or ideologically motivated or not, mental illness explains his actions. He’s not part of a movement or an organization or a structure. He’s still just a disturbed individual, whatever he says is his motivation. Brevik gave all sorts of religious motivation to his attacks, but we aren’t quick to categorize him as part of some sort of wider Christian fundamentalist movement. The term ‘jihadist’ however does just that.

  13. Cynthia Harbour says:

    While everyone, especially in the media is mesmerized by “terrorism” and the ugliness that is Bill C-51, parsing whether or not Bibeau was a terrorist or not, some Canadians are getting kind of cranky. This was shared by a friend….wonder whether this is the serious underbelly of ordinary Canadian opinion?

    One angry Ontario Citizen – [Please read! WOW]

    Jeff Smith, a Senator from Quebec calls senior citizens the Greediest Generation as he compared “Social Security ” to a Milk Cow with over a million teats.

    Here’s a response in a letter from Patty Johnstone in Ontario…I think she is a little ticked off! She also tells
    it like it is!

    Oh sooo true! “Hey Jeff, let’s get a few things straight!!!

    1. As a career politician, you have been on the public dole (tit) for FIFTY YEARS.

    2. I have been paying CPP & OHIP for 48 YEARS (since I was 15 years old. I am now 63).

    3. My Canada Pension payments, and those of millions of other Canadians, were safely tucked
    away in an interest bearing account for decades until you political pukes decided to raid the account
    and give OUR money to a bunch of zero losers in return for votes, thus bankrupting the system and
    turning Social Security into a Ponzi scheme that would make Bernie Madoff proud.

    4. Recently, just like Lucy & Charlie Brown, you and “your ilk” pulled the proverbial football away
    from millions of Canadian seniors nearing retirement and moved the goalposts for full retirement from
    age 65 to age, 67. NOW, you and your “shill commission” are proposing to move the goalposts YET AGAIN (this time to nearly age 72!).

    5. I, and millions of other Canadians, have been paying into CPP from Day One, and now you “morons”
    propose to change the rules of the game. Why? Because you “idiots” mismanaged other parts of
    the economy to such an extent that you need to steal OUR money from the CCP to pay the bills.

    6. I, and millions of other Canadians, have been paying income taxes our entire lives, and now you
    propose to increase our taxes yet again. Why? Because you “incompetent bastards” spent our
    money so profligately that you just kept on spending even after you ran out of money. Now, you come
    to the Canadian taxpayers and say you need more to pay off YOUR debt.

    To add insult to injury, you label us “greedy” for calling “bullshit” to your incompetence.
    Well, Captain Bullshit, I have a few questions for YOU:

    1. How much money have you earned from the Canadian taxpayers during your pathetic 50-year
    political career?

    2. At what age did you retire from your pathetic political career, and how much are you receiving
    in annual retirement benefits from the Canadian taxpayers?

    3. How much do you pay for YOUR government provided health insurance?

    4. What cuts in YOUR retirement and healthcare benefits are you proposing in your disgusting deficit reduction proposal, or as usual, have you exempted yourself and your political cronies?
    It is you, Captain Bullshit, and your political co-conspirators called Parliament who are the
    “greedy” ones. It is you and your fellow nutcase thieves who have bankrupted the Canadian Pension and stolen the Canadian dream from millions of loyal, patriotic taxpayers.

    And for what? Votes and your job and retirement security at our expense, you lunk-headed, leech.

    That’s right, sir. You and yours have bankrupted our benefits for the sole purpose of advancing your
    pathetic, political careers. You know it, we know it, and now you know that we know it.

    And you can take that to the bank, you arrogant son of a bitch. And NO, I didn’t stutter!

    P.S. And stop calling CPP “entitlements”. WHAT AN INSULT!!!!

    I have been paying in to the CPP system for years. “It’s my money”- give it back to me the way the
    system was designed and stop patting yourself on the back like you are being generous by doling
    out these monthly checks.

  14. kre8tv says:

    Nearly everyone in Ottawa seems to be nodding their heads in agreement with you on this. But me? I dunno. Since when do we make a distinction between jihadist and nut job? When I see this video, I see a kook who used religion to rationalize his murderous ideas. No amount of security legislation can deliver us from that kind of evil.

  15. Scotian says:

    For me this has always been fairly simple. Yes, he committed a terrorist act, when you murder a uniformed soldier standing guard at a national monument and then go to a seat of government to continue your shooting spree it can hardly be called anything else. This also means he himself is fairly labeled a terrorist, and the RCMP was clearly correct in doing so whatever trust issues one may have with the current RCMP leadership. However, calling him an extension of the global jihadi threat, there we run into some issues. From all available evidence to date he is a lone actor, the classic lone gunman actor that one can never fully guard against even in systems far more tyrannical than ours. He appears to have had a troubled history making him susceptible to radical ideology of some form, in this case it appears the Islamic radicalist form. He acted so far as we know to date entirely on his own.

    Now, we can get into all kinds of arguments as to what would have prevented his footsteps from walking this path in the first place, drug treatment programs, de-radicalization programs, etc, and these are important discussions to have, don’t misunderstand me. That does not change at the end of the day this was someone who fits the description of a terrorist who clearly committed terrorist acts. The area where the Harper government is clearly overselling it is in terms of this being only one small piece of a much greater and pervasive threat all around us, and on that note I am far from convinced based on all evidence to date. Is there a threat, of course, is it anywhere near as severe, imminent and to be fearful of as the Harper regime makes it out to be, that I am far from convinced on, and I am someone that does take security issues seriously and without partisanship, and always have.

    What I saw in this man was essentially at the absolute worst a fire-and-forget weapon, and that is assuming he was primed and aimed by others, something the RCMP appear to be suggesting/saying for the first time in their rationale for withholding some of the recording, but until that moment we had not seen any evidence for and therefore is something still clearly speculation alone. It is possible someone helped radicalize him seeing someone vulnerable to being turned into a suicide attacker, and if so, then yes, one can make a case that this is linked to a wider jihadi threat, assuming that the person doing so is part of a wider network and not also a self radicalized person themselves. Yet we currently lack any real basis for thinking so. When we talk about these sorts of things we need to be very careful about our assumptions and what weight we give them, and how far we build one atop another.

    This recording so far clearly shows he was a terrorist, with terrorist intentions, and therefore this should not be in dispute. What needs remembering though is that a terrorist can be a lone wolf actor and not part of a wider scheme or plot and therefore one needs to be careful in not conflating and overreacting, and so far the acts of terrorism in this country have the appearance of lone actors, not coordinated attackers, and that IS an important distinction needing to be kept in mind, and one this government is clearly blurring out as much as it can. Those three wannabe gunners here in Halifax last Valentine’s Day are also clearly terrorists who intended on committing a terrorist act, and since I was going to be in that mall that afternoon I took that incident rather seriously and was more than a little disturbed by our Justice Minister not grasping this basic truth about them.

    Terrorism comes in many forms, Islamic may be a current hot form but it is still far from the only one, and it is very dangerous to ever get yourself locked into the mindset of only seeing one form as “real” terrorism. I still remember how terrorists used to be all around Europe and other parts of the globe during the Cold War period, this is not a new threat, only the latest variant of it. We cannot avoid facing the truth of it, by the same token we must face the TRUTH of it and not let panic, fear, and exploiters thereof distort said TRUTH into something just as or even worse than the terror the terrorists seek. Fear is a weapon with multiple edges, we need to be especially wary of anyone using it in ANY manner, for whatever reason, PERIOD.

  16. Thor says:

    Pro tip: When people repeatedly declare their intention to kill you, pay attention.

    • Warren says:

      And when they have the means to do so, too.

      • edward nuff says:

        I cant’ describe how angry I am today. Are all you fucking chickenhawks happy now. We lost our first soldier today for no good reason whatsoever except to get Harper elected. Bill 51 has nothing to do with terror or security and everything to do with criminalizing dissent. We learned today that 14 of 17 agencies will have NO oversight over information shared with others. None.
        That soldier’s blood is on your hands Al and Lance and all the other warrenmongers so anxious to spill blood as long as it isn’t yours. May you all rot in hell. Words have consequences.

        • Warren says:

          Should we ban him, folks?

          • edward nuff says:

            no need. I’m oughta here.
            I’ve seen enough of the fear and hate
            I’m gonna wait for the prince of peace
            down by the palace gate.
            I’ve lost all respect for you and I used to have a lot. That soldiers blood is as much on your hands as it is on Harper’s. I know where the real friendly fire is coming from and when Harper and Kenney are grandstanding on the Highway of Heroes it’s chickenhawks like you and yours I’ll think about. This time you’re the idiot. Go fuck yourself.

          • Paul Brennan says:

            Yes – Rest in Peace Andrew and thank you.

          • doconnor says:

            No. He is just wearing his emotions on his sleeves, like a certain other commentator that I know.

          • Elisabeth Lindsay says:

            Nasty as they can be, I always feel it is better to let them vent in public so that you know what you are dealing with, rather then drive them underground where they might hurt themselves. 🙂

          • Peter says:

            I don’t know about banning from here, but I suspect Sgt. Dorion would prefer Mr. nuff was banned from his funeral.

          • ian turnbull says:

            I wouldn’t. It is clear that he believes what he says. Its difficult for many of us (at least me) to understand people could actually think that way. By banning him we will soon forget that people exist with that perspective. Just ask him to stop calling people names like “fucking chickenhawks”. Maybe you can appeal to his desire for less “fear and hate”.

          • sezme says:

            Warn him about the name-calling, and then ban if he doesn’t heed.

          • Ray says:

            Well….

            Aside from calling you an idiot & telling you to GFY (either of which is grounds for banishment), IMHO it’s not always a bad thing to let emotional people soapbox occasionally – it serves as a comforting metric by which to know that I’m marginally more sane than Rat, Scott, Nuff, et al.

            That said – your call completely.

            Thanks for letting him post what he did.

        • Al in Cranbrook says:

          Edward…

          Your kind can always come up with a photo of an innocent bystander of allied forces, but you never have the honesty to post photos of the victims of murderous barbarians such as ISIS, Al Qaida or Saddam Hassein…virtually all of whom happen to be their own Muslim people/citizens. Tens of thousands of them. Butchered! Led to slaughters like cattle! Gassed indiscriminately in their own villages. Of every age, no one spared. Women treated like slaves, personal property, less rights and dignity than the dogs roaming the streets. Children sold into slavery, some even having bombs strapped to them and sent into crowds to kill yet more women and children. At what point does any of this, in your opinion, demand something be done to end the barbarianism? You listen at all to what they’re telling you? That, if they have their way, you and yours are next? In the streets and homes of Canada and our western allies? What, you’re not convinced yet? What does it take to convince you? What’s your magic number? 100,000? 500,000? A million?

          Or do you even give a good GD in the first place?

          Clearly, it all scares the shit out of you…and such unrepentant evil damn well should!

          Difference between you and I is, I’m not stupid or naïve enough, given the history of 5000 years + of man’s inhumanity to man, to ever believe that such evil can ever be sated or appeased enough with boot licking and ass kissing to keep it from ultimately landing at my back door.

      • wsam says:

        So an intelligent policy would be to combat the growth of gun culture into this country to prevent firearm ownership becoming normalized outside of rural communities and hunters as it has in the United States. One aspect of this would be to regulate and control gun ownership.

        Make it harder for the crazies to get weapons.

        One would think it would be a law-an-order issue

        • Ray says:

          So then the crazies run over people with a car. Or attack them with meat cleavers and butcher knives. Or pack a vehicle full of ammonium nitrate and diesel fuel & detonate in the middle of a busy market.

          Respectfully, gun control isn’t the main issue here Wsam.

          • wsam says:

            But it would help. Guns are made to kill. Some classes of guns have only one purpose, to kill people. Why not restrict those, or just enforce the laws we already have, make it harder to purchase a firearm, especially ones not intended for hunting, to make it harder for the crazies to enact their crazy plans.

            We don’t we be smart about this fight?

  17. Nic Coivert says:

    Why wasn’t the entire video released? 18 seconds missing apparently. So it was censored, making one wonder if there isn’t another form of government terrorism at operation here. Just sayin’.

    • Elisabeth Lindsay says:

      Oh for Pete`s sake Nic. Watch the Committee Meeting for the explanation for the 18 seconds before you start to fear more conspiracies.

  18. socks clinton says:

    This was posted in “Hot Nasties reviewed, 1979” but is awaiting moderation.

    You better call your lawyer. Bruce McCulloch of Kids in the Hall fame has made a television series about you growing up in Calgary.

    http://www.citytv.com/toronto/shows/young-drunk-punk/?rvideo=4060493656001

  19. wsam says:

    Here is the terrorists mum articulating her sadness and hoping the video her son made does not inspire others to be like him. Which is exactly the point. Publicizing his views and labelling him a terrorist might be emotionally satisfying and certain political factions might make electoral gains but we risk turning him into a super-villain as well as amplifying his ideas, making his actions more attractive to someone who might like to copy him.

    http://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/zehaf-bibeaus-mother-i-am-afraid-that-someone-will-want-to-be-like-him/

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


*