"His behaviour was not normal," said David Ali, vice-president of the Masjid Al-Salaam mosque, adding Zehaf-Bibeau used to trip the mosque's fire alarms by trying to enter through the wrong doors. "We try to be open to everyone. But people on drugs don't behave normally."
For terrorists, killing people is merely a means to an end. By far the bigger objective for terrorists is to terrorize — not just their immediate victims, but an entire population.And he quickly gets to what, for me, is the heart of the matter:
A soldier lost his life Wednesday. And parliamentarians lost their innocence.
But the nation must not lose its nerve.
Public shootouts or bombings are carefully choreographed publicity stunts that require audience participation to succeed: If the public gives in to fear, and the state succumbs to hysteria, then the shootings or bombings have hit their mark. If the audience tunes out the sickening violence, the tragic melodrama is reduced to pointlessness.
The risk is that we will overreact with security clampdowns and lockdowns that are difficult to roll back when the threat subsides.
Terrorists will never be an existential threat — our Parliament and our parliamentarians are too deeply rooted to crumble in the face of a few bullets or bombs. The greater risk is that we will hunker down with over-the-top security precautions that pose a more insidious menace to our open society.
In 1966, a Toronto man blew himself up in a washroom just outside the Commons chamber. He had been preparing to take out the entire government front bench with dynamite. But it exploded too early.And no one who is of a certain age can ever forget the FLQ crisis of 1970 which led to Pierre Trudeau imposing The War Measures Act, which effectively suspended civil liberties across the country, a measure that was widely embraced at the time.
Other legislatures have had their share of trouble, most notably Quebec’s national assembly, which was attacked in 1984 by a disgruntled Canadian Forces corporal.
He shot and killed three as well as wounding another 13 before giving himself up.
In 1988, another man was shot after he opened fire with a rifle in the Alberta Legislature building.
We seem headed for another of those moments of panic. The fact that the gunman attacked Parliament has, understandably, spooked the MPs who pass our laws.If we are not very careful and vigilant, the real threat will come, not from terrorist attacks, but from our putative political leaders.
It has also spooked the media and, I suspect, much of the country.
The government wants to give its security agencies more power over citizens. The government wants to rally public support for its war in Iraq.
On both counts, this attack can only help it along.
Is there a despot in the House? Insight Oct. 19
As journalist Michael Harris’ book points out, Canada has already undergone a sea change under Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s secretive, dominant rule. Soon the attack ads will try to convince us that we would be mad to trust anyone other than Harper’s steady hand at the tiller.
That he is leading us straight over a waterfall, especially in areas like climate change and biological sciences denial (think of the need for research in non-petroleum areas such as water pollution or the collapse of bee colonies) doesn’t concern us nearly enough.
Nor did Harper ever ask us if we wanted a 100-fold increase across the country in hazard fuel shipments, or, for that matter, American-style gun control. He just patiently escalated the former and whittled away at the latter.
The twin tragedies of Lac-Meganic and Moncton will be as much a part of his legacy as his accidental tightfistedness with expenditure. I say accidental, because he was intending to blow the wad on 65 F-35s and indenture us to American arms maker, Lockheed Martin.
Could it be that the Republican-style fear tactics used by these Tories will scare us off for voting for progressives at both the national and municipal level?
Ron Charach, Toronto
This book brings to mind the story: if a frog is placed in boiling water it will immediately jump out; but if it is placed in cool water and the heat slowly raised, the frog will sit there and die as it cooks.
This book brings to our attention that we Canadians are that frog and that the temperature of the water is rising. It is time to jump.
David Kister, Toronto
The Harper government’s narrow political agenda acts like a deaf, dumb and blind juggernaut ruthlessly wielding its power as if we Canadians and our democratic parliamentary system of governance are simply obstacles to be overcome.
Under Mr. Harper’s leadership we have witnessed the relentless erosion of our democracy, of our civil rights, our cherished reputation for fair and open elections, our influence as leaders on the world stage and most insidious of all, our belief in ourselves as citizens and the efficacy of civil participation.
His aggressive brand of partisanship ominously appears to have no bounds, nor his willingness to constrain or silence those not in agreement with his policies or initiatives. At risk are the institutions and values that are the very heart of who we are as a nation.
We cannot be side-tracked by our political differences or our disgust with politicians behaving badly or even fear of reprisal. Our silence is the Harper government’s greatest ally.
June Osborne, Camrose, Alta.
.jpg)
An organization known for its efforts to improve scientific integrity within the U.S. government is taking aim at Prime Minister Stephen Harper over policies and funding cuts that it says are detrimental to Canadian public science.The letter, signed by over 800 academic researchers working outside of Canada,
In an open letter released Tuesday, the Union of Concerned Scientists urged Mr. Harper to lift a communications protocol that prevents federal researchers from speaking with journalists without approval from Ottawa. The letter also refers to barriers that it says inhibit collaboration with colleagues in the broader scientific community.
was released jointly with the Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada (PIPSC), the union that represents more than 15,000 scientists employed within a range of government departments and agencies. It includes a reference to a PIPSC survey, conducted in 2013, which found that 90 per cent of more than 4,000 of the federal scientists who responded felt they could not speak freely about their work.Dennis Hansell, chairman of the Department of Ocean Sciences at the University of Miami and one of the signatories, said:
“As a global scientist I need Canadians to be involved so I can get my work done too. If there’s any threat to that, that’s a problem,” said Dr. Hansell, who is in the midst of proposing a project in the Arctic that would require the co-ordination of U.S., German and Canadian research teams.Much of the world seems aware of the autocracy and fear that exists in Canada. Let's hope that sufficient numbers of Canadian voters will soon become similarly enlightened.
In a statement responding to the letter, Scott French, a spokesman for Ed Holder, minister of state for science and technology, said the government has made "record investments in science, technology and innovation."As usual, everyone else is wrong, and the Harper regime leads the world in all that is sacred and holy.
With regard to the freedom of federal scientists to communicate, French said, "While ministers are the primary spokespersons for government departments; scientists have, and are readily available to share their research with Canadians," he said. He added that federal departments and agencies produce over 4,000 science publications per year, including 700 peer-reviewed articles last year alone.
