Soldier shot at National War Memorial in Ottawa

[CountDeMoney]

[Josephus]

Would you guys please stop shitting on a thread about a terrorist attack on my nation's capital?

What Beeb said.

[Admiral Yi]

How is a serious discussion about an issue that's directly related to the attack "shitting on the thread?"

I think you guys are being a little anal.

[The Brain]

Ask and you shall receive.

[garbon]

I still want astral.

[Martinus]

How is a serious discussion about an issue that's directly related to the attack "shitting on the thread?"

I think you guys are being a little anal.

I guess we should also stop talking medicine, science and health care in the ebola thread as more than 2 people died of ebola too.

[PRC]

Corporal Cirillo being taken home to Hamilton.

[Josephus]

So question.

Are we maybe over reacting by calling this a "terrorist act"?
given that what we know now, that he was a lone shooter. While he was Muslim and had plans to travel to the Mid East to "study Koran", he wasn't directly, or indirectly, tied to any terrorist organization. He was mentally unstable. In other circumstances, we may just say he "went postal."
this is not, of course, to down play the death of the soldier or the serious risk to the prime minsiter and other government people and staffers that took place (surprised the head of RCMP hasn't stepped down yet) and that a serious look at the security of government buildings needs to taken immediately.

But is it an act of terror? the Harper government plans on tabling new bills that will give CSIS more power. Does this act justify it?

[crazy canuck]

It is a good question. At least part of the answer may be contained in a video the shooter apparently made just before the attack.  It seems his mother may have been wrong about him him.  In any event I think you raise a very important point that we should not over react.  From news reports it seems the police wanted to detain the fellow who killed the soldier in Quebec but lacked the power to do so.  I am not sure what power they didnt have that they thought they needed.

The man who committed the brazen attack on Parliament Hill that left a Canadian soldier dead was driven by a political and ideological motive, the RCMP said, as it provided new details that shed light on the assault that shook Ottawa last week.

Michael Zehaf-Bibeau prepared a video shortly before he shot a Canadian soldier at the National War Memorial and stormed Parliament, according to police. The video is being analyzed by the RCMP and will not be immediately released. But RCMP Commissioner Bob Paulson said in a statement that police had uncovered "persuasive evidence" of Mr. Zehaf-Bibeau's motivation.

The interwoven questions of whether Mr. Zehaf-Bibeau was mentally ill, whether he was ideologically motivated, whether he thought he was acting on behalf of the Islamic State and whether he moved on his own will take on added significance this week as the Conservative government is expected to table legislation that would enhance the power of intelligence agencies.

Reached by The Globe and Mail Sunday night, Commissioner Paulson said that the video was a short one in which Mr. Zehaf-Bibeau appeared "lucid and purposeful."

He said the RCMP cannot release the video or give further details about it at this time. "It may be evidence," he said. Still, Mr. Paulson said, the public should know about its existence. "There's no agenda to putting it out," he said. The RCMP statement provided details that illuminate some aspects of the attack, including how an apparently homeless, drug-addicted drifter was able to fund his assault.

Mr. Zehaf-Bibeau had worked in the Alberta oil sands and had amassed a considerable sum of money, the RCMP said. That helps explain how he was able to purchase a used car that he drove up to Parliament Hill before hijacking a minister's car. The police said they continue to investigate how Mr. Zehaf-Bibeau distributed the rest of that money prior to his killing.

The question of how Mr. Zehaf-Bibeau acquired a gun remains under investigation, they said. He was prohibited from possessing weapons due to previous criminal convictions, but the RCMP said they believe the knife he was carrying during the attack was retrieved from an aunt's property in Mont Tremblant, where he had lived years earlier. Investigators are looking into the possibility that the weapon used to kill Corporal Nathan Cirillo at the National War Memorial, a .30-30 Winchester lever action rifle, might have been similarly hidden on the property. They called it an "old and uncommon" gun.

"The RCMP is also investigating Zehaf-Bibeau's interactions with numerous individuals in the days leading up to this attack," Mr. Paulson said in the statement. "The investigation is focusing on whether these interactions could have contributed or facilitated, in any way, the terrorist attack subsequently committed by Zehaf-Bibeau."

In her letter, Ms. Bibeau said the RCMP got it wrong about her son's intended destination, something she said she brought to their attention and wondered if they had publicly corrected. She said she believed her son felt trapped because his application for a passport had been held up, which frustrated him to the point that he "wanted death." Or he may have wanted to "strike back at the government that had refused him," she wrote in a statement published by Postmedia over the weekend. She said she felt angry and ashamed in the wake of her son's actions, but said he was an unhappy person "at odds with the world." "For me, mental illness is at the centre of this tragedy," she wrote.

The RCMP announced that it had asked the Ontario Provincial Police to take over the investigation into the shooting of Mr. Zehaf-Bibeau, who was brought down by a hail of bullets after bursting through security at a guarded entry to Parliament's Centre Block.

"The RCMP is confident we will have an authoritative and detailed account of the shooting, including a complete reconstruction of the heroic actions of those involved, in the weeks to come," the statement said.

[Josephus]

The video will be interesting to see what he said. But again, it's just the equivalent of a 1000 page manifesto written in fine penmanship that crazies since time memorial have done.
I'm just wondering why this is labelled an act of terror, and say the shooting of all those women in Montreal around  25 years ago isn't. In both cases a specific type (soldier or women) was targeted.

My concern is that we start watering down "terrorism", if any random act of violence is a terrorist act. Or worse, if every violent act by a muslim is a terror act.

[crazy canuck]

I agree with your concern that there could be an over reaction.  But one thing to keep in mind is that he does appear to have been responding to an ISIS call for action.  So I am not sure your characterization that he had no connection with a terrorist organization is without doubt.

[Jacob]

Yeah. My personal point of view is, given what I know, this does not rise to the level of what I consider terrorism.

I mean, I suppose it could technically be made to fit into a definition of terrorism, but then terrorism does not - again IMO - justify an extraordinary response by itself.

This seems to me to be one deranged individual acting out. That he lashed on to poorly understood Islam, as opposed to shittily articulated Satanism, badly mangled misogyny and MRA BS, some kind of white nationalism, homophobia, anarchism, or any other kind of ideology is neither here nor there.

[Malthus]

Strikes me that "terrorism" is simply a description for the motivation of the attacker - that is, whether or not the attack was designed to create terror, in the service of some sort of ideology.

The analysis of whether the guy was mentally unstable is somewhat besides the point. Most terrorists are likely to be at least somewhat mentally unstable - particularly the ones who don't care if they live or die. In any event, sane or crazy makes no difference to the threat they pose.

The issue of what actions, if any, we should take in response is another issue. I'm not a big fan of 'security theatre', and I'm not convinced that anything can really dissuade a lone attacker from killing people anyway; we should definitely avoid the temptation to sign away civil liberties.

[crazy canuck]

Strikes me that "terrorism" is simply a description for the motivation of the attacker - that is, whether or not the attack was designed to create terror, in the service of some sort of ideology.

The analysis of whether the guy was mentally unstable is somewhat besides the point. Most terrorists are likely to be at least somewhat mentally unstable - particularly the ones who don't care if they live or die. In any event, sane or crazy makes no difference to the threat they pose.

The issue of what actions, if any, we should take in response is another issue. I'm not a big fan of 'security theatre', and I'm not convinced that anything can really dissuade a lone attacker from killing people anyway; we should definitely avoid the temptation to sign away civil liberties.

I agree.

[KRonn]

Looking at the pictures of the caravan carrying the slain soldier is very moving. Great and heartfelt response by the Canadian people.