kelownabomberfan

The EU has opened the door to Britain sending troops or other specialists to France after an emergency mechanism was triggered for the first time in the bloc's history. France activated Article 42, a distress call that compels other EU states to send military and other support. It is akin to Article 5, the Nato mutual defence pact. States have already pledged support, which could be military or civil. France will specify the support it needs to each state in the coming days.

To answer your question, I think that this definitely would have affected the election. Harper would have won a majority, no question. I also have to wonder if these attacks are going to cause the cancelation of Justin's climate change party in Paris next week?

http://www.ctvnews.ca/world/german-stadium-evacuated-after-concrete-evidence-of-explosive-plot-1.2662737 Soccer game cancelled today in Germany on short notice due to explosive device plot. Merkel was supposed to be at the game.

There's a good reason that the winner of that "free" (cough cough) election is in jail. He and the MB's were trying to start a war with Israel. The Muslim Brotherhood is not a party you want running your country.

I don't see how any democracy can function in the Middle East, other than Israel. If you keep half your population enslaved through not providing any sort of public education, meaning that they are doomed to menial labour for their entire lives, how do you teach them that their vote has value, or which candidate is even worth voting for? A strong man with a strong secret police has to be in place, or radical Islam will over take and destroy the entire country. Look at how fast the military acted in Egypt to over-throw the "democratically elected" Muslim Brotherhood government. The reason they acted fast was that the MB's started shipping arms and rockets into Gaza almost the same day they were elected, and the Egyptian military does NOT want another war with Israel.

No question, the Iraq war launched by Bush was so incredibly stupid and created a vacuum in Iraq that is to blame for a lot of the unrest currently in that region, and the formation of ISIS. The Arab Spring probably wouldn't have happened either, and Gaddafi and Hussein would still have iron grips on the crazies in those regions. Would that be better?

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/even-syrian-refugees-agree-it-is-not-easy-to-identify-the-fakes

The NDP and the rest of the vociferous anti-Harper crowd would have accused the Conservatives of master-minding the attacks to create a "wedge" issue.

Right. Because they actually had a battle to win with an achievable end game, the reunification of Vietnam. Their goal was political, not religious. The "battle" you describe that radical Islam is engaging in won't be won until the entire earth is one giant Caliphate. So that's why the bombings will never stop.

No, what I am saying is that you seem to be looking for someone else to blame for these attacks other than radical Islam. I'm sorry, but I'm not buying that it was just "mistreatment" that lead these people in Paris to self-detonate, just like it wasn't mistreatment that is causing Boko Haram to wipe out whole villages in Nigeria or Al Quada to blow up Christian churches in Pakistan. Mistreatment of the Middle East isn't the reason that Philippine muslims on Mindanao are kidnapping, torturing and head-hacking infidels. Mistreatment of the Middle East isn't what is causing massive unrest in Myanmar. Mistreatment of the Middle East didn't cause 400,000 Bengalis to be slaughtered in 1971. Mistreatment of the Middle East didn't cause 1,000,000 Armenians to be slaughtered in Turkey in 1915. There is a lot more to this than "our countries mistreated them so it's our fault that thousands of people are being killed every month in terrorist attacks". It's radical Islam that is to blame. Every other excuse isn't even in the same galaxy. And make no mistake, in no way am I blaming all Muslims, or the religion itself.

Anonymous already declared war on ISIS after the Hebdo attacks. Good job on that war there Anonymous. ISIS is quaking in their sandals and explosive vests.

Good thing there is no more football left to play in Winnipeg this year....oh wait...

The Norman Bethune of Islamic extremism?

Brad Wall asking the Shiny Pony to rethink his campaign promise regarding allowing the Syrian flood of unvetted refugees into Canada. Will the Shiny Pony do that and look uncool to all of his selfie admirers at the G20 conference? http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatoon/sask-premier-brad-wall-asks-ottawa-to-suspend-syrian-refugee-plan-1.3321159

Wait - no fire is allowed on the sidelines. Only slow patient pats on the back and smiles for the players, no matter how mind-numbingly dumb the penalty or screw-up.

That's what I told everyone in 2001, including my Vegas bookie. Man that broken leg took a long time to heal. Still working on the heart though, 14 years later...

Sorry Mark, but I'm not buying this apologist argument. As I said in a previous post, this is just too easy. Why aren't the Vietnamese self-detonating and murdering people in cold blood in restaurants and theaters in Paris right now? They have every reason to hate the French. They were mistreated by "our" countries (I'm not sure who you are lumping into this catch-all) including France and the USA, for well over 100 years. Over a million of their citizens were murdered. And yet, the Vietnamese are peaceful and are moving on with their lives. This isn't about mistreatment (or at least, that's just a small factor) of the Middle East (once again, not sure who you are lumping in to that category). It's about a religion that seems to be unable to co-exist with anyone else in many parts of the world. Try going to parts of Myanmar. Guess which parts you can't travel in. Try going to the Philippines. Guess which area you can't travel in. Were the people of Mindanao in the Philippines "mistreated" by "our" countries? Of course not. Yet they are kidnapping and beheading "infidels" too. I just don't buy it Mark.

Stamkos for Ladd - straight up - how could Tampa say no to that one?

Looks like Washington DC has been named as the next target. http://dailysignal.com/2015/11/16/isis-just-named-d-c-as-possible-target-for-terrorist-attacks-has-the-risk-increased/ one relevant segment to Canadians, in light of the Liberal campaign promise re Syrian refugees: Q: Should the U.S. be concerned about foreign-fighters coming to our shores hidden among Middle Eastern refugees? A: The government needs to focus on “terrorist travel,” finding and disrupting how groups like ISIS and al-Qaeda attempt to move assets rather than particular groups. The U.S. has seen it all—homegrown terrorists, refugees, and legal international travel. What we need from Washington is due diligence in how they process all of these. When it comes to refugees, the administration has an obligation to conduct a substantive risk assessment, fully consult with Congress and follow the law, and thoroughly vet refugee applicants.

Dat would be the record completion percentage in 2005, Bob! That and his stupid ******* facial hair choices and his giant dumbo ears... he just looks like someone you'd want to punch right in the face. I don't care if he looks like the hunchback of Notre Dame. If he can get our offence firing on all cylinders. He's my guy! If we reject an OC with a winning track record purely because of his dumbo ears then we deserve to be 25 years without a Cup.

Yikes! 100 porn stars?

Connect the dots to get to the root of terrorism RAHEEL RAZA First posted: Sunday, November 15, 2015 03:16 PM EST Once again terrorists have struck at the heart of Europe. My cousin who lives in Paris writes: “Paris, my City of Lights is in darkness — but this, too, shall pass.” Will it pass? Our reaction is deep sadness at the loss of innocent lives but also anger at the fact that this attack is not unexpected, knowing the track record of ISIS and their ilk. Reaction across Europe is that this madness is now a reality, hitting close to home. For some leaders in the West, the discussion is whether ISIS should be called Daesh, ISIL or something else? Let’s not deflect the real issue. For some Muslims on social media and those I have spoken to over the past two days, the victim card is already being played out. I met a young newly-elected Muslim MP who said: “I hate the word ‘terrorist’ because we don’t know who they [the perpetrators] are.” Seriously? Across mainstream media, self-appointed analysts are spouting their expertise to conclude that the culprit turned out to be none other than ISIS — surprise! We fully agree that the perpetrator this time is ISIS. But the same type of cowardly terrorist attacks have taken place even before ISIS was in existence. Why can’t we connect the dots to the heart of where the violence is emanating from? Former prime minister Stephen Harper was one of the first western leaders to point out that Islamism is the biggest threat facing Canada. U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron called radical ideology “the struggle of our generation.” (http://www.latimes.com/world/europe/la-fg-britain-cameron-islam-20150720-story.html). French President François Hollande says this is a declaration of war. We agree. However this declaration of war from radical Islamists happened at 9/11 when planes crashed into the twin towers in New York. What other well articulated argument do we need to understand the enormity of the threat? Since 9/11, the West has been waffling in the quicksand of political correctness and refuse to call a spade a spade. Until they do, attacks like those in Paris, New York, Mumbai, Boston and Ottawa will keep happening again and again until they engulf all of us. Just connect the dots: • The export of Wahabi ideology has been taking place successfully for more than three decades. • Trillions of dollars have been used to support this program. • The inability of democratic western nations to challenge Saudi Arabia and Iran on their human rights record. • Non-integration of Muslims into countries where they migrate or seek refuge. • The push for unreasonable accommodation that white liberal guilt offers these immigrants. • No challenge to messages of hate being spouted from Mosques — especially against Christians, Jews and Hindus. • The ability of notorious Muslim organizations who say they represent all Muslims to work with impunity with government bodies. • Finally the refusal of western democracies to brand terrorist organizations as terrorists. Defence Minister Harjit Singh Sajjan just said that Canadians should not fear ISIS. With due respect, Canadians while not being afraid, should be very concerned. The perpetrators are within us and unless law enforcement takes drastic action on the issues mentioned above, terrorists will strike again. There is no need to pray for Paris unless we connect the dots, understand the players and their motives and take action accordingly. — Raza is President of The Council for Muslims Facing Tomorrow and author of Their Jihad is not my Jihad and international activist for women’s rights http://www.torontosun.com/2015/11/15/connect-the-dots-to-get-to-the-root-of-terrorism

Here's a column from 2013 from another unacceptable source, Mark Steyn. When I posted this column on another website forum I visit I was totally pilloried and several people demanded that I be banned from the forum, for posting such politically incorrect and insulting rubbish. And yet it's never been more poignant: Whose Islam? National Review's Happy Warrior October 21, 2013 The "war" part of the war on terror is pretty much over, and we're now fighting it culturally, rhetorically. Which is not something we do well. Take the British prime minister and his traditional nothing-to-do-with-Islam statement, issued in the wake of the Kenyan shopping-mall carnage: These appalling terrorist attacks that take place where the perpetrators claim they do it in the name of a religion: They don't. They do it in the name of terror, violence and extremism and their warped view of the world. They don't represent Islam, or Muslims in Britain or anywhere else in the world. Same with the Muslims who beheaded a British soldier, Drummer Rigby, on a London street in broad daylight. On that occasion, David Cameron assured us that the unfortunate incident was "a betrayal of Islam. . . . There is nothing in Islam that justifies this truly dreadful act." How does he know? Mr. Cameron is not (yet) a practicing Muslim. A self-described "vaguely practicing" Anglican, he becomes rather less vague and unusually forceful and emphatic when the subject turns to Islam. At the Westgate mall in Nairobi, the terrorists separated non-Muslim hostages from Muslims and permitted the latter to leave if they could recite a Muslim prayer—a test I doubt Mr. Cameron could have passed, for all his claims to authority on what is and isn't Islamic. So the perpetrators seem to think it's something to do with Islam—and, indeed, something to do with Muslims in the United Kingdom, given that the terrorists included British subjects (as well as U.S. citizens). It was a busy weekend for Nothing to Do with Islam. Among the other events that were nothing to do with Islam were the murder of over 85 Pakistani Christians at All Saints' Church in Peshawar and the beheading of Ricardo Dionio in the Philippines by BIFF, the aggressively acronymic breakaway faction (the Bangsamoro Islamic Freedom Fighters) from the more amusingly acronymic MILF (the Moro Islamic Liberation Front). Despite a body count higher than Kenya, the Pakistani slaughter received barely a mention in the Western media. You'd be hard put to find an Anglican church in England with a big enough congregation on a Sunday morning to kill 85 worshipers therein, but in Peshawar, a 99 percent Muslim city, the few remaining Christians are not of the "vaguely practicing" Cameron variety. Viewed from London, however, they've already lost: One day there will be no Christians in Peshawar and the city will be 100 percent Muslim. It may be "nothing to do with Islam," but it's just the way it is: We accept the confessional cleansing of Pakistan, as we do of Egypt, because it's part of "the Muslim world." Nairobi, on the other hand, is not, and a murderous assault on an upscale shopping mall patronized by Kenya's elite and wealthy secular expats gets far closer to the comfort zone wherein David Cameron "vaguely practices": In a "clash of civilizations" in which one side doesn't want to play, a shattered church has less symbolic resonance than a shattered frozen-yogurt eatery. On this side of the Atlantic, meanwhile, the Canadian branch of the Islamic Society of North America lost its charitable status after it was revealed to be funding all that jihad stuff that's nothing to do with Islam. This presented a small problem for Justin Trudeau, leader of the Liberal party, son of Pierre, and on course to be the Queen's dimmest prime minister of her six-decade reign: Where David Cameron is a silky, slippery deceiver who surely knows better, young Justin seems genuinely to believe the mush he serves up. Asked to explain his recent photo-op at the now-discredited ISNA, he replied: "Part of my job is to speak with as many Canadians as possible and talk to people about the kinds of shared values we have." I don't suppose M. Trudeau really means he "shares values" with terrorism supporters, but he does get to the heart of the problem: To put it at its mildest, there seem to be insufficient "shared values" between Western societies and a not-insignificant number of young Muslim men who are nominally and legally citizens thereof. One survivor of the Westgate mall said, "I don't understand why you would shoot a five-year-old child." But what's to understand? The child was shot because he was not Muslim. Five-year-olds died at All Saints' Church for the same reason—because, even in a town that's 99 percent Muslim, a non-Muslim kindergartner is a provocation. Crazy, huh? Yet it is not inconceivable that the man who executed the five-year-old at the Westgate mall was one of those "British subjects" or "U.S. citizens." That's to say, he's not some primitive from the fringes of the map but someone who has grown up in the same society as Justin Trudeau and decided that Justin's "shared values" are worthless. To be charitable to Mr. Cameron, he is trying to point out that very few Muslims want to stare a five-year-old in the eye and pull the trigger. But, likewise, very few of them want to do anything serious—in their mosques and madrassahs—about the culture that incubates such men. The prime minister is betting that all the clever chaps like him can keep the lid on and hold things to what, at the height of the Northern Irish "Troubles," cynical British officials privately called "an acceptable level of violence." A combined weekend corpse count of 150 is, apparently, "acceptable"—or at any rate not sufficiently unacceptable to prompt any reconsideration of a British, Canadian, and European immigration policy that makes Islam the principal source of Western population growth. But don't worry: As John McCain says of our Syrian "allies," "Allahu akbar" simply means "Thank God." Thank God for that.

I hear what Goalie's saying, but these perpetrators in Paris were almost all French Nationals, so they were living in France, not the Middle East, and so didn't have bombs dropping on them. They were motivated by something else. I've said it before and I'll say it again - the unifying thread through all of these attacks and discussions is the sickness that is fundamental Islam. Westerners have a hard time wrapping their head around why people strap bombs to themselves and blow themselves up. We have such great lives, why would you want to kill yourself, and why would you want to take out a bunch of other people, just because they have a different religion? Do some research. It's no different than why people drink poisoned Kool-Aid and think that they are going to float out to a comet and travel to another galaxy. It's religious fervor. There's a reason why illiteracy in the Middle East (outside of Israel) is around 50%. The imams want everyone to be illiterate. That way they will believe everything they are told. Here's a good Vice episode on suicide bombers. Fast forward to the 11 minute mark (though the first 11 minutes are good too, about the Philippines): Vice is extremely left-wing, so I hope it is acceptable to the PC Himmlers residing here...

Anyone who is interested in hearing more from and about Ayaan Hirsi Ali, here's a good interview with her in which she gives her opinion on what has to change in the Muslim world (of course I expect the source to be attacked yet again): And here's a dated yet funny interview with Hirsi Ali and the ultra-leftist Avi Lewis, who has his politically correct mind blown as his viewpoint is totally destroyed by her, as newsflash Avi, she's actually lived this life you are trying to defend, and escaped from it. Avi has a hard time with his misguided beliefs being challenged, yet of course, he just sloughs it off rather than consider a different view, which is no different than every other hard-core leftist (or hard-core right-winger) I've ever met...