Canadian Parliament attacked. Watch for gun control coming to an area near you. - Page 2

carguychris · October 28, 2014, 08:54 AM

There has been rampant theorizing in the Canadian press that terrorists may be targeting Canadian servicemen, but AFAIK there's no hard evidence that this is the case. All of the official statements paint Zehaf-Bibeau as a lone crackpot, despite the (admittedly arguable) fact that the Conservative government supports a position that organized terrorist groups are a dire threat to Canada and must be opposed with force; witness PM Harper's haste in labeling this as a terror attack, before it was even clear who the shooter was.

I stand by my Suicide by Cop theory. Actually, I surmise that Zehaf-Bibeau may not have realized that the guards at the War Memorial did not have loaded weapons; perhaps he thought he might die in a hail of gunfire right there.

**44 AMP** · October 28, 2014, 12:09 PM

"Terrorist" is a much overused word today.

A murderer kills for pleasure, or personal profit. A terrorist kills to force some political or social change.

If there is no stated reason for the attack, no one claiming it was done "because" or this or that reason, even though the attack may generate terror, I don't see it valid to call it a terrorist act.

It is also possible that a valid "terrorist" may not be acting in concert with a group.

The fact that this guy was a convert to Isam makes some things much more likely, but doesn't alone make them fact.

Soldiers, Police, Politicians, Judges, civil servants, etc. are all representatives of government. in the eyes of most, attacking them is attacking the government, and attacks against government, either because of what it is, or what it is doing are today called "terrorist acts". Earlier generations called them "revolutionaries", or just crazies, wackos and nutjobs.

It is entirely possible that fellow went off to battle what he saw as "the Great Satan" with a stolen deer rifle (and apparently no extra ammo), never intending to come back. We'll never know for certain unless we find something he left behind saying so.

Unless something like that turns up, speculation, while entertaining, is essentially pointless.

October 28, 2014, 08:54 AM	#26
carguychris Senior Member Join Date: October 20, 2007 Location: Richardson, TX Posts: 7,523	There has been rampant theorizing in the Canadian press that terrorists may be targeting Canadian servicemen, but AFAIK there's no hard evidence that this is the case. All of the official statements paint Zehaf-Bibeau as a lone crackpot, despite the (admittedly arguable) fact that the Conservative government supports a position that organized terrorist groups are a dire threat to Canada and must be opposed with force; witness PM Harper's haste in labeling this as a terror attack, before it was even clear who the shooter was. I stand by my Suicide by Cop theory. Actually, I surmise that Zehaf-Bibeau may not have realized that the guards at the War Memorial did not have loaded weapons; perhaps he thought he might die in a hail of gunfire right there. __________________ "Smokey, this is not 'Nam. This is bowling. There are rules... MARK IT ZERO!!" - Walter Sobchak

October 28, 2014, 12:09 PM	#27
44 AMP Staff Join Date: March 11, 2006 Location: Upper US Posts: 28,846	"Terrorist" is a much overused word today. A murderer kills for pleasure, or personal profit. A terrorist kills to force some political or social change. If there is no stated reason for the attack, no one claiming it was done "because" or this or that reason, even though the attack may generate terror, I don't see it valid to call it a terrorist act. It is also possible that a valid "terrorist" may not be acting in concert with a group. The fact that this guy was a convert to Isam makes some things much more likely, but doesn't alone make them fact. Soldiers, Police, Politicians, Judges, civil servants, etc. are all representatives of government. in the eyes of most, attacking them is attacking the government, and attacks against government, either because of what it is, or what it is doing are today called "terrorist acts". Earlier generations called them "revolutionaries", or just crazies, wackos and nutjobs. It is entirely possible that fellow went off to battle what he saw as "the Great Satan" with a stolen deer rifle (and apparently no extra ammo), never intending to come back. We'll never know for certain unless we find something he left behind saying so. Unless something like that turns up, speculation, while entertaining, is essentially pointless. __________________ All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.