Leftist Ottawa Citizen Traitors Defend Terrorists

Reading this crap is what I have to put up with on a daily basis!

And it’s the most likely reason why low-information Canadian citizens still defend islam, like this:

(From: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hamilton/news/nathan-cirillo-inspired-racism-experiment-ends-with-sucker-punch-1.2816837?cmp=rss )…!

On Tursday, October 30, 2014, P.#C6, this commentary by the entire Board was originally titled


From here:

Editorial: Both theories about Zehaf-Bibeau could be right
Ottawa Citizen Editorial Board

Mug shot of Michael Zehaf-Bibeau (Vancouver Police Department mugshot)
Mug shot of Michael Zehaf-Bibeau (Vancouver Police Department mugshot)

Vancouver Police Department

In the aftermath of Michael Zehaf-Bibeau’s attacks at the National War Memorial and on Parliament Hill, there are two competing narratives: That he was a radicalized homegrown terrorist who lucidly planned his attacks in deference to a sick ideology, or that he was a mentally ill, drug-addicted man who couldn’t find the help he needed to turn his life around before it ended in one final, desperate act.

These two descriptions need not be mutually exclusive, however. If a mentally ill man latches on to a cause, it doesn’t make him any less mentally ill, or any less an adherent of the cause.

No. Islam was created, and its Qur’an written, by a mentally ill/immorally criminal man: Muhammad. SO all followers of islam, called “muslims,” embrace “mentally ill” behaviour. But “mental illness” itself doesn’t really exist, unless neurologically (brain-chemical hardware malfunction) based; otherwise, it’s just bad (software; programming) habits, reversing cause and effect, like all victim-blaming confirmed masochist criminals always do!

And to acknowledge the possibility of mental illness is not to absolve an individual of responsibility.

Actually, YES, IT IS – at least, that IS the most common, legally accepted point of view these days.

One could argue that Zehaf-Bibeau’s angry rant at a ServiceOntario outlet about soldiers killing civilians — as described by several witnesses to the Citizen’s Glen McGregor — was one sign among many that he was a budding terrorist.

One could also argue that ranting about global conflicts in a quiet office setting until being told to leave is a sign he wasn’t of sound mind.

Nonsense. Ranting about injustices to the very people who cause them, is never a sign of insanity, no matter how calmly deluded the criminals are, or their (therefore) peaceful quiet office setting surroundings. But ranting about the injustice of punishing criminals for their crimes, as you all do, IS.

One can be either a justly angry person accusing calm criminals, or an unjustly angry criminal ranting against calm and innocent civilized people. The exhibited behaviours are only circumstantial at most.

The truth, as usual, probably resides somewhere in the middle, and if we fail to look at it that way, we risk overreacting to one factor while failing to address other vulnerabilities.

In other words: “All criminals are victims, too! And if we fail to tolerate criminals AS victims, that lack of tolerance makes US the real criminals! Whee!”

It’s easy to say “Zehaf-Bibeau committed a terrorist act on Canadian soil, ergo we must significantly beef up anti-terrorist legislation — privacy rights be damned.”

It’s harder to admit that his final act, like many plane crashes, was not the result of one problem, but a tragic confluence of them.

So, to these liberals, deliberate islamic crime is only a “tragic accident, like a plane crash!” (But I’m willing to bet they didn’t mean “like a plane-crash CAUSED by muslim terrorists hijacking said plane”)!

It is indisputable that Zehaf-Bibeau embraced terrorism. He made contact with another radical, who is now believed to be fighting in Syria for ISIL. He made a video reportedly promising to act in God’s name in opposition to Canada’s foreign policy. He attacked civilians.

It is also indisputable, however, that Zehaf-Bibeau exhibited strange behaviour and was hooked on crack cocaine. He bounced around homeless shelters and correctional facilities, at one point asking to stay in jail so he could get clean.

But didn’t his islam prevent his drug addiction? Islam is against intoxication, so it’s not an excuse! And most islamic terrorists carry out criminal acts very similar to those this guy did, but without a drug excuse! Besides, most if not all “addictions” are habitual alibi-excuses embraced by masochists after the fact, to pretend to justify their chosen masochistic behaviours!

So while the shootings may fit into a broad definition of “terrorism,” it’s also important to remember that Zehaf-Bibeau’s spiral was a societal failure that needs to be discussed alongside any attempt to boost anti-terrorism legislation.

He was born a muslim, of a Libyan terrorist father and a complicit leftist mother; HOW is any of that a “FAILURE OF SOCIETY” as a whole?! Unless you mean “Civilized society shouldn’t fail any of its helpless citizens as children by letting their delusive parents indoctrinate them into islamic crime!”

Nah! Not a chance! You’re libertine “liberals” (criminals who always want to “progress” to “freedom” from self-restraint, always looking for the best idolatrous excuse to justify your masochistic and self-induced paranoid desire to attack everyone else first, before they can “inevitably” attack YOU first! Whee!)

In the end, it may be that getting help to vulnerable people, before ISIL trolls on the Internet ensnare them, would prevent many more potential strikes than weakening judicial oversight of police activities would.

So any and all of the islam-indoctrinated “holy” criminals are really only helpless, “vulnerable” people? If true, the solution is to BAN ISLAM!


It isn’t, it may never be, totally clear why Michael Zehaf-Bibeau turned into a killer, but that’s one more reason to tread carefully, and thoughtfully, when considering our reaction to his crimes.

In other words: “While we can’t be certain why the muslim committed his Qur’an-mandated crimes, one thing is for sure: that if we carelessly and unthoughtfully react to his crimes by calling them crimes, it will definitely be all our fault, being hateful racists!”

Dear Libtards: we don’t do any of these criminals any favors by pretending that they are not only not responsible for their crimes (because, as perpetual victims, they have no free will) and even worse, we actually do them a total dis-service by giving them endless lists of alibi-excuses for their criminal desires, too!


Tags: ,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: