Late last night, when the news first broke about the massacre in the mosque in Quebec City, several media reports (including one from the CBC) said that there were up to three gunmen, and that they shouted “Allahu Akhbar” as they gunned down their victims.
Before I went to bed, Vlad and Sandra Solomon made a subtitled clip translated from the Arabic, which I posted here. It was based on this Facebook video, and discussed an intramural conflict at the mosque between “moderates” and “extremists”.
When I woke up this morning, the number of suspects had been reduced to two. Both of them had been arrested. Their names were released (or leaked), one Muslim, the other French-Canadian.
I had to leave home early this afternoon and was out for about six hours. Before I left, I rushed to post the latest update, which said that only one of the two men was a suspect; the other was a “witness”. The wording of the article was difficult to understand; after several readings, I made it out to say that the French-Canadian was the witness and Mohamed was the shooter. I was mistaken.
When I got home early this evening, I learned that it was just the opposite. It seems that I made an error in reading comprehension (along with numerous other people).
The man who has been arrested and charged with murder is named Alexandre Bissonnette. No beard, no evidence of conversion to Islam, with right-wing political leanings. In other words, a godsend (allahsend?) to Prime Minister Justin “Baby Doc” Trudeau.
At this point the story doesn’t make much sense. What happened to “Allahu Akhbar”? How does an arrested “suspect” become a “witness”? Why was the second man a suspect for a while? Is he perhaps a government informant or infiltrator who accompanied Mr. Bissonnette?
The whole thing is very smelly. I’m not willing to venture any conjectures about what it all means, at the risk of descending into unfounded conspiracy theories. I’ll just have to wait until more information becomes available.
Below are excerpts from the exhaustive report in the The Daily Mail:
Loner student ‘who liked Trump, Le Pen and mocked Syrian refugees online’ is charged with six counts of murder for gunning down Muslim men as they prayed in a Quebec City mosque
The loner student accused of killing six Muslim men as they prayed at a Quebec mosque was pictured arriving at court on Monday to face charges for their murders.
Alexandre Bissonnette is accused of slaughtering the men and injuring five others by opening fire on them as they attended evening prayers at the Quebec City Islamic Cultural Center on Sunday.
The 27-year-old student was described by classmates as a pro-Trump loner who did not fit in well at Laval University where is studying anthropology and political sciences. But neighbors of the family home in the affluent Quebec suburb of Cap Rouge were stunned to learn Bissonnette, described as a ‘typical boy-next-door’, was being accused of the shooting.
He was arrested on Sunday night after phoning police himself from his Mitsubishi where investigators allegedly found two rifles and an AK-47.
Bissonnette was charged with six counts of murder, five of attempted murder and is likely to have more charges brought against him, police said on Monday.
Originally police believed two gunmen had carried out the attack and took Moroccan-Canadian Mohamed el Khadir into custody. He is now being treated as a witness and no one is else is wanted in connection with the attack.
‘The inquiry is ongoing to determine the motives,’ said Royal Canadian Mounted Police Superintendent Martin Plante.
Six men aged between 39 and 60 were killed at the mosque as they observed evening prayers at the mosque which said security had become a ‘major’ concern.
Another five are in intensive care at Quebec City’s Hôpital de l’Enfant-Jésus after the shooting on Sunday night.
Twelve others had less serious injuries and another 39 escaped from the mosque unharmed.
[…]
At a press conference on Monday afternoon, officials from the Gendarmerie royale du Canada confirmed the suspect had been charged with six counts of murder.
Searches are ongoing at the suspect’s home and at the mosque, they said. It’s likely he will have more charges, specifically under the terrorism act, brought against him.
Bissonnette fled the scene in his Mitsubishi but called 911 himself later to turn himself in, local media reported. His car was spotted on the side of the road with a police vehicle behind it on Sunday night
Bissonnette is a student at Laval University. A friend of Bissonnette’s said he was pro-Trump and conservative but did not think he was capable of violence
The 27-year-old was dressed in a white prison jumpsuit and sneakers and appeared to be handcuffed as he made his way inside the courthouse
Alexandre Bissonnette’s house in Quebec City, Canada, (pictured) was searched by police after the shooting
Bissonnette, 27, and el Khadir were arrested on Sunday night after six men were shot dead at the Quebec City Islamic Cultural Center during evening prayers.
El Khadir was picked up by police at the mosque but Bissonnette fled in his Mitsubishi and was arrested in nearby Ile d’Orleans around 20 minutes later after calling 911, Le Soleil reports. Police found two rifles and an AK-47 in the car. Court clerk Isabelle Ferland earlier identified the pair as the two men arrested in connection with the shooting.
Police are not seeking anyone else in connection with the attack which was is being treated as an act of terror.
A source later told Reuters police were looking at Bissonnette as a ‘lone wolf’.
The political sciences and anthropology student, who is from the affluent Quebec City suburb Cap-Rouge, will appear in court sometime on Monday or Tuesday.
Students described him to DailyMail.com as a pro-Trump loner but a timid man who didn’t seem capable of committing an act of terror.
‘Based on the conversations that I had with him during the American presidential campaign, it’s true he is pro-Trump,’ the student, who asked to remain anonymous, said.
He added that he Bissonnette had ‘never demonstrated’ a violent side but that he didn’t ‘fit in’ among peers.
‘Yes, he was conservative in the political sense but despite the profound differences between us, he never showed or suggested that political violence or terrorism was something he was capable of.
‘He didn’t fit in well at university.’
One Facebook group dedicated to welcoming refugees in the Quebec City area claimed that Bissonnette was well known in the area for his ‘pro-Le Pen and anti-feminist positions at Laval University and on social networks,’ wrote the Bienvenue aux réfugié.es — Ville de Québec Facebook group.
He is said to have acted like a ‘troll’ and would attack women’s rights.
A Facebook page reportedly belonging to Bissonnette, which has since been taken down, revealed support for far right ideologies, including that of Marine Le Pen, the leader of France’s National Front.
Other ‘likes’ included Israeli Defense Forces, Donald Trump, and outspoken critics of Islam Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens.
Yet neighbors paint a very different picture of the suspect, describing him as the ‘perfect boy-next-door’, who loved his family, sports and would always remember to say hello.
Alain Dufour, a financier who retired last week, and has lived next door to Bissonnette’s family home since the alleged shooter was a child, said: ‘ Alexandre is a very nice, friendly young man. He and his brother have been brought up very closely and carefully by his parents. They are all very close.
‘Alexandre has never given anybody any trouble in this area and is the perfect boy next door.
‘He is friendly and always says hello. I didn’t know that their son had a gun and never imagined he could kill innocent people like that.
‘My wife Huguette and I are very upset about those people who were killed. Very sad.’
His wife added: Alexandre has lived here all his life. He is very sweet. I remember him as a boy when he had a paddle car and would ride it outside his house.
‘I can’t believe he could have done something like that. I am in shock.’
Police are speaking to Bissonnette’s parents, his father Raymond — a retired government employee who he addressed as ‘Papa’ — and his mother Manon, but insisted they were not suspects in the case.
A police officer at the Bissonnette house told DailyMail.com: ‘We are just beginning the investigation and there a lot of questions. But in my experience of these cases the parents do not know anything before.
‘And they are not suspects at all here. They are victims themselves.’
[…]
Laval University’s rector said he would would assist authorities in any way he could but has not yet confirmed Bissonnette’s enrollment. He was not known to police before Sunday night’s atrocity.
Hat tip: Vlad Tepes.
I suppose that it’s possible that the Muslims in the mosque let out the “Allah Akhbar” in response to getting shot at, much the same as Christians might say “Oh my God!”. That is the simplest explanation.
Not really.
Allahu Akbar is something that is shouted out in defiance or triumphantly, not in surprise, panic or fear.
Then it would just be a faint “Allah”.
Not true. It is an all-purpose ‘thing’ to have on your lips before dying as well as the shahada
It`s not a question of an all-purpose thing or not, it`s a question of psychology and the use of language under excitation and surprise.
Under such circumstances almost no one uses a complete phrase.
Because the emotional aspect of spoken language dominates the rational one (which would be identical to written forms).
No it’s not…. I lived in a Muslim majority country for years…. Allah hu Akbar is more of a triumphant call rather than that of one in distress or anguish…. What would come naturally in this situation would be. ” Ya Allah” ….. Equivalent to saying “…. Oh my God..”
This is Brevik 2; all sorts of loose ends and a too many agendas. The truth will eventually trickle through. This is Canada, why is the Trump connection even relevant? Are we meant to believe that Trump inspires acts of violence around the world, or is the MSM not letting a good crisis go to waste?
Come on, fellow counterjihadis, this guy seems to have been a genuine crazy, doing exactly what our movement should never do, has no ‘right’ to do and most certainly no religious or other ideological reason to do.
It seems that he has committed pure evil.
Concur. As long as no actual war has broken out, I cannot in good conscience condone acts like these. We don’t need Breiviks, they harm our cause and are gefundenes Fressen for our enemies.
The Baron has consistently stated that civil war and anarchic gang warfare was all part of the nightmare of the flood of this barbaric and alien culture and never remotely supported such. The ‘skinheads’ one had expected long since to have fought back have been remarkably acquiescent, considering the provocations.
That’s because the ‘skinheads’ are still part of the Western system, and thus have too much to lose. This is relative to the invaders, who are not even being fingerprinted properly, and pitch out any ID papers they are given so they are basically untraceable.
I agree as well. This killing was awful.If we support it then we are no better than our opponents. Few Counter~Jihadists would want that.
“Pure evil” — because he was an anti-feminist “loner” who acted alone.
He should have stood in front of the mosque with a sign, instead.
Or poured gasoline over himself and set himself on fire, at a safe distance from the invaders.
Oh, but he “most certainly [had] no religious or other ideological reason” to do so.
Why was he a loner, by the way? Might the “women’s rights” that he “attacked” have had something to do with his solitary condition? The same “women’s rights” that have resulted in the proliferation of mosques and that will eventually result in the distribution of Western women to Muslim men?
Loners and losers, listen to my advice — don’t imagine that anyone wants you to “act”. Be like me — drink beer, watch anime, lift weights, nod politely to the nice ladies and Muslims and, ahem, satisfy yourself. This is all that anyone, including those that you imagined were on your team, wants you to do. Don’t worry, in a few decades you’ll be dead. There is no reason for you to be here, no reason for you to do anything.
OK ‘reason’ was the wrong word. He had no *justification*.
That’s what I’d say about a jihadi: ‘reasons’ (from the quran and hadiths etc) are not ‘justifications’.
I think the profile of loner, pro-Trump, etc. is intended to deliberately play into the narrative. I actually am very suspicious that he did not act alone. My theory is that he was framed — maybe by the other suspect. Someone talked him into this. There is nothing specific indicating he was planning violence. I have noticed that several of the terrorist attacks recently get boiled down to one perpetrator . . . when early claims have involved more than one. I think this is an attempt to downplay the level or terrorism. One recently was the German McDonalds where people were lured and then shot — that started out with ore than just one person involved. This is slightly different — the attack here is against Muslims. Still, the “official” report does not jive with early eye witness reports. I think Mr. Bissonette is being framed.
No official report is trustworthy today. We are all living in the soviet nightmare now. The .gov cannot be trusted anywhere in the world I am afraid. The media.gov is the least trustworthy of all.
Munich attack was also specifically aimed at Sunni Muslims.
“My theory is that he was framed — maybe by the other suspect. Someone talked him into this.”
Exactly!
They need that in their narrative. A quick look into this personality, studying anthropology and political science, makes you think he might have been an easy target to form and use as a tool.
This theory does not explain the strange appearance of the Moroccan ‘witness’ who at first appears to be part of the operation, and then later a mere witness to it.
Below is a theory which explains that.
Well, I for one don’t endorse shooting people in peaceful assemblies, whether or not I agree with what their assembly is about.
So, they murder us over and over and we have to rely on the Obama’s, Blair’s, Merkel’s and Clinton’s of the world to protect us. Sorry, we are in a war. Most of us will use words and votes, but some arguably have had enough.
Let’s try this, shall we. Which one among you think you has the moral high ground in, let’s say, 1938 Germany , when a lone Jew walks into a NSDAP meeting and shoots and kills (6) SS officers.
Would you have fretted, cried and condemned the Jew? That Jew knew he was in a war. I know I am in a war. I won’t do what this guy did, but I sure as hell think I understand why he did it.
The only thing – the only thing – that Islam understands is getting beaten. That is a fact throughout 1400 years of their murderous cult. We win or they do. Never, ever forget that.
So condemn this guy but then you would have condemned the Jew as well. Same thing – different decade.
Brevik? No comparison at all. He didn’t shoot up a Tim Horton’s or a bunch of pagan Socialists and Communists, this guy went after the enemy directly.
Trust me, we will see much more of this. Much more.
I know what you mean.
But keep in mind that neither politicians nore the ones who collaborate with Islam (out of many reasons) will suffer from this.
And in the end it will not even be a setback for Islam.
In contrary – one plays the game of Islam and nonmuslim collaborators by attacking Muslims physical (and not even the radical ones).
Any intelligent person can have one`s own thoughts on the matter.
And violence against humans is always and in any conflict only the last resort…
Enough said.
Correct. But note that responsibility is also with those who import such a distinct, alien culture and expect no nut job pushback. I bet Trudeau doesn’t put up his hand for that.
Yes, its all about who is responsible and guilty.
Muslims in the end, only take their opportunities that we as a society give them (or that they are given, by certain persons and organisations).
John Galt III, I think your excellent comment covers it exactly, particularly with regard to Anders Breivik.
After the Utøya massacre I wrote a long comment on another blog (and was congratulated for it) saying that Breivik did a terrible thing, but I could see why he did it, and despite the fact he was a murderous nutter, he had a reason–he hated to see what was/is happening to his country. (and so do I, who lived there for years and married one of them)
In GoV I was jumped on for saying the same thing.
Nowadays, people are so indoctrinated they recoil in horror if anyone attacks their pet moslems–but it’s not nearly as bad if moslems murder a dozen or so kuffar. I said after Breivik’s massacre that the future would see more such attacks, this seems to be one such, but we don’t know everything yet.
“So, they murder us over and over and we have to rely on the Obama’s, Blair’s, Merkel’s and Clinton’s”
No, vote for the Trumps, Farages, Petrys and Le Pens instead.
Bissonette did not shoot the modern equivalent of SS officers. He killed civilians. Silly analogy.
He killed moslems, who have been (and still are) our enemy for the entire 1400 years of their existence.
Our ancestors knew well who moslems were, but now our leaders insist they’re our friends; what has changed?
Not the moslems or their terror manual, the koran.
They continue to play our so-called leaders like a violin.
I could not agree more with your reasoning John Galt III.
I note in so many comments on this site the hope that if we vote for the right people, then the Islamic menace will somehow cease to exist.
What many also do not realize is that the Islamic menace is just the harbinger to a wider agenda that has been designed to cause maximum civil and social upheaval throughout the West – and people should ask themselves why only the West – to the point that those who I term the Controllers, will be able to initialize the next phase of their one world agenda via the collapse of the targeted governments.
However, and this is probably more wishful thinking than not, Trump may have forestalled, but not completely defeated this phase the Controllers have in place by defunding the United Nations.
Too, what many seem to not comprehend is that having the right people in place in government will only ensure that that the law of the land is completely adhered to, and that includes the protection of everyone who states that they are citizens, including Muslims, even though their belief system compels them to subjugate the entire planet in the name of Islam and to not obey any man made law.
Also, what we are currently in is termed Fourth Generation Warfare as waged by the Controllers who are ‘old hands’ at this type of manipulating whole populations into doing their bidding. One can study up on what Sun Tzu has to say about this type of non-combative ‘warfare’ to understand what it is that is being done to us.
Putin knows about this, but I doubt that Trump or many of his advisers do, and that is why Russia is now a sane standout in a world of mass stupidity.
But, getting back to the subject, which is what to do about those pesky Muslims. I believe the most obvious move to rid ourselves of the Islamic menace is to remove the religious status that is afforded to what is really a supremacist political ideology that is Islam – even the very name is a controlling title. If we can achieve this victory with those we elect then by lawful means Islam can then be termed a dangerous ideology, and one that has no place in any country that wishes to maintain its own culture, society and sovereignty, and it can then be permanently banned from those country’s who adopt such a finding.
That could be the beginning of the Islamic downfall throughout the West, but we would also need to be prepared to take on those Muslims – and there would be many – who do not agree with such a finding and would retaliate violently against the country that adopts it.
Trying to re-label Islam for what it really is – a supremacist murderous ideology – isn’t possible in our current political culture. We would have to begin much further back, by removing the special tax status that all self-declared religious organizations can now claim. Such a demotion would go far toward removing the resentment non-believers currently hold and would put us all on an even plane. I say this as a member of a religious group – all need to pay their fair share.
Would that mean a reduction in income for churches? No doubt. But if members are motivated only by the tax laws to support their church, that doesn’t say much for them or the system. At any rate, we’ll never get rid of the special status for Islam without applying it also to real religions. And that might be a good thing in the long run.
—————–
PS I don’t think Islam is going to fall by our direct fight against it. Not that pushback does no good. But the ultimate defeat will be their own abysmal strictures rubbing up against the virtues of an open society. So obviously we have a lot of our own house-cleaning to do.
You know, what was not considered possible in 2015 is now becoming achievable in regard to many things and especially in identifying Islam for what it truly represents.
One Nation’s goal in Oz is to have convened no less than the sweeping powers of a Royal Commission in to determining Islam’s true purpose.
One Nation is represented in our Senate and looks like taking government at the Queensland state election over the next few months. If that occurs, then from the state parliament it is just a matter of a hop, step and jump into placing One Nation representatives into the House of Reps and a future federal government.
However, there is also the ability for any state to convene a Royal Commission.
I believe that anyone charged with hearing the history of Islam and how Islam operates will become convinced that it is one dangerous ideology. These commissions are open to the public so the public exposure would be very wide indeed and would preclude anyone from the Collectivist box, appointed as Commissioner, from not finding what any reasonable person would determine.
In both our constitutions governments have continually contravened ‘government shall not legislate for any religion’. That needs to be halted and the letter of the law obeyed. Government is able to get around it by arguing that providing tax exemption to all religions and money for education is in keeping within a secular society that values human rights and education for all.
That kind of undermining via our elected officials needs to be fully exposed.
It appears that Trump will not alter the current situation, but that does not mean he will not be open to new ideas.
With the break from the ‘Church’ it was local communities who paid for their places of worship, maybe that could be instilled in those who are desirous of such places. I believe in God, but I do not need to visit a special place or house in order to speak with an ‘intermediary’ when I need to talk to Him.
There will always be those who like to be led and I see no reason why they should not be permitted their comfort in that regard – so long as they pay for their own churches.
Islam is too patriarchal and many headed to be ‘reformed’ and so Islam, like any other rabid ideology, can only be held at arms length by those who value their freedom. Islam was for hundreds of years ‘rubbing up’ against the virtues of a Christian society, yet that had no effect, so I cannot see pious or virtuous examples from other cultures ‘rubbing off’ onto Islam.
“Trying to re-label Islam for what it really is – a supremacist murderous ideology”
The following excerpt from JihadWatch last November suggests that President Trump and his team might already be moving on this:
Incoming White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus said some aspects of the Islamic faith are “problematic” while defending former Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn’s controversial comments about Muslims.
Asked on ABC whether future National Security Adviser Flynn’s view that Islam is a political ideology that hides behind being a religion is in line with President-elect Trump’s view of Islam, Priebus answered “I think so.”
“Clearly there are some aspects of that faith that are problematic and we know them; we’ve seen it,” Priebus said.
https://www.jihadwatch.org/2016/11/priebus-on-islam-clearly-there-are-some-aspects-of-that-faith-that-are-problematic
Thank you for that info Chris!
It’s pretty clear this was a rightwing nut job, but please don’t use the Daily Mail for overseas story confirmation. The whole British tabloid press is worthless for news outside the UK–they don’t have overseas corrs, they use secondhand sources, they don’t check facts, they exaggerate, they push agendas and on occasion they tell outright lies. GoV discredits itself by citing them for foreign news.
You’re mistaken about the Daily Mail. They have an extensive network of local stringers and correspondents. You can tell by the American spelling, syntax, and idioms used in articles on American topics. On the day of the San Bernardino massacre, the Mail had the best coverage.
You discredit yourself by making such an argument, all while hiding behind complete anonymity (except for your IP address).
Agreed, Baron. I never understand why Robert Spencer is so anti Daily Mail. They do have long, detailed articles, many pictures and, best of all, allow comments so one can ‘feel the pulse’ of the public.
Yes, the bikini-bodies and Kardashians are silly, but nobody needs to click on those stories.
“The whole thing is very smelly.” Yes, it is. But assuming it was a smart young man who does not submit to islam who did the shooting, I have a couple of observations.
First, what was his motivation? Whenever the media publishes stories of muslims being attacked or harassed, it’s always one-sided, it’s always only the muslim side that’s being reported. It doesn’t even cross their minds that the muslims might have done something to provoke retaliation. It’s like muslims never threaten anybody, never specifically target non-muslims for rape and child grooming etc. (example from yesterday’s news feed https://gatesofvienna.net/2017/01/gates-of-vienna-news-feed-1292017/#273279 – what if one of these harassed Chinese folk decided one day to put a stop to it? I know, we would only hear how the muslims were victims yet again of an unprovoked “Islamophobia” attack.) Now Bissonnette is alive, we should hear his side of the story (not that it’s justified to go on a murder spree, whoever did it, but I am sure there is more that we are not being told). I’m not buying the propaganda that it had anything to do with Trump, Le Pen etc. That’s not a motivation, just the media seeing an opportunity to attack other people for political views they are trying to suppress.
Second, please note how this attack was handled. Trudeau immediately called it a terror attack – without even knowing who did it or why, simply because it happened in a mosque. Like with hate crimes, attacks are terrorist only if the attacked are not white. Also please note in the Daily Mail article the spread allocated to the victims’ pictures. After Charlie Hebdo, I don’t believe I’ve seen the same amount of attention devoted by the media to the victims of islamic terror attacks as they are doing now.
In summary, I don’t believe this kind of violence is justified, but I also don’t believe the attack was completely unprovoked. And it’s just one of many times that I am disgusted by the media and politicians for behaving like muslim victims are more important and deserving of much more attention than non-muslim victims (e.g. Aylan Kurdi vs. children killed in the Nice attack, fake hijab pulls vs. victims of muslim grooming gangs, muslims killed in Quebec mosque attack vs. people killed by muslims in the name of islam in recent years or Christian persecution by muslims).
They keep mentioning that he liked all sorts of “wrong” stuff like Trump, Marie le Pen, IDF, Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens.. All this affair seems a bit fishy to me.
Also, it seems that it doesn’t matter what really happened, they are going to use it as a leverage for “moar muslims” and to bash conservatives (of course).
This guy resembles the shooter at the Black Baptist church in North Carolina (I think that was the location). The same loner persona, physically underdeveloped, weed like, probably never had a girl friend and with a far right neo nazi type ideology. These people exist, they may even visit online sites such as GofV. But they don’t represent the vast majority of those who oppose Islamization and the Jihad. Denying they exist undermines our credibility.
You make the mistake to presume that our “opponents” give us any credibility at all. 😉
It really doesn`t matter for them what any of us says or does.
As long as we are not embracing their sick ideology and/or Islam.
Not credibility to our opponents, I never said that. Credibility to the fence sitting centerist masses. These are the people who must be won for the political changes to occur in the West. Opposition from the Left is a given.
There is nothing to indicate that Bissonette was “far right” or a neo nazi type — he liked chess and bird watcching. Also, he had several leftist people and one leftist party “liked” on his Facebook page. You are being fed a narrative because this is the story the government wants out there — but it is not credible. I would like to hear from his parents about his gun possession. Usually bird watchers are not also hunters.
The whole thing stinks, especially as Trudeau and the MSM is not making hay out of this. Australia has a failed bombing which has been covered up massively, but the perpetrator in that instance was undoubtedly muslim, with associates. Either way, the MSM cannot be trusted to tell the truth. And yes, the act was pure evil. Happy for him to be executed if guilty as a message that it is unacceptable, no matter who does it.
They don’t execute in Canada, but someone could (in theory) make sure he gets suicided as he may not go along with the story we are being told.
That Islamophobia bill is almost certainly going to pass.
Keep in mind that ‘the mosque’ is not going to tell the truth if it works against Islam.
ALSO KEEP IN MIND THAT THE MOSQUE MEMBERS ARE SCARED FOR THEIR LIVES IF THEY TELL THE TRUTH
It is smelly indeed Baron; I think it’s more likely simply a flase-flag by Jihadists. It is a ‘hate-crime hoax’ of a sort, the hoax element being in who is ultimately the agent.
There are two significant variations on this false-flag theory:
1. THIS IS SIMPLY A FALSE FLAG THROUGH AND THROUGH, with Bissonette actually a Jihadist ‘in on’ the false flag operation
Bissonette could be secretly Muslim and, under instruction perhaps, has prepared a disguise in advance by pretending for some time to be a ‘pro-Trump loner’ — all of that appearance, including mocking Syrian refugees online was part of the act required for the operation.
This way the Jihadis get two birds with one stone. They keep the Murtadeen in check and and false-flag propaganda coup against the infidels at the same time.
The Jihadists are good at false flags. Ahmed the clock-boy was actually a non-kinetic, propaganda false flag when you think about it; it was a propaganda Jihadist attack on the infidels made to appear as an infidel aggression on the Jihadists.
The role of the ‘witness’ may have been to direct Bissonnette whom to kill. An interesting question is whether those killed were actuall Murtadeen.
2. IT IS A FALSE-FLAG — BUT Bissonnette is a manipulated proxy for Jihadists
In this variation, Bissonnette IS violently anti-Muslim. Jihadists have found him and determine that Bissonnette could be lured into shooting at this mosque. They approach him on a false-flag basis, pretending to be ‘right-wing’ violently anti-Muslim like him and provide him with weapons.
This would work for the same purpose as in 1 above: it would get two birds with one stone–keep the Murtadeen in check and do a false-flag propaganda coup against the infidels.
The Moroccan witness is again a jihadist, but the role of the Morroccan ‘witness’ in this case requires a somewhat more complex subterfuge against Bissonnette. Bissonnette has been deceived as to the nature of ‘the witness’. He may have been deceived, for example, that the witness will select the true violent Jihadists for him to kill, while in fact the witness is selecting the Murtadeen for him to kill.
These false-flag theories are entirely coherent and believable to me. They explain the so-far unexplainable, such as the bizarre behavior of this so-called witness.
Unfortunately, the congregation has probably been warned that anyone who tells the truth WILL BE KILLED. And there is no question that when they say that they will be killed, that they mean it. The only possible way that the authorities could get the truth might be some convincing form of witness protection.
Unfortunately also, the Trudeau administration will not WANT to find the truth in this case. Because the lie, which has travelled around the world before the truth has got its socks on, is MUCH more convenient for the Trudeau administration than the truth is.
If you think this theory has merit, please discuss, and please spread it.
Also worth mentioning:
3. FALSE FLAG with PROXY — variation.
Variation on 2, except that the ‘Morroccan witness’ is genuinely innocent and merely truly a witness. The Jihadists simply lured a right-winger to attack this particular mosque because they knew it was murtadeen-ish.
My suspicions exactly.
I’m horrified at the damage that this event did to our cause. Unfortunately, even smart kids are learning their history from FPS video games. ( ‘Kraut and Tea’does, with sad results).
I know Ahmadiyya who fear for their lives when in Muslim countries. They do not display their “murtadeen” credentials there. Their mosques are easy targets for the jihadist thugs. It was a breeze to find a useful idiot (Bissonnette), give him an assault rifle, whisper in his ear, and set him loose.
[The fact that the death toll was as low as it is, is indicative of the shooter’s inexperience and lack of familiarity with the weapon.]
Don’t be too worried about the damage to our cause. This will not be that big a setback longterm.
I agree with you 100%! This was a false flag and this guy is a perfect patsy. The original witness accounts talking about 2-3 shooters were before the media/government/local muslim orgs started manipulating the events.
? The ‘allahu akbars’ shouted by the TWO masked gunmen, were a message to the murtadeen that they were being targeted for their apostasy. The killings made sure the message was understood. One of the two masked gunmen was a member of the targeted mosque, who was either the Moroccan ‘witness’ or someone else who demasked and merged in with the survivors. ?
Whatever the truth, the PMO (Prime Minister’s Office) and the Really Corrupt Malevolent Police (RCMP) are likely concocting the “real” story to suit their “progressive” agenda. Their agents provocateur are probably still being debriefed for the upcoming show trials.
You guys are a riot. I really don’t think Trump has anything to do with this at all. Some people just seem to enjoy killing others, which is obviously a BIG SIN, but killers just don’t care. And no, I have no answers, but wish I did.
Baron, how about you or Dymphna? Do you have any thoughts/answers?
Of course Trump had nothing to do with this!
An AK-47 is a rifle; so is the confusion intentional, or is the journalist merely typically illiterate?
Yes the information about the firearms used/found are confusing. It seems now that they found 2 handguns and one AK47 in his car. He would have used the handgun for the shooting though. His charges are
– 6 first degree murders
– 5 attempted murders with a restricted firearm.
AK47 isn’t a restricted firearm in Canada, it is a prohibited firearm (you can only get it through illegal means). Handguns or pistols are restricted firearms, so you can legally acquire them if you obtain the proper license. Unrestricted are all the rifles like pump, bolt, lever action types, your typical hunting rifle, also require another type of license issued by the government.
Correct. So the underlying question is, did the accused have a firearms license that would allow him to purchase the Restricted firearms (pistols), or, for that matter, any firearms? The acquisition of the Prohibited firearm, is another major question.
If he did not have the requisite license (and most likely the process of acquisition would have sniffed him out if he had shown any signs of being a firearms nutter) then how did he acquire said firearms and the ammo to go with them?
Now the media are reporting that the “assault” rifle wasn’t an AK47 but a CZ858, legal to acquire with either a restricted or non-restricted license, that looks like an AK47. They say the CZ858 jammed and it’s why Bissonnette resorted to use his 9mm to shoot. Magazines are blocked at 5 ammunitions in Canada (if purchased within the law) and he might have attempted to modify the weapon to have the magazine contain more ammo which caused the malfunction.
I’m wondering why the police didn’t properly identify the type of weapon right away, and why spread that he had used an AK47 for almost 3 days.
“A police officer at the Bissonnette house told DailyMail.com: ‘We are just beginning the investigation and there a lot of questions…”
Indeed.
For some this is very convinient and comes in the right moment.
looks fishy to me. whole thing seems manufactured.
Some final thoughts from my side.
If something like this is commited by Muslims, then the Muslim victims would always argue, that this were not real Muslims and that it had nothing to do with Islam.
And if the victims would`ve been Nonmuslims, Muslims would argue, that it was also an attack on Islam (part of the great conspiracy against Islam).
And that they are getting victimized by holding Islam accountable for it, or expecting from them to denounce the crime – again.
But secretly they would cheer about it.
Also good to remember:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:ISIL_terrorist_incidents_in_Canada
The story kept changing. Typical of the MSM.
Another fake story.
THe liars!
Rumor has it that former snowboard instructor Trudeau is now considering legislation that would criminalize so-called “Islamophobia” in Canada.
RIP Canada is this is even remotely true.
It is not a rumour. They had this on the table for awhile now. This attack just came in the most convenient time… committed by the most conveniently profiled perpetrator… It’s a textbook operation. Hmmm…
The bill has been in consideration for some time and is now being discussed in the House of Commons. That’s where some of our conspiracy theorists are getting their fuel — the timing is oddly convenient.
This is not the first time there has been a mass shooting in Quebec. There seems to be bit more of a history in that province for whatever reason. I have heard rumours the shooter had showed support for the PQ (Quebec’s separatist party) and the FLQ (a terrorist seperatist group in the 70s that had killed some people and inspired Trudeau SR to put the entire nation under the war measures act) on his social media. Also some support for the NDP (our left-wing party). If true (I have not investigated myself) it would indicate more of a francophone national socialist bent rather than the right-wing narrative. In the 1990s referendum where the separatists lost by a slim, slim percentage, the then-leader of the provincial PQ made the infamous remark they had lost to the “ethnic vote”. There is a bit of animosity to immigrants who learn English first rather than French.
Under the Trudeau government, we might never know the truth of this. I’m not a conspiracy speculator, but the timing on this and him being a Caucasian, I find very suspicious. The one thing for sure is that we’re being lied to by Canadian authorities and media. On the other hand, even if he was just a white guy who hated moslems and aired a few out, who cares? Not me. They deserve it.
You do not need to be a conspiracy theorists to suspect foul play, when 3 shooter screaming the usual “Allah Awkward”, suddenly morphs into a lone wolf “white supremacist Trump fan” as soon as the people of the radical liberal government with extremely tight relationships to islamic organizations arrive to the scene…
Only those who commit violence … deserve violence. Our rules of engagement should never make us criminals.
Now, on the other hand, if this dude had perforated a few of the main-fake media people – CNN, BBC, for example – I’d be popping the bubbly. 😉
I feel sorry for this young man. As I see it he is the victim of a vile plan by the liberals and the Muslims. And I feel sorry for his parents. He will get no justice in Trudeau’s Canada. Lord have mercy !
If I were an Islamic strategist, I would tell my followers to become agents provocateurs and fake a pro-Trump stance in all their terror activities.
This has truly been a godsend for Muslims and [Progressives]…. This event has taken the wind out of the 30,000+ attacks done in the name of Islam by Muslim terrorists and focused it on the victimization of Muslims….. The oppressors now play the oppressed….. McVeigh, Breiviek and now Bassoniette …. The 3 that’s essentially wipes the slate of 30,000 clean….
This seems too good to be a random attack by some white racist nut job…. It’s almost like it’s planned….. Remember Allah is the best of deceivers….
If people are genuinely seeking to highlight the problems with Islam, the worst thing they can do is to turn Muslims into victims, because then Islam wins and critics – even genuine, intelligent criticism – loses. Shootings, pigs-heads, graffiti, hijab flinching, nasty names, all serve the other side. It is not only cruel and nasty to fellow human beings to do these things, but also stupid!
Violence is never the answer, and we should condemn such act as being “pure evil”-we should just stand like sheep and wait for the wolves to arrive, because we can never be like them….blah. Just pathetic.
There was a time when men roamed the earth and did not let themselves be eaten. Our homeland has been invaded. Many have already been felled by the wolf, and many will continue to be devoured in front of our eyes as we continue to chew on the grassy field, hoping that we will not meet the same fate.
We did not start this war, but none the less the war has been brought to us. The reality is if we are not willing to be more ruthless than your enemy. I fought in the Long War for almost six years, and realized that the more humane we tried to make the war, the more humane we tried to make the war to be, the less chance for victory less chance of victory it had become.