Canada shootings: Soldier killed and Ottawa on lockdown

[Lokie]

These Jihadists are very brave, they always seem to pick a target who is either an un-harmed innocent civilian, man, woman or child or a Real Man or Woman stood on Ceremonial Guard, promoting and doing something these dog turds would not even understand, brave brave heroic heroes huh?

The Man at Arms stood strong and proud yesterday in Parliament while the whole world looked on at a true Hero who ensured that no more fell at the hands of this coward, he will not be worried about any threats from anyone

RIP to the young soldier also

[simondan]

If people throughout the world were increasingly catching a "cold" that had them coughing themsevles to death, doctors would treat the cough yes, but diagnose the infection as well. Its a matter of simple intelligent inquiry. Throughout the world today, and now Canada, radical islam is stalking all civilization and products of enlightened society. However, the only thing really being discussed is the "cough;" the circumstances of each new act of dreadful violence- to the point of numbess. Few are willing to actually query and name the core disease that is infecting so many people. Lets be clear, ideology can infect people as surely as a virus; indeed, in many regards it has the same reservoirs, vectors, transmission, communicabilty, and morbidity.

The acts in Canada are but one more manifestation of a real disease, far more deadly than ebola (Ebola may kill humanity but it would not erase us having passed), ravishing the islamic communities of this world. It is actually quite easy to detect the causative agent. If all these jihadists, such as in Canada, had Mein Kampf as their single common denominator you can bet your ass we would be hearing about this book instigating the infectious savagery and sedition sweeping the world. We would know exactly what was causing the "cough." But we do not discuss such things, do we? Thus it is inevitable that the threats posed will increase dramatically as denial fuels blindness.

What can seem a reasonably argued post leads to what end or purpose? Its direction and movement are clear, so do its implications take the world toward an open confrontation or conflict -- or conflagration -- against a certain religion.

Gen Dwight Eisenhower's book concerning his WWII experience as supreme allied commander in Europe was titled The Great Crusade. It chronicled his multilateral military campaign against the evil one and the awful manifestations of his self-presented mad struggle Humans claiming to be prophets do have their own mad struggles regardless of their self described cause, purposes.

So who in his right mind would force Saudi Arabia, Jordan, the Gulf states among other Arab nations to choose sides in such a struggle. Have no doubt what Iran would do with its nuclear program if presented absolutely with such a "choice."

This is not the future that would be writ by the events in Ottawa Canada of the past few days - no, not at all.

The current coalition policy of realpolitik diplomacy backed by strategic and selective use of military force does indeed seem the better alternative and the only real and realistic policy.

Your response really does capture the essence of the problem, and I partly agree with you. The part that does not agree with you remains a bit unsure as to a final course of action, but as a source of intellectual honesty, one must confess they clearly see the agent causing islamic jihad. I am 100% resolved that denial is as dangerous as the threat (right now the Fall of the West is being hastened not by jihad but by denial). Once having named that which is the core problem of all these disparate terrorist attacks, how do we proceed? I am unsure finaly but a hint that it is a valid line of inquiry will always be gleaned by the response to the query.

If you can ask the question "What is the unifying fuel of islamic jihad?" and the results will be widespread savagery, murder, riots, burning, boycotts, war and rumours of war- then you know for sure that this line of query is the causative agent. Global denial has given sustanence to the jihadis. Even a three legged dog knows when someone is scared. To run from most animals is foolish as the evident fear gives rise to prusuit. It is abundantly clear the West is in full retreat from an ideology that has quickened its pace in response. Should we name it? You presume that in so naming "it" war must follow?

If, "in so naming it war must follow," then war has already come- it widely overlooked by all the cowering and denial in the western world. Before this modern, Third Jihad plays out around the globe one thing will become clear to the generation that follows us: the problem was always apparent. The source was always discernable. The only thing that prevented strong, wise, affirmative resistance to the ghastly Third Islamic Jihad was simply defining that which seeks to destroy you. Most people on earth understand that islam itself is marching upon the world with the passive or tacit approval of its majority; indeed, they inform of this daily. Until the human mind gives language to the dark places it cannot define it; the mind cannot concieve it; and surely, the will cannot battle it.

Your argument appears to me eerily reminiscent of the black logic of Angkar and Uncle Adolf. In abhorring 'cowering and denial' those guys 'gave language to the dark places', language leading to phrases like 'the final solution' and ' ethnic cleansing', euphamisms for what on the ground was some pretty nasty stuff.

When decision makers exercise restraint, perhaps because of moral strength or just a standpoint that takes in the whole complex issue, they can easily be labelled as cowering and in denial by those of us who dont actually have to make the decisions.

I can see the temptation to strip this issue down to simple concepts - Us against Them (them being the majority of Islamic peoples who you say give their 'tacit approval' to the march of Islam upon the world). Anger and outrage tend to contribute to such a temptation.

But thank god we dont have imbeciles like George Bush Jnr in power anymore whose limited intellect was susceptible to such candied treats. After all, his blundering into Iraq is largely responsible for 'freeing the Mesopotamian genie', disrupting the regional power balance and creating the conditions that now allow the escalation in false jihad that IS represent.

Please correct me if I have misunderstood you but you appear to be presribing total war against Them? Or something similar?

[Ulysses G.]

When decision makers exercise restraint, perhaps because of moral strength or just a standpoint that takes in the whole complex issue, they can easily be labelled as cowering and in denial by those of us who dont actually have to make the decisions.

I am guessing you are a fan of the Neville Chamberlain approach.

[simondan]

When decision makers exercise restraint, perhaps because of moral strength or just a standpoint that takes in the whole complex issue, they can easily be labelled as cowering and in denial by those of us who dont actually have to make the decisions.

I am guessing you are a fan of the Neville Chamberlain approach.

I am guessing you are a fan of the George Armstrong Custer approach?

Actually, with 20/20 hindsight I think Churchill was right. But did Chamberlain and his cabinet make the decisions they did because they were cowering? Or in denial? It was and is easy to label their actions as such but one does not necessarily follow the other. The correct answer is not always going to be 'Charge!'.

Also, Chamberlain was facing a sovereign nation with established diplomatic channels, documented and known allies and a conventional army. He didnt have to contend with a relatively amorphous organisation with sleeper cells and fighting an unconventional war. I believe any parallels between Chamberlain and Obama in this regard are bound to fall flat.

Dont get me wrong, Im all for total war against these evil bastards. I just think including the whole Muslim world in the scope of such action would be, er, unwise.

[Ulysses G.]

I don't see anyone suggesting attacking "the whole Muslim world" besides you, but you might be right about comparing Obama with Neville Chamberlain. I don't remember Chamberlain drawing any red lines, which he ignored when they were crossed. Maybe I am being unfair... to Chamberlain.

Edited October 25, 2014 by Ulysses G.

[simondan]

I don't see anyone suggesting attacking "the whole Muslim world" besides you, but you might be right about comparing Obama with Neville Chamberlain. I don't remember Chamberlain drawing any red lines, which he ignored when they were crossed. Maybe I am being unfair... to Chamberlain.

No, its not me suggesting attacking the whole Islamic world. My original post responded to arjunadawn, who said...

'Before this modern, Third Jihad plays out around the globe one thing will become clear to the generation that follows us: the problem was always apparent. The source was always discernable. The only thing that prevented strong, wise, affirmative resistance to the ghastly Third Islamic Jihad was simply defining that which seeks to destroy you. Most people on earth understand that islam itself is marching upon the world with the passive or tacit approval of its majority; indeed, they inform of this daily. Until the human mind gives language to the dark places it cannot define it; the mind cannot concieve it; and surely, the will cannot battle it.'

As I said in that post, I may have misunderstood arjunadawn, and if so I invited correction.

But the meaning of...

'The only thing that prevented strong, wise, affirmative resistance to the ghastly Third Islamic Jihad was simply defining that which seeks to destroy you. Most people on earth understand that islam itself is marching upon the world with the passive or tacit approval of its majority'

appears to be, as I read it...

'Islam itself' is the definition of 'that which seeks to destroy [us]' (ie the enemy).

The next sentence advocating giving language to the dark places of our minds reminds me of the fictious Colonel Kurtz and his real life neighbour Mr P. Pot. Which gives me real life chills.

[Publicus]

If people throughout the world were increasingly catching a "cold" that had them coughing themsevles to death, doctors would treat the cough yes, but diagnose the infection as well. Its a matter of simple intelligent inquiry. Throughout the world today, and now Canada, radical islam is stalking all civilization and products of enlightened society. However, the only thing really being discussed is the "cough;" the circumstances of each new act of dreadful violence- to the point of numbess. Few are willing to actually query and name the core disease that is infecting so many people. Lets be clear, ideology can infect people as surely as a virus; indeed, in many regards it has the same reservoirs, vectors, transmission, communicabilty, and morbidity.

The acts in Canada are but one more manifestation of a real disease, far more deadly than ebola (Ebola may kill humanity but it would not erase us having passed), ravishing the islamic communities of this world. It is actually quite easy to detect the causative agent. If all these jihadists, such as in Canada, had Mein Kampf as their single common denominator you can bet your ass we would be hearing about this book instigating the infectious savagery and sedition sweeping the world. We would know exactly what was causing the "cough." But we do not discuss such things, do we? Thus it is inevitable that the threats posed will increase dramatically as denial fuels blindness.

What can seem a reasonably argued post leads to what end or purpose? Its direction and movement are clear, so do its implications take the world toward an open confrontation or conflict -- or conflagration -- against a certain religion.

Gen Dwight Eisenhower's book concerning his WWII experience as supreme allied commander in Europe was titled The Great Crusade. It chronicled his multilateral military campaign against the evil one and the awful manifestations of his self-presented mad struggle Humans claiming to be prophets do have their own mad struggles regardless of their self described cause, purposes.

So who in his right mind would force Saudi Arabia, Jordan, the Gulf states among other Arab nations to choose sides in such a struggle. Have no doubt what Iran would do with its nuclear program if presented absolutely with such a "choice."

This is not the future that would be writ by the events in Ottawa Canada of the past few days - no, not at all.

The current coalition policy of realpolitik diplomacy backed by strategic and selective use of military force does indeed seem the better alternative and the only real and realistic policy.

Your response really does capture the essence of the problem, and I partly agree with you. The part that does not agree with you remains a bit unsure as to a final course of action, but as a source of intellectual honesty, one must confess they clearly see the agent causing islamic jihad. I am 100% resolved that denial is as dangerous as the threat (right now the Fall of the West is being hastened not by jihad but by denial). Once having named that which is the core problem of all these disparate terrorist attacks, how do we proceed? I am unsure finaly but a hint that it is a valid line of inquiry will always be gleaned by the response to the query.

If you can ask the question "What is the unifying fuel of islamic jihad?" and the results will be widespread savagery, murder, riots, burning, boycotts, war and rumours of war- then you know for sure that this line of query is the causative agent. Global denial has given sustanence to the jihadis. Even a three legged dog knows when someone is scared. To run from most animals is foolish as the evident fear gives rise to prusuit. It is abundantly clear the West is in full retreat from an ideology that has quickened its pace in response. Should we name it? You presume that in so naming "it" war must follow?

If, "in so naming it war must follow," then war has already come- it widely overlooked by all the cowering and denial in the western world. Before this modern, Third Jihad plays out around the globe one thing will become clear to the generation that follows us: the problem was always apparent. The source was always discernable. The only thing that prevented strong, wise, affirmative resistance to the ghastly Third Islamic Jihad was simply defining that which seeks to destroy you. Most people on earth understand that islam itself is marching upon the world with the passive or tacit approval of its majority; indeed, they inform of this daily. Until the human mind gives language to the dark places it cannot define it; the mind cannot concieve it; and surely, the will cannot battle it.

Absolutely true in all you write. An analogy would be to deny that the Crusades were a belated response to over two centuries of Moorish conquest, murder, rape, piracy and slave raids. Yet that is what orthodox history tends indeed to do, the starting point is always the crusades and the evils carried out during them, but they are never given historic context. I'm not sure where this denial comes from, but the Canadians seem less in denial than the current UK and US administrations, their actions and language will be interesting to test whether this remains so, or whether they buckle to intimidation as Denmark did.

Absolutely true in all you write.

You don't say....

...or I guess you do say.

So it must be said in reply that Western nations are not going to engage in another world war or a regional war against one another or against any other civilization based on religion, ethnicity, race, an increasingly ignored rulebook, or anything of the sort.

The Western analysis and evaluation of the Crusades, initiated long ago, is based on the Crusades themselves and all that transpired during them and of the manifest consequences of such ongoing wars. As with the battle against IS, examining the causes is important but that examination must yield to the present priority of defeating the clear and present danger, threat.

I haven't any doubt the assailant against the Canadian parliament -- and all that it is and represents -- was inspired by a certain rulebook and a certain religion, but that doesn't necessarily mean Canada or the West in general must or needs be respond in kind. After all, radical Muslims weren't the only people in the world rejoicing on Sept 11th 2001.

The attack in Ottawa against Canada constitutes a 9/11 kind of radical departure to Canadians from the long standing Canadian notions of themselves and of their nation's exceptionalism, to include Canada's secure and removed place in the scheme of things. This convert to Islam victim was after all born and raised in a peaceful and prosperous Canada that is deservedly confident and secure of itself.

Canadian calm and reserved self-confidence stands in contrast to the bold and strident character of Denmark which consciously put a bull's eye on its back for not only Muslim radicals, but against the world of Islam itself. Canada hasn't ever as much as contemplated any such high profile stridency, remaining confident and low key as it worked quietly to resolve differences among others.

Voices of appeasement exist in any country so going forward Canada will be no exception. However, anyone who saw the live telecast of the subsequent reopening of parliament was witness to a Canada of resolve and strength and should have no doubt it remains the Canada that defeated the Axis powers of WWII and which held steadfast throughout the Cold War to its successful conclusion.

[arjunadawn]

TO ARJUNADAWN

Your argument appears to me eerily reminiscent of the black logic of Angkar and Uncle Adolf. In abhorring 'cowering and denial' those guys 'gave language to the dark places', language leading to phrases like 'the final solution' and ' ethnic cleansing', euphamisms for what on the ground was some pretty nasty stuff.

When decision makers exercise restraint, perhaps because of moral strength or just a standpoint that takes in the whole complex issue, they can easily be labelled as cowering and in denial by those of us who dont actually have to make the decisions.

I can see the temptation to strip this issue down to simple concepts - Us against Them (them being the majority of Islamic peoples who you say give their 'tacit approval' to the march of Islam upon the world). Anger and outrage tend to contribute to such a temptation.

But thank god we dont have imbeciles like George Bush Jnr in power anymore whose limited intellect was susceptible to such candied treats. After all, his blundering into Iraq is largely responsible for 'freeing the Mesopotamian genie', disrupting the regional power balance and creating the conditions that now allow the escalation in false jihad that IS represent.

Please correct me if I have misunderstood you but you appear to be presribing total war against Them? Or something similar?

Your post is a poor ad hominen attack on me, not cleverly concealed as your "right thinking." Any human who takes my benign comments to ask the questions and savages me with the likes of Hitler and the Khmers, reveals himself. You juxtapose my qoutes with those of Adolf Hitler and Khmer madman? I noted how, when asking the question, if it instigates outrage by virtue of being asked, then it is correct. Congratulations!

I wish I can say more in direct response, and clarify your question/sick-associations of my post. I do wish to remain respectful to the forum rules and redirect to the thread. As some of you know, I would love to take your bait and run with the line but...

I have been reminded, this Topic regards CA: and the soldier and Ottawa killing. I should like to redirect this there, where it belongs.

In a really curious piece from Global Research, it is noted that the US was actually reporting the name of the attacker in the Parliment attacks before the CA media were even out of lockdown. Before CA officals even had a chance to sort things out, the name was known by their neighbor in the south, and released to US media. This may not be alarming but it does demand looking into. How do we once again have a "known/managed" actor comitting acts of terror in North America (Passports revoked)? As a junior historian it must be noted that landmark Canadian legislation was pending, and passed, during the smoke of this debacle. No, it doesnt mean nefarious ends. It just means CA took a large step in the direction of the US intel state at the very moment these attacks were happening. Were this a movie we would justifiably be riveted to our seats, knuckles white.

While there are multiple suggestions in this article I direct further into the article; why was this man known?

http://www.globalresearch.ca/government-passes-anti-constitutional-surveillance-law-during-ottawa-shooting/5409771

Edited October 25, 2014 by arjunadawn

[simondan]

Calm down arjuna, there's no attack on you, its not personal. I didnt put in the 'TO ARJUNADAWN' heading either, which adds a confrontational element not in my post. And I think I made it pretty clear that I could have misunderstood you, leaving the door open for you to correct me, and we could all have a discussion like mature adults.

It would be a lot easier to follow your logic and not have to seek clarification if your posts weren't so unneccesarily verbose and over-expressive.

[bkkcanuck8]

The computing power to cross-reference information that IS available is far superior to anything most other countries have -- so it cannot be too surprising that the US could narrow down the individual identified through photos etc. The US would have had access to intelligence and criminal records that are on file with the RCMP and CSIS. Probably an anonymous source inside the US government got ahead of themselves and was probably disciplined for releasing the results and in doing so revealed more about methods than the intelligence agencies would have liked to be made public.

[H1w4yR1da]

And yet ANOTHER cowardly attack by a convert to the religion of peace.

http://news.yahoo.com/man-islamic-extremist-leanings-attacks-ny-police-083342808.html

They're almost becoming a daily occurance.

Edited October 25, 2014 by H1w4yR1da

[arjunadawn]

Absolutely true in all you write.

You don't say....

...or I guess you do say.

So it must be said in reply that Western nations are not going to engage in another world war or a regional war against one another or against any other civilization based on religion, ethnicity, race, an increasingly ignored rulebook, or anything of the sort.

The Western analysis and evaluation of the Crusades, initiated long ago, is based on the Crusades themselves and all that transpired during them and of the manifest consequences of such ongoing wars. As with the battle against IS, examining the causes is important but that examination must yield to the present priority of defeating the clear and present danger, threat.

I haven't any doubt the assailant against the Canadian parliament -- and all that it is and represents -- was inspired by a certain rulebook and a certain religion, but that doesn't necessarily mean Canada or the West in general must or needs be respond in kind. After all, radical Muslims weren't the only people in the world rejoicing on Sept 11th 2001.

The attack in Ottawa against Canada constitutes a 9/11 kind of radical departure to Canadians from the long standing Canadian notions of themselves and of their nation's exceptionalism, to include Canada's secure and removed place in the scheme of things. This convert to Islam victim was after all born and raised in a peaceful and prosperous Canada that is deservedly confident and secure of itself.

Canadian calm and reserved self-confidence stands in contrast to the bold and strident character of Denmark which consciously put a bull's eye on its back for not only Muslim radicals, but against the world of Islam itself. Canada hasn't ever as much as contemplated any such high profile stridency, remaining confident and low key as it worked quietly to resolve differences among others.

Voices of appeasement exist in any country so going forward Canada will be no exception. However, anyone who saw the live telecast of the subsequent reopening of parliament was witness to a Canada of resolve and strength and should have no doubt it remains the Canada that defeated the Axis powers of WWII and which held steadfast throughout the Cold War to its successful conclusion.

Your post is a mainstream, valid way of observing these events. It is not mine, though. However, I have never advocated war; I am far too aware of the conditions of war having "been" in numerous war zones. Someone distilled that from my comment and the ball kept rolling. Therefore, I object to the idea above that "that Western nations are not going to engage in another world war or a regional war against one another or against any other civilization based on religion, ethnicity, race, an increasingly ignored rulebook, or anything of the sort." Without reservation, it is my position that this sentence captures the problem- the West will avoid War at all costs.

Yet the West is at war, in war, waging war, planning, war- warring! The west is doing all the things that consistute war but calling it "not war" because they dont wish to offend... all the millions who are at war with the West. It makes no difference whether the west concieves of a state of war, it is being warred upon. It is at this juncture only I state one needs to ask the question- what is the source of this Fourth Generational type non state war? Indeed, there are even state actors warring upon the west through sunni and shia countries. (BTW, Denmark's "strident character" actually had tears running from my eyes, thank you. Denmark defines Dhimmitude. No nation has so easily served at the feet of its new masters). Based on this useful point regarding Denmark I can contrast the road CA must take in order to survive.

According to some media sources CA is moving toward increased militarization because of this same awareness that the asymetrical nature of Fourth Generation War has the West incapable of mounting not only a defense but a response against lone wolf threats. However, even if the attacks in CA serve to motivate the people to surrender more liberties (charter) in prusuit of more security, the real issue remains vague and unspoken, as in Denmark. CA must use this moment to have a frank and honest discussion not be held hostage to catcalls, political correct leveraging, special interest demands, etc. What is the threat posed to CA, who poses it, how will it manifest, and what steps can be taken to first mitigate it, and later massage or repair the problem totally? But Canada, do not go the way of Denmark.

"I haven't any doubt the assailant against the Canadian parliament -- and all that it is and represents -- was inspired by a certain rulebook and a certain religion, but that doesn't necessarily mean Canada or the West in general must or needs be respond in kind. After all, radical Muslims weren't the only people in the world rejoicing on Sept 11th 2001."

I close only in noting this passage from your post. I would actually pay money to see someone defend this statement in a debate- "Que, sera, sera."

Edited October 25, 2014 by arjunadawn

[arjunadawn]

The computing power to cross-reference information that IS available is far superior to anything most other countries have -- so it cannot be too surprising that the US could narrow down the individual identified through photos etc. The US would have had access to intelligence and criminal records that are on file with the RCMP and CSIS. Probably an anonymous source inside the US government got ahead of themselves and was probably disciplined for releasing the results and in doing so revealed more about methods than the intelligence agencies would have liked to be made public.

Yes, agreed. In all likelihood the article cited sour grapes on the part of the CA media for being beat to the story because they were locked down.

[Steely Dan]

TO ARJUNADAWN

Your argument appears to me eerily reminiscent of the black logic of Angkar and Uncle Adolf. In abhorring 'cowering and denial' those guys 'gave language to the dark places', language leading to phrases like 'the final solution' and ' ethnic cleansing', euphamisms for what on the ground was some pretty nasty stuff.

When decision makers exercise restraint, perhaps because of moral strength or just a standpoint that takes in the whole complex issue, they can easily be labelled as cowering and in denial by those of us who dont actually have to make the decisions.

I can see the temptation to strip this issue down to simple concepts - Us against Them (them being the majority of Islamic peoples who you say give their 'tacit approval' to the march of Islam upon the world). Anger and outrage tend to contribute to such a temptation.

But thank god we dont have imbeciles like George Bush Jnr in power anymore whose limited intellect was susceptible to such candied treats. After all, his blundering into Iraq is largely responsible for 'freeing the Mesopotamian genie', disrupting the regional power balance and creating the conditions that now allow the escalation in false jihad that IS represent.

Please correct me if I have misunderstood you but you appear to be presribing total war against Them? Or something similar?

Your post is a poor ad hominen attack on me, not cleverly concealed as your "right thinking." Any human who takes my benign comments to ask the questions and savages me with the likes of Hitler and the Khmers, reveals himself. You juxtapose my qoutes with those of Adolf Hitler and Khmer madman? I noted how, when asking the question, if it instigates outrage by virtue of being asked, then it is correct. Congratulations!

I wish I can say more in direct response, and clarify your question/sick-associations of my post. I do wish to remain respectful to the forum rules and redirect to the thread. As some of you know, I would love to take your bait and run with the line but...

I have been reminded, this Topic regards CA: and the soldier and Ottawa killing. I should like to redirect this there, where it belongs.

In a really curious piece from Global Research, it is noted that the US was actually reporting the name of the attacker in the Parliment attacks before the CA media were even out of lockdown. Before CA officals even had a chance to sort things out, the name was known by their neighbor in the south, and released to US media. This may not be alarming but it does demand looking into. How do we once again have a "known/managed" actor comitting acts of terror in North America (Passports revoked)? As a junior historian it must be noted that landmark Canadian legislation was pending, and passed, during the smoke of this debacle. No, it doesnt mean nefarious ends. It just means CA took a large step in the direction of the US intel state at the very moment these attacks were happening. Were this a movie we would justifiably be riveted to our seats, knuckles white.

While there are multiple suggestions in this article I direct further into the article; why was this man known?

http://www.globalresearch.ca/government-passes-anti-constitutional-surveillance-law-during-ottawa-shooting/5409771

Perhaps this time the Canadians will be prepared to bury the hatchet, as the New York subway Jihaddist tried to, or perhaps the Canadians could respond in kind hinting it was not a transportation incident.

P.S anyone who denies that ISIS are a common thread in all of this would do well to explain why such incidents are coming thick and fast at the moment.

[arjunadawn]

Post removed to enable reply.

With the converts and younger people joining IS, who appear to be the majority, were not practising followers of Islam. For whatever personal reasons when discovering / rediscovering Islam they are attracted to those advocating violent extremism. To be honest I do not understand the causal reasons of this phenomenon, nor does it appear do most of the leaders of Western societies on why 'they' find the ideology appealing in the first place.

Easy..they hate the West for a,b,c reasons and in order to strike back at it they join the most anti-western ideology/religion around....Islam.

I read and hear many arguments for why people would prusue such ideology, even at the expense of their own lives. What I have come to realize most is I am limited by my perceptions- what am I capable of imagining? I think an even greater amount of people in the West are limited by their perceptions. We tend to think, based on our own landmarks and mores and values, that "they" must be unhappy with economics, politics, policy, unemployment, trade, opportunity passing by, or low self esteem. I have come to realize these things may concurrently be present in many jihadis but there is also something else, something deeper, in many cases. We tend to miss this as describing color escapes the blind.

It has been a long while since religious zealotry (sorry Jews) consumed the passions of the average Westerner/Canadian. We overlook the persuasive power of belonging, of being assured they are a warrior for god (Ephesians, Jihad, etc), and that by their actions they give meaning to an otherwise meaningless life, in furtherance, no less, of the will of god. How grand? How many really, really feel this intoxicating power? Few. But it is real, it is infectious, and it is virulent. A greater part of the recruitment for new jihadis will be less about the irresistable attraction of self emolation and death, and more about the weakness and deciet and succumbing of the Western response. Everyone wants to be on a winning team. From a disaffected muslim youth in the West, western society does not appear to be the winning team. It does not and each one of us, alone with our thoughts, fears this.

The TTP- Tactics Techniques and Procedures adopted by the West and soon Canada, will not stem the hemorraghing. The bleeding will only worsen because the wrong approach is being employed, for the wrong reasons, with the wrong understanding of the agent. As CA debates the development of its own as agents of jihad I pray it considers the right course for CA independent of other western policies. If it arrives, fairly, at the same policy conclusions as other western nations, ok. But I hope CA asks itself all the right questions without regard to political correctness and foreign leverage.

Simple1- just a thought. The world is actually a complicated place, increasingly. With the age of prophets, magic, god and meaning behind the western world there are few places to turn for a template to manage the aloneness of the universe. Islam provides to many a very specific template of personal and societal governance that takes from you (whew) the need to detect, discern, and manage your life. Islam has an answer for everything and has the added advantage of appearing worn, ancient, perhaps wise, in an age where few other insitutions provide such reason for being. It allows a person to navigate their lives IAW with something much greater than they are, and be informed of usefulness.

[arjunadawn]

Calm down arjuna, there's no attack on you, its not personal. I didnt put in the 'TO ARJUNADAWN' heading either, which adds a confrontational element not in my post. And I think I made it pretty clear that I could have misunderstood you, leaving the door open for you to correct me, and we could all have a discussion like mature adults.

It would be a lot easier to follow your logic and not have to seek clarification if your posts weren't so unneccesarily verbose and over-expressive.

I added "To Arjunadawn" as I had too many posts. I am an imperfect man and as I have conceeded. Tip: If you dont understand and wish to, ask. While verbose at times, it is hardly necessary you assign me as the cause of your hitler association. Hitler is a bit excessive. Let us agree now to refocus.

I actually do not want the CA actions to lead to an increased posture toward war. I think this would be as tragic a mistake as other western friends are doing. If you cannot define the threat you can not manage it. It is my firmest position, previously not stated, that the West needs to intelligently, transparently, have the discussions on the emerging face of Islam and its threat to the world. This process would not, as imagined, lead to warring against Islam. It would clarify and set in motion the need for moderate Islamic countries throughout the world to self regulate, even if for no other reason than survival.

Islam is undoubtedly in a reformation. In the midst of all of this opportunist, illegitimate, islamic countries are manipulating radical jihadis for political gains. This is the single greatest action in the world fueling the spread of jihad. CA should seek an independent analysis of what is happening rather than shoehorning these acts into an already fictious narrative of islam and the world.

[F430murci]

And yet ANOTHER cowardly attack by a convert to the religion of peace.

http://news.yahoo.com/man-islamic-extremist-leanings-attacks-ny-police-083342808.html

They're almost becoming a daily occurance.

This dude's Internet postings are chilling. He is dead now. Good f'in riddance to him and all like him.

[H1w4yR1da]

The Muslim terrorists who killed the 2 canadian soldiers recently were followers of Anjem Choudary.

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/canada-ottawa-quebec-terror-attackers-followed-britains-hate-preacher-anjem-choudary-1471487

[Mosha]

The killer in the OP made a video Canadian police report, according to BBC World News.

[canman]

The Muslim terrorists who killed the 2 canadian soldiers recently were followers of Anjem Choudary.

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/canada-ottawa-quebec-terror-attackers-followed-britains-hate-preacher-anjem-choudary-1471487

This Anjem Choudary? Apparently he really hates this pic being passed around on the internet.

[katana]

Apparently he was a bit of a party animal back in his university days.

[bkkcanuck8]

To me it just sounds like another pathetic loser who blamed society for his situation. Converting to the muslim faith was probably some form of escape instead of reflecting why he turned out to be a loser and trying to rectify it -- he was likely attracted to radical muslim philosophy because it was teaching him, it was not his fault it was the society's fault. The only good that comes out of this is that he is no longer with us -- unfortunately it came at too high a price (for others).

[katana]

Tucker Carlson Confronts Choudary, Who Wants to Implement "Sharia Law":

http://youtu.be/pMqRKfwrn9Q

[ABCer]

By Jessica Chasmar - The Washington Times - Wednesday, October 22, 2014

"A top Canadian naval officer reportedly warned soldiers on Tuesday not to wear their uniforms out in public for fear of being targeted, following two deadly attacks this week on uniformed soldiers in Quebec and Ontario."

MORE

Shame, Shame, Shame!

The West has fallen another notch in its war with Islam!

We FEAR them ! Yet they are a minority! I am weeping for free and beautiful Canada!

I am weeping for my once free and beautiful Australia!

In stark contrast to Canada only in Israel boys and girls are proudly wearing their guns and uniforms! And are not afraid!

[chrisinth]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

By Jessica Chasmar - The Washington Times - Wednesday, October 22, 2014

"A top Canadian naval officer reportedly warned soldiers on Tuesday not to wear their uniforms out in public for fear of being targeted, following two deadly attacks this week on uniformed soldiers in Quebec and Ontario."

MORE

Shame, Shame, Shame!

The West has fallen another notch in its war with Islam!

We FEAR them ! Yet they are a minority! I am weeping for free and beautiful Canada!

I am weeping for my once free and beautiful Australia!

In stark contrast to Canada only in Israel boys and girls are proudly wearing their guns and uniforms! And are not afraid!

Perhaps not a war against Islam, but against the terrorists that represent it through their own interpretation of the koran.

As for the rest of the post, i agree fully. It is a worldwide problem, where governments have made 'socially accepted' PC laws that protect the very people that they should be afraid of. Not only for the crimes they commit, but for the latitude they are given that makes the crimes possible.

Human Rights? IMHO, there are times and situations when some humans should not be entitled to any rights.

But off course, this is only a personal opinion, i wouldn't want to upset any tree-huggers, wannabe disillusioned psychiatrists or the like over this problem........................

Murdered victims (regardless of wearing uniform or not under these circumstances) bleed on the ground as testament to there being a problem.

[45slap]

Don't wear your uniform? How about banning this sorry-ass 'religion'? It's an insidious disease.

[45slap]

Self-moderate? Hahaha!

[Friendly Stranger]

Tucker Carlson Confronts Choudary, Who Wants to Implement "Sharia Law":

http://youtu.be/pMqRKfwrn9Q

This almost looked staged how ridiculous it was.

Good for you Tuck.

Re Sharia Law: Implement it in your own country you hypocrit, have another beer..

[katana]

Looks like Choudary spent his first night in prison last night when bail was denied:

Anjem Choudary faces UK terrorism charges over Islamic State (BBC News 05/08/15)
Radical preacher Anjem Choudary has appeared at Westminster Magistrates' Court charged with inviting support for the so-called Islamic State.
He and another man Mohammed Rahman, indicated they would plead not guilty.
Anjem Choudary was remanded in custody until 28 August.
Both men have each been charged with one offence under section 12 of the Terrorism Act 2000, alleged to have taken place between 29 June 2014 and 6 March this year.
Continued here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-33784926 (05/08/15)

[7by7]

No idea what the ridiculous Choudary has to do with this topic; but would like to point out that anyone who believes he, his views and his outpourings represent anything except a very tiny minority of British Muslims obviously has no idea of the reality.

On the other hand, though, for some reason the media love him!