From the CBC:

Quote

 

Quebec provincial police say six people are dead and eight were wounded after shots were fired inside a mosque on Sunday night during evening prayers.

Sûreté du Québec Sgt. Christine Coulombe says the victims range in age from 35 to 70. Some of the wounded are considered to be in critical condition.

Thirty-nine people escaped the Islamic cultural centre of Quebec in the Sainte-Foy neighbourhood without injuries, according to Coulombe.

 

Rest of the article is at http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/quebec-city-mosque-gun-shots-1.3957686

My heart goes out to the victims, their families and friends. I hope the two SOBs responsible rot in hell. 

Interesting (this is one of the perpetrators)

 

14 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

Interesting (this is one of the perpetrators)

 

hate love, hate love, who?

 

Just now, FrostyWinnipeg said:

hate love, hate love, who?

 

Marion Anne Perrine Le Pen, known as Marine Le Pen is a French politician who is the president of the National Front, a national-conservative political party in France and one of its main political forces.

One of the shooters is now considered just a witness.  Which one Alexandre or Mohammed ? Slow drip of info is frustrating.

Edited January 30, 20179 yr by Zontar

5 hours ago, Jacquie said:

From the CBC:

Rest of the article is at http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/quebec-city-mosque-gun-shots-1.3957686

My heart goes out to the victims, their families and friends. I hope the two SOBs responsible rot in hell. 

I hope all terrorists who kill people in the name of hatred etc rot in hades.  Just yesterday seven people were gunned down in Nigeria by Boko Haram.  Rot in hell Boko Haram!!

3 hours ago, Zontar said:

One of the shooters is now considered just a witness.  Which one Alexandre or Mohammed ? Slow drip of info is frustrating.

Alexandre Bissonnette is the one who was arrested. 

 

 

The actual shooting suspect is 27-year-old Alexandre Bissonnette, a white French Canadian who is, by all appearances, a rabid anti-immigrant nationalist. A leader of a local immigration rights groups, François Deschamps, told a local paper he recognized his photo as an anti-immigrant far-right “troll” who has been hostile to the group online. And Bisonnette’s Facebook page – now taken down but still archived – lists among its “likes” the far right French nationalist Marine Le Pen, Islam critics Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens, the Israeli Defense Forces, and Donald J. Trump (he also “likes” the liberal Canadian Party NDP along with more neutral “likes” such as Tom Hanks, the Sopranos and Katy Perry).

6 hours ago, Zontar said:

One of the shooters is now considered just a witness.  Which one Alexandre or Mohammed ? Slow drip of info is frustrating.

Mohammed was the person who tried to help the victims

 

 

Martin Niemöller (1892–1984) was a prominent Protestant pastor who emerged as an outspoken public foe of Adolf Hitler and spent the last seven years of Nazi rule in concentration camps. Niemöller is perhaps best remembered for the quotation:

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

This product of diseased minds affects as all. No matter if the slurs and hatred are directed at Jews, Muslims, gays, or women, it affects us all, even at a distance. We are all in this together, like it or not. 

Edited January 31, 20179 yr by tracker

5 hours ago, tracker said:

Martin Niemöller (1892–1984) was a prominent Protestant pastor who emerged as an outspoken public foe of Adolf Hitler and spent the last seven years of Nazi rule in concentration camps. Niemöller is perhaps best remembered for the quotation:

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

This product of diseased minds affects as all. No matter if the slurs and hatred are directed at Jews, Muslims, gays, or women, it affects us all, even at a distance. We are all in this together, like it or not. 

yes.  This is very true.  We are all in this together.  All of us.

remember this?

Quote

 

"Conservative Leader Stephen Harper says his government would consider banning public servants from wearing the niqab, but rejects the suggestion that recent assaults against Muslim women should stifle debate about the issue."

In an interview Tuesday with CBC Radio's The House, Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau said the public debate over the niqab has become too heated, and he made an appeal to Harper.

"To the prime minister directly: Stop this before someone truly gets hurt. We've had women attacked in the streets for wearing hijabs and niqabs. This is not Canada," Trudeau told host Chris Hall.

and proposed Quebec law

Quote

Government services will be required to be delivered and received with uncovered faces in proposed new legislation tabled in the National Assembly on Wednesday.

 

 

Edited January 31, 20179 yr by Mark F

Yes. And the forced covering and shaming of women to comply with beliefs that make them property of men is still not in keeping with Canadian values.  But we also have a Pm who visited mosques where the women were forced to the back.   I'm not sure how that relates to this subject  

Unfortunately you also have this:

 

4 hours ago, The Unknown Poster said:

Yes. And the forced covering and shaming of women to comply with beliefs that make them property of men is still not in keeping with Canadian values.  But we also have a Pm who visited mosques where the women were forced to the back.   I'm not sure how that relates to this subject  

Unfortunately you also have this:

 

Where's the list of Canadian values? I need to check it out.

And if you're actually sincere about treatment of women, you might have a look at orthodox Jews, and some fundamentalist Christians. Objecting to women's treatment by just one group, when others do similar things, is racist. I haven't heard any public outcry about any other groups.

eg
 

Quote

 

A frightened eight-year-old Jewish girl has been called a 'whore' and spat on as she walked to school through an ultra-orthodox settlement in Israel.

Naama Margolese has become a symbol in Israel for the growing abuse of women and young girls by Jewish extremists.

Even though she is religious herself, and wears long sleeves and a skirt, she is deemed not to be religious enough by the zealots in Beit Shemesh, about 11 miles west of Jerusalem.

 

 

Edited January 31, 20179 yr by Mark F
edit

9 minutes ago, Mark F said:

Where's the list of Canadian values? I need to check it out.

And if you're actually sincere about treatment of women, you might have a look at orthodox Jews, and some fundamentalist Christians.

eg
 

 

Start with common sense.  Work backwards from there.

And yes, the negative treatment of women in other religions does not make the negative treatment of women in any religion acceptable, does it?  Argue the point, dont say "yeah but..." and point to a different negative treatment.

your comment is so vague as to be meaningless.

This business about the terrible treatment of women is so widespread through so many different cultures here in North America and Canada it is frightening. Apart from the previously mentioned, there are also the Old Order Mennonites, parts of the Mormonism followers, and even some of the Hutterite communities. What diminishes one, diminishes all. It seem every culture and relgious tradition has its share of lunatics.

15 minutes ago, Mark F said:

your comment is so vague as to be meaningless.

A suitable response to your silly reply to me.  Must we detail the history of the Hijab and the requirement that women must veil themselves to preserve their modesty?  A Muslim equivalent of shaming a rape victim for the clothes she was wearing...  Its beside the point of this topic but you brought it up.  Are you in support of laws or rules that require women to forcibly be covered?

Edited January 31, 20179 yr by The Unknown Poster

3 minutes ago, tracker said:

This business about the terrible treatment of women is so widespread through so many different cultures here in North America and Canada it is frightening. Apart from the previously mentioned, there are also the Old Order Mennonites, parts of the Mormonism followers, and even some of the Hutterite communities. What diminishes one, diminishes all. It seem every culture and relgious tradition has its share of lunatics.

Yes and it must not be condoned.  And "religious freedom" isnt an excuse.  Celebrating cultural differences is wonderful.  Allowing negative treatment in Canada on the grounds of said differences should not be permitted.  What people do in their home is generally their business but the former government was correct in taking steps to disallow the forced subjugation of women which is all too prevalent in the more fundamental aspects of Islam,...though if you look back at the Middle East prior to certain revolutions that embraced the male-centric fundamentalism, women were not treated that way.  This isnt about religion, its about subjugation.  And should not be allowed.

But none of that has anything to do with a right ring white nationalist walking into a Mosque and killing Muslims.  Lest the argument be that if only the radicals were permitted to invoke Sharia law and fundamentalism that this wouldn't happen.  Or that a white nationalism wouldnt have racist tendencies if we didnt argue against the Hijab. 

I appreciate the effort to somehow make this Stephen Harper's fault though.  It provided a needed dose of levity to a very serious topic.

26 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

Yes and it must not be condoned.  And "religious freedom" isnt an excuse.  Celebrating cultural differences is wonderful.  Allowing negative treatment in Canada on the grounds of said differences should not be permitted.  What people do in their home is generally their business but the former government was correct in taking steps to disallow the forced subjugation of women which is all too prevalent in the more fundamental aspects of Islam,...though if you look back at the Middle East prior to certain revolutions that embraced the male-centric fundamentalism, women were not treated that way.  This isnt about religion, its about subjugation.  And should not be allowed.

But none of that has anything to do with a right ring white nationalist walking into a Mosque and killing Muslims.  Lest the argument be that if only the radicals were permitted to invoke Sharia law and fundamentalism that this wouldn't happen.  Or that a white nationalism wouldnt have racist tendencies if we didnt argue against the Hijab. 

I appreciate the effort to somehow make this Stephen Harper's fault though.  It provided a needed dose of levity to a very serious topic.

The precedent is already set with the culturally-enforced garb of Hutterite (and some Mennonite) women as well as the Hassidic Judaism expectations of women's "modesty". 

2 minutes ago, tracker said:

The precedent is already set with the culturally-enforced garb of Hutterite (and some Mennonite) women as well as the Hassidic Judaism expectations of women's "modesty". 

Yes, but style of dress is different from the forced shaming.  Many of us have likely seen Hutterite's wearing more modern clothing (sure, long skirts etc).  I have relatives from the country that you'd think were Hutterites but they just dressed like everyone else in their small community.

I should clarify, the Harper effort was against the Niqab, the full face covering.  Troudeau's support for it was weird since even in Muslim countries the support for the Niqab is almost nil.  Where its worn its almost entirely as a result of forced fundamentalism which should have no place here.  If a co-worker comes to work wearing a turtle neck and long pants because she wants to be modest, thats her choice.  if she wears a ski mask because her husband will beat her if she doesnt, thats entirely different.

Suspected Quebec Mosque Shooter Loved Trump and Had 'Very Right-Wing and Ultra-Nationalist White Supremacist' Views, Classmates Say

The suspected gunman who massacred Muslims praying in Canada is a far-right internet troll who likes Donald Trump, Marine Le Pen, and Israel.

By Ben Norton / AlterNet

January 30, 2017

•  

1.3K62

Print

72 COMMENTS

 

Photo Credit: Facebook

The suspected shooter who carried out a massacre of Muslims praying at a mosque in Quebec, Canada is a strong supporter of far-right U.S. President Donald Trump and a right-wing extremist, according to his former classmates, acquaintances, and social media accounts.

During evening prayers on Sunday, January 29, a gunman opened fire in the Quebec Islamic Cultural Center, killing six worshipers and injuring 19 more. Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau condemned the shooting as a "terrorist attack on Muslims."

The suspected assailant, 27-year-old Alexandre Bissonnette, is a white Canadian who has expressed far-right, anti-Muslim, anti-immigrant, anti-feminist, and pro-Israel views.

"He really liked Trump and had a permanent grudge against the left," explained Éric Debroise, who knew Bissonnette and contacted the police after the attack. (Quotes are original translations from French.)

The suspected shooter's politics are "very right-wing and ultra-nationalist white supremacist," Debroise told the local newspaper Le Journal de Quebec.

"He has right-wing, pro-Israel, anti-immigration political ideas," Jean-Michel Allard-Pru, another classmate, said of Bissonnette, who was a student at Laval University.

Canadian newspaper The Globe and Mail reported that the suspected shooter "was known in the city's activist circles as a right-wing troll who frequently took anti-foreigner and anti-feminist positions and stood up for U.S. President Donald Trump."

François Deschamps, who runs a refugee support page on Facebook, told the publication that Bissonnette was an abusive far-right internet troll "who made frequent extreme comments in social media denigrating refugees and feminism."

Multiple people who knew Bissonnette linked him to the far-right, nationalist, racist "Identitarian" movement, which is on the rise in Europe and North America.

Bissonnette's extreme right-wing views were similarly inspired by Marine Le Pen, the far-right politician who may become the next president of France. Like Trump, Le Pen campaigns on racist, anti-Muslim, white nationalist policies.

On his personal Facebook page, Bissonnette liked the pages of both Trump and Le Pen. (Bissonnette's Facebook profile was taken down after the attack, but it is archived here.)

A pro-refugee group in Quebec City wrote on Facebook that activists knew of the suspected shooter because of his extreme "Identitarian, pro-Le Pen, and anti-feminist positions."

Bissonnette also liked the Facebook pages of the Israel Defense Forces and the pro-Israel group United with Israel. The Israeli government is extremely right-wing, and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has expressed staunch support for President Trump and his anti-Muslim, anti-immigrant policies.

After the massacre at the Quebec Islamic Cultural Center, police initially detained two people — Bissonnette and Mohamed Khadir, who is Muslim. Khadir was widely reported to be another suspect, but he was quickly released and police made it clear that he was a witness, not an assailant. This, however, did not stop anti-Muslim, anti-immigrant groups from distorting the facts surrounding the events.

President Trump's far-right administration and right-wing news sources jumped on the opportunity to misleadingly blame the attack on a Muslim. White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer tried to use the rumor to justify President Trump's racist ban on Muslim refugees and migrants. But in reality the opposite is true: the suspected shooter is a white Canadian who massacred Muslim migrants. The victims were largely from North Africa.

As if often the case with terrorist attacks carried out by white right-wing extremists, media reports and government officials claimed the shooting was a "lone wolf" attack, and gave very sympathetic coverage to the suspected shooter, portraying him as "timid," "lonely," and "kind."

Far-right terrorism is on the rise in North America. In the U.S., residents are significantly more likely to be killed by right-wing extremists than they are Islamist extremists.

 

5 hours ago, tracker said:

This business about the terrible treatment of women is so widespread through so many different cultures here in North America and Canada it is frightening. Apart from the previously mentioned, there are also the Old Order Mennonites, parts of the Mormonism followers, and even some of the Hutterite communities. What diminishes one, diminishes all. It seem every culture and relgious tradition has its share of lunatics.

right, but for some people, it's only important, or it's worse somehow,  when it's muslims.

Singling out one group for doing what a number groups do, is bigotry.

End of story.

If you can't grasp that, you really don't grasp the meaning of bigotry.

And there are many people are simply unable to understand what bigotry is.

 

 

Edited January 31, 20179 yr by Mark F

The thing I want to know is, how did this kid get radicalized? And what should we do to prevent other kids from being similarly radicalized?

15 hours ago, Mark F said:

right, but for some people, it's only important, or it's worse somehow,  when it's muslims.

Singling out one group for doing what a number groups do, is bigotry.

End of story.

If you can't grasp that, you really don't grasp the meaning of bigotry.

And there are many people are simply unable to understand what bigotry is.

 

 

Is your argument that because bigotry exists across multiple religions, ethnic groups etc, that we should not fight any of it?  Because you seem to be arguing against those who have an issue with the way women are treated in Islam but not presenting any thoughts on combating it.

Banning the Niqab was a real solution.  The fact there was so much pushback tells us that its a growing segment of a radical sub-section because there is virtually no support for the Niqab within traditional Muslim countries.  Its used as a punishment and control method when "fundamentalists" rise to power.  Any thought that we should have shrugged it off because there are pockets of oppression of women among other groups is failing to address a real issue that exists in Canada now.

We're talking about immigrants coming here and then adopting a way of life that their vast majority of the people in their own country reject.  It cant be allowed.  And we know there are those wanting Sharia Law here.  Cannot be allowed. 

And when you identify tangible ways that women are oppressed in other ares or groups in Canada, Ill support putting a stop to that too.

We consistently fight against bigotry towards gays.  We dont say, well there's other bigotry out there.  We can fight bigotry on more than one front.  Saying no to radical Islam and the oppression of women on the grounds of religious freedom is not bigotry.  That's laughable.

1 hour ago, The Unknown Poster said:

Is your argument that because bigotry exists across multiple religions, ethnic groups etc, that we should not fight any of it?  Because you seem to be arguing against those who have an issue with the way women are treated in Islam but not presenting any thoughts on combating it.

Banning the Niqab was a real solution.  The fact there was so much pushback tells us that its a growing segment of a radical sub-section because there is virtually no support for the Niqab within traditional Muslim countries.  Its used as a punishment and control method when "fundamentalists" rise to power.  Any thought that we should have shrugged it off because there are pockets of oppression of women among other groups is failing to address a real issue that exists in Canada now.

We're talking about immigrants coming here and then adopting a way of life that their vast majority of the people in their own country reject.  It cant be allowed.  And we know there are those wanting Sharia Law here.  Cannot be allowed. 

And when you identify tangible ways that women are oppressed in other ares or groups in Canada, Ill support putting a stop to that too.

We consistently fight against bigotry towards gays.  We dont say, well there's other bigotry out there.  We can fight bigotry on more than one front.  Saying no to radical Islam and the oppression of women on the grounds of religious freedom is not bigotry.  That's laughable.

You are gravely mistaken when you say there are those here who would like the imposition of Sharia law- this has been a fear-mongering rally cry for the bigots in Europe and America for several years and has absolutely no prospect of ever being enacted here. You do not need to have laws to restrict people- simple cultural or familial imprinting in childhood will do that and people will suspend their own happiness to submit to a set of bahaviours and/or dress code to belong and not be shunned. The doctors at Jonestown who gave the cyanide-laced Koolaid to their own children were not compelled by law- they chose to obey because they were raised to unquestioningly follow whatever the "authorities" told them to do. How do you differentiate between those who are compelled to follow certain dictates and thise who "choose" to obey out of fear of being ostracized by their families and cultural groups?