Wednesday, April 25, 2018

Terrorist or Nut-bar... Let's Get Things Straight.


ter·ror·ist
  1. 1.
    a person who uses unlawful violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.

    "four commercial aircraft were hijacked by terrorists"



adjective
adjective: terrorist
  1. 1.
    unlawfully using violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.

    "a terrorist organization"
It's important to differentiate between those who fit the label of terrorist and those who murder because of a sad mental defect. When these wanton type of killing events unfold, our definitions are often shaped by our political views.

When Alexandre Bissonnette killed six Muslims in a Quebec City church, many in the rest of Canada were quick to define him as a terrorist and many laid the blame for his supposed radicalization on what they perceived as a racist and Islamophobic Quebec society.

But as it turns out Bissonnette was not a terrorist, just your garden variety mental case.
"The man who murdered six Muslim men in a Quebec City mosque in January 2017 had been suffering with mental illness for years and wanted to kill, a psychologist who evaluated the gunman said in court Monday....
...Lamontagne said Bissonnette harboured violent and hostile thoughts for years – sentiments that were initially directed toward his peers at school who bullied him, as well as toward former teachers.

His hostility eventually became more generalized, Lamontagne said.

Over the last few years, Bissonnette came close to killing himself numerous times, Lamontagne said. He would write goodbye letters and put the barrel of his gun in his mouth.

The killer also lied about his past psychological problems in order to obtain a gun permit, Lamontagne said.
Lamontagne said Bissonnette told him that six weeks before the mosque shooting, he considered murdering people in a Quebec City shopping centre." Globe & Mai
On the other hand, the attempted murder of Premier Pauline Marois by Anglophone Richard Bain which resulted in the death of an innocent bystander was largely described as an act of terrorism by the French media because it played into their narrative of the big bad Anglo.
"It is indisputable that Richard Bain committed an act of terrorism, by any definition of the term," prosecutor Dennis Galiatsatos writes in a summary of the arguments he intends to make before the Quebec Court of Appeal." Montreal Gazette
 Even though the crown prosecutor wants to define Bain as a terrorist for political reasons, Bain was never charged with terrorism, just plain second-degree murder.
"A forensic psychiatrist who interviewed Richard Henry Bain when he fatally shot a man after a provincial election told the jury she doesn't think he's faking a mental illness." Montreal Gazette
Richard Bain isn't a terrorist, sadly just another deranged 'done me wrong' mental case who cracked rather tragically.
So defining whether a murderous act is terrorism seems to have a lot to do with our political views.

The tragic truck-ramming event in Toronto has us all screaming terrorism until we were informed that the perpetrator was, in fact, an Armenian Christian, which had us immediately changing hypothesis that the act was in fact that of an unhinged nutbar.
If that same nut-bar was in fact, Muslim, the label of terrorist would have stuck.

The same goes for the two so-called terrorist acts which took the lives of two Canadian soldiers in two separate incidents, one in Ontario and one in Quebec. Both perpetrators were actually just mentally unhinged.

In Canada, we are lucky in that we haven't had a serious terrorist incident since 1985 when horrifically, 329 people were killed, including 280 Canadians. The flight originated in Toronto, bound for India with stops in Montreal and London. The 747 exploded off the coast of Ireland courtesy of a bomb placed by a group of Canadian Sikh separatists from British Columbia led by Talwinder Singh Parmar. 
Those people define the word 'terrorist.'

Next time you hear of a so-called terrorism act, ask yourself this question ..."Nut-bar or Terrorist?"

These random acts of violence have us frightened because we believe that there's nothing to be done to prevent getting injured or killed, and in most cases that is so.
But two recent incidents during two stressful situations reminded me that to a large degree we are responsible for our own safety and unfortunately some of those who died in the truck-ramming incident might have survived had they paid attention to what was going on around them.

First is a picture of the Southwest airline airplane where one woman died when an engine exploded.


Look at these three idiots wearing their masks improperly, not covering their mouth and nose as is explained by the cabin crew in every pre-flight demonstration. Unbelievable!

Next, I want to talk about situational awareness, taking note of your surroundings and understanding when a situation becomes dangerous.

We've all seen the video of the brave Toronto police officer who stared down the truck-rammer and made the arrest without a shot being fired.


Not many of you noticed the three idiots strolling by what was a most dangerous confrontation.
They casually walk by as if there is no danger when clearly there is a good chance bullets will be flying.

It is called 'Normalcy Bias,'
"When disaster strikes, some people lose their heads, some people become cool and effective, but by far most people act as if they've suddenly forgotten the disaster. They behave in surprisingly mundane ways, right up until it's too late."
 The trio of pedestrians strolling right by the confrontation define 'normalcy bias,'  and unfortunately, some of those mowed down by the truck-rammer failed to act in their own self-interest, freezing instead of fleeing.

I remember shopping in Montreal's tony Rockland Shopping centre when I was surprised by two policemen hugging the wall and slinking around a corner with guns drawn. It didn't take me long to understand that a silent alarm had been triggered. I immediately turned and hurried in the opposite direction but to my amazement, all the shoppers who also saw the cops kept right on doing what they were doing without any reaction!
It taught me a valuable lesson in 'situational awareness' and I have practised staying away from trouble my whole life.

If there is one piece of advice that I can offer it is to PAY ATTENTION to your surroundings and situation and understand that things can be dangerous even if all the others around you don't react.

Don't be afraid to err on the side of caution and more importantly recognize when you need to act.

6 comments:

  1. I think we need to address the issue of an increasing number of young males who end up isolated, marginalized and left out of society and how some of them end up lashing out at society in a violent fashion. Over and over we see scenes like this played out and it seems to be the same story over and over. Young male with no friends or very few, isolated, spending lots of time on the internet or playing video games - anger growing at the isolation and eventually boom.

    Its easy to avoid people like this but its time maybe more of us try to talk to these young men, alert the proper authorities that these men are mentally unhinged and need help, increase efforts to stop bullying in schools, increase efforts to deal with painfully shy and awkward youth in schools, etc.

    Everyone keeps jumping up and down about guns but the sheer number of young males lashing out at society is something that needs to be addressed. I suspect video games and the internet also are having a major influence on their mental state..putting them in a virtual fantasy world, giving them violent ideas, etc.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Philip, Mr. Sauga here. It almost sounds like you're blaming the stricken pedestrians for what happened...but not quite. It is true had people been paying more attention, some deaths and injuries may have been prevented. I'm now going to make a point of walking on the side of the street facing traffic, sidewalk or no sidewalk. I believe all, or most of those struck by this renegade had their backs to him and the vehicle.

    No doubt 9/11 and subsequent events have still left their traumatizing mark, and in these situations we and the media too easily jump to the conclusion it was an act of terrorism, but eventually common sense prevails. What difference does diagnosing the situation really make? The simple fact of the matter is innocent people have been killed or injured, some possibly for the rest of their lives.

    Complicated touched on something, specifically, there is a decreasing amount of visual and verbal contact between people. You'll especially see younger people walking next to each other and texting into their portable devices as opposed to looking at each other and talking. I'm simply pointing out there seems to be a correlation between less interaction among people and more of these insane incidents. This is a correlation, and therefore one cannot conclude there is causality between these two observations.

    This isn't new, it has been going on now for decades. Kids don't just spontaneously gather in their neighbourhoods and play anymore, it's play dates. More kids are being pushed into planned activities whether they want them or not by their parents, and now there are mobile devices that substitute for human interaction, and create anonymity. I see this as a function of how society now behaves and so I expect this sort of thing to get more commonplace over time. Of course, because it's a correlation, I can be wrong...but I don't think so!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Once again, a violent crime / "terrorist" act comes down to mental health issues.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I have seriously looked into the Koran and I can best say it like this: Muhammad wrote peacefull writings to convince the Jews tha he was a prophet and they rejected him so he gave up on the peacefull writings and became violent. This is how Wasabism is taught and applied, so when Muhammad says "Terror has gotten me the victory" he meant it, it also says "Do not be friends with the Christians because theyre friends of the Jews" is another dandy. Remember this, Quakers and Methodists started the movment that ended Slavery in the Empire, bible believers! When Catholics did nothiong just like non believers who stood by..... Know them by their fruits.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Lets go folks!!! Turf the Turd 2019!!!

    ReplyDelete