Democracy Gone Astray

Democracy, being a human construct, needs to be thought of as directionality rather than an object. As such, to understand it requires not so much a description of existing structures and/or other related phenomena but a declaration of intentionality.
This blog aims at creating labeled lists of published infringements of such intentionality, of points in time where democracy strays from its intended directionality. In addition to outright infringements, this blog also collects important contemporary information and/or discussions that impact our socio-political landscape.

All the posts here were published in the electronic media – main-stream as well as fringe, and maintain links to the original texts.

[NOTE: Due to changes I haven't caught on time in the blogging software, all of the 'Original Article' links were nullified between September 11, 2012 and December 11, 2012. My apologies.]

Thursday, October 30, 2014

Ottawa shooting not terrorism, says Thomas Mulcair

OTTAWA—New Democrat Leader Thomas Mulcair said he would not label killing of a solider at the National War Memorial and the attack on Parliament Hill by gunman Michael Zehaf-Bibeau as a terrorist act.

“I don’t think that we have enough evidence to use that word,” Mulcair told reporters Wednesday after emerging from the NDP caucus meeting held in the same room where MPs had cowered below tables while hearing gunfire outside a week earlier.

Mulcair said he based his opinion on reports that Zehaf-Bibeau had been struggling with mental illness, for which he had tried to seek help.

“If that turns out to be the case, I think we are not in the presence of a terrorist act in the sense that we would understand it and I think we have to be very careful with the use of the word terrorism, make sure that’s actually what we are dealing with,” Mulcair said.

The Conservative government, the RCMP and U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry have all described the attack as terrorism.

On Sunday, RCMP Commissioner Bob Paulson said Zehaf-Bibeau had recorded a video of himself just before carrying out his attack on Cpl. Nathan Cirillo and Parliament Hill, which he said was “persuasive evidence” he had been “driven by ideological and political motives”.

When asked by a reporter whether the Conservatives were “irresponsible” in using the word terrorism, Mulcair said no, they just had a different point of view.

“They’ve used the word from the get-go. It was the word that they used immediately before any of this other information was out there and frankly the information that is now available to the public comforts me in my choice not to use the word terrorism in describing the act that took place here,” Mulcair said.

“It doesn’t take away from the horror of what took place. It doesn’t make it any less criminal, but I think there is a distinction to be used and when you look at the background of the individual and what was actually going on, that the use of that word was not the appropriate one. That’s our point of view. That’s my point of view,” Mulcair said.

Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau expressed confidence in the choice the RCMP made to use that word.

“I said several times last week that I would wait for the appropriate authorities to make a determination on what happened before using that word. The RCMP said it was terrorism, so it was,” Trudeau told reporters after the Liberal caucus meeting Wednesday.

Finance Minister Joe Oliver also said he disagreed with Mulcair.

“I think it was a terrorist act,” Oliver said after the Conservative caucus meeting Wednesday morning.

Original Article
Source: thestar.com/
Author: Joanna Smith

No comments:

Post a Comment