• Multiple pedestrians hit by van in Toronto
    56 replies, posted
The post could be faked, but it seems pretty conclusive that this was inspired by the Isla Vista, California attack.
Good lord what a bunch of fucking tools. If you start a "rebellion" because you can't get laid, you might want to consider that the problem isn't society or whatever. What are they rebelling against? Their lack of vag? We should legalize sex work to combat terrorism.
Ok I've heard the term Chad before but Stacy is a new one.
Maybe it's like a female version of Chad? Or something? I don't know, the chad memes make my head hurt.
Same thing basically, the genderswapped version of that virgin walk meme had "The Stacy Strut" and such
Took the GO train home tonight, happened to be the one right after the Leafs game let out. Lots of people were excited and cheering about the game (They won, woo!), but about 10 minutes into the train ride most people seemed to turn their conversations/phones to the videos surrounding this (especially the arrest one). On that note, that officer is a god damned hero and I hope he gets properly recognized. The courage it took not to flinch in that situation is something I don't think I could ever muster.
Bow are people saying that this is not a terroristic act?
Because that's always how it's reported when someone who isn't a muslim commits one.
Or maybe it didnt fit the definition.
I sincerely hope this shit is made up.
Come on, you've probably been on the internet long enough to know that it's real. Still can't wrap my head around the fact that people died over this incel beta uprising shit, but I don't doubt that this is real
believing theres a good chance its real is still not a confirmation its actually real
That's not really the right way the frame it. Terrorism requires a political motive, so until there's a political motive found, you can't frame it as a terrorist attack, Muslim or otherwise. Van crashes, injuring pedestrians in Toronto; driver in custody Police Constable Jenifferjit Sidhu says authorities do not yet know the cause or reason for the collision.
Terrorism doesn't require a political motive. There are other motives that can be present in terrorism.
Can you explain?
I'm just going off of what the law says and for the US what the FBI defines terrorism as. Which states that there doesn't necessarily need to be a political motive for it to be defined as terrorism, that there are other motives that be considered. Maybe the law is a bit different in the UK, I'm not familiar with UK laws though. The criminal code of Canada states that terrorism is: (b) an act or omission, in or outside Canada, (i) that is committed (A) in whole or in part for a political, religious or ideological purpose, objective or cause, FBI definition of terrorism: Domestic terrorism: Perpetrated by individuals and/or groups inspired by or associated with primarily U.S.-based movements that espouse extremist ideologies of a political, religious, social, racial, or environmental nature. 
Speculation surfaced Monday night around a Facebook post associated with the same name and as the ones that appear on Minassian's LinkedIn profile. CBC News has not been able to independently verify whether the Facebook post was, indeed, written by Minassian or created after that fact and intended to mislead.
PJW showed incredible bravery https://twitter.com/classiclib3ral/status/988739131546185728
No, it's because it didn't fall under the definition of terrorism, because the motive either hasn't been fully established yet, or it has, and it doesn't fit the definition. A senseless mass murder isn't necessarily an act of terror. So what? The two other potential motives for terror is defined as religious and/or ideological, none of which has been found in this case yet. I don't see the point in bringing this up. Unless you know something that the authorities don't, this act doesn't fall under the terrorism definition (yet). If you've been on the internet long enough, you also know that a lot of this stuff is fake. I would wait until this has actually been confirmed before jumping to conclusions.
Article updated a few minutes ago. Facebook confirmed to CBC that that post was indeed real and publicly posted to the accused's Facebook profile before it was shut down. CBC: Speculation surfaced Monday night around a Facebook post associated with the same name and photo as appear on Minassian's LinkendIn site. Facebook told CBC News that the post from an Alek Minassian was real and was posted publicly on his profile before Facebook shut it down. The post referred to the "Supreme Gentleman Elliot Rodger." Rodger was the 22-year-old California man responsible for a deadly rampage in Isla Vista, Calif., that left six people dead and a dozen people wounded.
I'm brought it up because Cyteless said terrorism requires a political motive when the law specifies differently.
We're not trying to assert what this incident was, just trying to define whether it's possible it could be ruled as a terror incident or not. It's relevant given that the method used was a trend started by terrorists.
If you broaden the definition of a political motive, it covers both ideological and religious extremism, since their end goal is political change. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think this was what Cyteless was referring to, and not the strict legal definition of political. I just don't see how this is relevant to this case though, or why it was worth bringing up.
Even when motives are clear as day, the media still avoids labelling non-muslims as terrorists. When a white guy goes on an ideologically motivated shooting of black people, he's just a confused lone wolf good man who made a single mistake. There's a consistent narrative in reporting of attacks where terrorism is something Muslims do, and no-one else.
Just because you don't feel it was worth bringing up doesn't mean others feel the same way. And it's relevant because there are people calling this terrorism because of how many similar incidents like this have happened that have been defined as terrorism. Without confirmation of a motive you can't come to a conclusion either way but it can't be ruled out yet, and even then it's still something that can and should be discussed in light of terrorist incidents that have been happening.
You could argue that a mass murder committed by a guy who is in with the "incel" crowd, which believes that "beta" virgins of a certain age should be granted, by the government a pre-teen sex-slave for them the raise as their personal slave, could actually be defined as politically motivated. After all, the beta uprising is about (impossible as it is) gaining sexual power over unwilling female partners by use of governmental policies. Where else in the world do we have that status quo? These guys should just fuck off and join ISIS in their desert grave. There's no room for this level of insane entitlement in modern society.
In the case of white shooters, I can think of Dylann Roof, who I think should have been deemed a terrorist because of his motivation to incite a race war (which seems like an explicit political motivation), whereas the Vegas shooter, who killed more people, isn't classed as a terrorist, which I think is correct - there wasn't a political motive behind his actions. Can you cite examples, both of non-Muslims who should have been deemed as terrorists, as well as Muslim shooters who shouldn't? Sure, but I'll wait to see what the police have to say in their investigation about his motive. I'm not going to take a Facebook post as absolute truth at the minute.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.