Family doctor salary ottawa Videos

Benjamin Franklin

+Matt Hoyte Which is even scarier...? That means the final decision on a majority of decisions goes to the least qualified person in the party that sounds horrible to me.

+Ferris Kerr Mulclair has experience but most of his MPs do not.  The Liberals have the opposite problem.

+Matt Hoyte The vote wasn't split in Alberta that's for damn sure. I really don't think Harper is going to have the day in this election, unless he cheats some how and that won't go down well if he ends up the Prime Minister again. What it comes down to is who should be prime minister between Trudeau and Mulcair, and if you look at experience alone Tom Mulcair wins that debate all day long.Also, I wouldn't say that their support of C-51 was necessarily inconsequential. It's lost them degrees of support from almost all demographics.

+Ferris Kerr I wouldn't pin a coalition totally on the liberals.  The NDP can have their ultra partisan and demagogue moments also.  I just hate to see progressive partisanship split the vote and give the day to Harper.  Whatever you may dislike about Trudeau, there are some very good liberals in the party.  The NPD has a lot of novices and college students and would have a hard time finding experience to fill all the minister roles. The liberal support of C-51 was inconsequential and came with a ton of caveats, so I wouldn't make too much hay out of it.  They've both vowed to repeal it in power.

+Matt Hoyte A coalition will never happen now, the Liberal leadsership is too flippy floppy, who knows if they might decide to fallout anyway. They honestly disappointed the shit out of me with their support of C-51. I like Liberal values, I just don't like the Canadian Liberal party.

+Ferris Kerr _"The NDP also wanted to make a coalition for 2015 with the Liberals to which the Liberals refused for some reason."_- I actually heard the opposite reported by the CBC recently.

+Ferris Kerr _" One random court psychiatrists opinion on someone is not damning evidence"_- It's not random.  But it is the only evidence to the point there is.  The assertion that he was mentally ill is not evidence.  His actions in trying to get arrested to get rehab is not irrational , in fact it's very rational and very common where access to services are poor.You're complete distrust of the system is not evidence that he was mentally ill.P.S. he very clearly stated a political and religious aim in the very relevant video he made.  Revenge for foreign occupations of Afghanistan and IS against Canadian infidel soldiers...Islam will rule the world?  I suppose you didn't listen to the video he made?  Or you just think you know what he was thinking better then he did?  I'm all for reforming mental healthcare in Canada...but it doesn't make him mentally ill or have no religious/political motivation.What part of being mentally ill would make him shoot up a soldier and parliament specifically?  

+Matt Hoyte Let me explain this to you, that mental examination (the only one that gave him a clean bill of health) has already been shut down in the debate and has been completely disregarded for numerous reasons, firstly it's not even applicable to the Ontario incident because it was two full years previous, secondly what did he do almost immediately afterwards? He tried to rob a McDonalds while smiling because they would not put him in jail. Thirdly, as has been mentioned numerous times he was a fucking crack addict and homeless for years before and lastly this stuff has happened before in the past, people are examined by court psychiatrists and then released just to go commit crimes or kill themselves or god knows fucking what hence why so many people want reform in the mental health act and rightfully so. One random court psychiatrists opinion on someone is not damning evidence, and he's the only person to have given him a clean bill of mental health two full years before the Ontario shooting even happened.P.S. he didn't have a political aim anyway, so it's not terrorism twice I guess.

+Ferris Kerr _" the CBC article that says he was detained under the mental health act and then released,"_- Released because he was found to not be mentally ill by an expert.  A short temper does not make someone mentally ill. And regardless of what you think of the system, you do not get to substitute your own opinion for an experts who actually examined him.I know, it's all a big conspiracy.  And remember, if they disagree with the conspiracy - they are a part of the conspiracy.  - He may have been emotionally unstable, but that is not the same as mentally unstable.  He was still competent enough to be responsible for his own actions, and he clearly stated his religious/political reasons for the shooting.  I suppose anyone who is violent or does drugs is mentally ill in your books.

+Matt Hoyte Lol, the only one that says anything of that sort is the CBC article that says he was detained under the mental health act and then released, to go back to smoking crack and then shot up parliament two years later, clearly wasn't a top quality examination since people are calling for reform of said Mental Health Act like the CMHA of Ontario://ontario.cmha.ca/public-policy/context/mental-health-reform/and Gen. Lawson on GN sitting there saying it's just a "distorted world view" almost like his opinion as a military General actually means anything in a debate of mental health. He's there to sell terrorism more than anyone, plain and simple. Nevermind all this evidence and testimony from people with him days before the event. Not to mention RCMP's Bob Paulson basically saying the exact same thing like they're reading from a script lol.(Lawson also resigned)"He was an unusually quiet person who smoked “a lot of crack cocaine” and would lose his temper at the slightest provocation." Even without all the evidence people would still be questioning a homeless crackheads mental state, especially with how these people describe him as a person.His fucking video doesn't say anything about his mental state, you can't say that somebody is 100% mentally acute because they are speaking clearly. Ever heard of a drug called Scopolamine? The Devil's Breath? It's like roofies except you don't pass out and people can't tell you're on them.It's become clear that you're hiding in a shell of ignorance that you created because of your fear of "terrorists" in Canada, when in actuality this is the Governments hard press to try and convince people that terrorists are here in Canada and are a threat, and all the sheep just ate up the bullshit. What happened in Ontario wasn't terrorism, it was just marketed to you that way.

+Ferris Kerr all those articles say that he was not mentally ill.  read them.  Asserting that something is true is not proof.The video he made shows his state of mind and his rationale.

+Matt Hoyte Hasn't linked a single fucking relevant source and calls me a hypocrite for proving my point about his mental state. You must be fucking blind, because here they are again for you.Global news://globalnews.ca/news/1866596/gen-lawson-knew-zehaf-bibeau-was-mentally-ill-on-day-of-ottawa-shooting-documents/The National Post://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/michael-zehaf-bibeau-a-crack-addict-who-tried-to-rob-mcdonalds-so-he-could-go-clean-in-jail-records-showCBC://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/michael-zehaf-bibeau-ottawa-gunman-asked-b-c-judge-to-send-him-to-jail-1.2810683The only source you linked is from the star and they don't really say anything about whether he's mentally ill or not, all it talks about is the video he made right before the shooting, which doesn't prove a thing about what we're actually arguing about and then you turn around and tell me that I'm full of shit and haven't been linking sources to prove my point.Hy-poc-ri-sythe practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform; pretense.That's probably the tightest fit of a definition I've used so far. You've basically fell down the bullshit tree at this point. You lost this argument a while ago, pal.PS as I said before, you've already been caught in a lie, nothing you've had to say for a while has had any validity, and you have yet to prove a single point. Good day.

+Ferris Kerr yes fuck you too.  I was going by the fucking sources you provided and obviously didn't read past the headline." too bad he was diagnosed insane by everybody that ever took a look at him."- sources?  oh yes there are none.  because that never happened.  hypocrite.  at least i can admit when I'm wrong.  Your are about as self righteous as they get." PROVEN CRAZY AS FUCK"- So bald assertions count as proof in your world.  If you are representative of the NDP base then i won;t be voting for them again.  now you are the one that is lying, but I won;t wait for you to admit your are wrong."PS You could give a fuck about the truth because it's clearly subjective to people like you."- for someone who hasn't provided any evidence to support their own claims you are about as hypocritical as they come. All the quotes I used in the last post came from the sources YOU provided.   i agreed with you on multiple points and tried to be civil.  but it's obvious that you are not interested in civil discussion but would rather get in a name calling shouting match.  I don;t have time for that.  have a good day you ideological fuck head.

+Matt Hoyte You didn't misspeak, you fucking lied. You seriously think I'm going to read all this bullshit you're spurting? After your last statement of "facts" there's no fucking point in reading any of that, considering your word is worth about as much as horse shit at this point in the argument, sources? Nope, just that stupid video of him bumbling about Muslims and how he hates America so much, too bad he was diagnosed insane by everybody that ever took a look at him. You finally post a link and it's completely irrelevant, it's information everybody already knows about and that everybody has already discounted because he was PROVEN CRAZY AS FUCK. I really shouldn't be surprised, you were reduced to lying to support your argument.PS You could give a fuck about the truth because it's clearly subjective to people like you.PPS Next time you try and argue with someone about something like this maybe you should do a little research instead of just trying to make up facts on the hope that the other person won't call you out on them.

+Ferris Kerr yes, maybe I misspoke when I said he was analyzed after the shooting.  But he was analyzed before.But Maybe you didn't read these article?  First line. of the first article you posted " Three years ago, a psychiatrist deemed Ottawa gunman Michael Zehaf-Bibeau mentally fit to stand trial ..."Or this _"The psychiatrist, who met with Zehaf-Bibeau at the Surrey Pre-Trial Centre, found that he was fit to stand trial, and explained some of Zehaf-Bibeau's motivation for wanting to be imprisoned."The accused is aware of his charge and possible consequences of conviction. He wants to be in jail as he believes this is the only way he can overcome his addiction to crack cocaine. He has been a devoted Moslem for seven years and he believes he must spend time in jail as a sacrifice to pay for his mistakes in the past and he hopes to be a better man when he is eventually released," the psychiatrist wrote on Dec. 18, 2011."_Or this - ""I'm a crack addict and at the same time I'm a religious person, so I want to sacrifice freedom and good things for a year maybe, so when I come out, I'll appreciate the things of life more and be clean," Zehaf-Bibeau said"Being a crack addict does not make you mentally ill, and wanting to go to jail so that you can go through rehab is a very rational thing to do.  How else would you get free rehab? 'I'm a crack addict and at the same time I'm a religious person... I want to sacrifice freedom and good things... so when I come out, I'll appreciate the things of life more and be clean.'"-  Michael Zehaf-BibeauDoesn;t sound like the ramblings of someone detached from reality to me, or the psychiatrist who examined him.  But of course you probably know better from reading an article.  Just try for a second to think about it critically and not just confirm your bias.  What is the connection between wanting to go to jail to get rehab and mental illness?The entire premise behind the assertion that he was mentally ill was his estranged mother saying so and nothing else.  Looks like you read headline only and took it as gospel truth.Again, name calling only betrays your lack of an argument and your partisan fervor.P.S.- Islamic terrorism wasn't created by the US, it was only made worse by the US.  The Islamic extremism we see today is a direct descendant of the Islamic forces that sided with the Nazis in WW2.  They've been around for a while, it's just the US (and others) actions have allowed them to gain power in many places."what I was saying is that they're clearly not a tremendous threat."- Actually that's what I said.  You said that this was not terrorism - because his mother said he was mentally ill.  Even if he himself said otherwise."We've lost more Canadian soldiers to suicide over the decade (thanks Stephen Harper) than we did in Afghanistan. The NDP knows this."- I agree, and that's horrible, but it's completely irrelevant to the issue at hand - this WAS a terrorist act.  the ONLY evidence to the contrary is his mothers say so.  And it's fairly obvious that parents are usually bias in favor of their children."P.P.S. Islam isn't a fucking nation, just as revenge for a conflict he was never a part of isn't a political aim"- You've really never heard of the nation of Islam?  Malcolm X? Nation does not mean counrty/state.  Muslims very often refer to Islam as a 'nation'.  (A nation is a large group of people who share a common language, culture, ethnicity, descent, or history) It's not a state (although there are Islamic states). He specifically said that this was revenge for Canada's participation in Afghanistan and against ISIS and Muslims in general in the video he made.- Can you provide a single bit of evidence that he was mentally ill besides a bald assertion from an estranged parent?  He made a very clear and deliberate political/religious statement directly before the shooting.  why do you discount that?  Why do you ignore his rational for the shooting?  Do you know what he was thinking better then he did?  Do you think every terrorist act is committed by mentally ill people?  Do you deny that perfectly sane people can commit atrocities in the name of political and/or religious ideologies?  And why are you dismissing the possibility so flippantly and in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary?Fact 1 - He was analyzed by a psychiatrist and deemed mentally fit.  He had no prior history of violence.Fact 2 - He created a video explaining his political and religious motivation for the shooting that was coherent and articulate.//www.thestar.com/news/canada/2015/05/29/ottawa-attacker-praises-allah-in-unedited-version-of-pre-shooting-video.htmlFact 3 - The only fact that supports the idea that he was mentally ill was his estranged mothers say so.  (and maybe your incredulity and bias)Weight the evidence dude.  Facts 1 and 2 completely outweigh fact 3.And notice how I responded respectfully, with out calling you a name once. And also mentally ill people do not go shooting up Parliament buildings, and to claim that he must be mentally ill because he did, is an insult to the mentally ill.PPPS I have Muslims and mentally ill people,  in my family.  I have voted NDP before.  and so really I have no axe to grind here - I'm only interested in the truth.  The truth is important.Have a good day.

+Matt Hoyte I'm gonna point out right away that you're lying about Michael Zehaf-Bibeau being "analyzed by a psychiatrist before and after" because even if he was before he couldn't have been afterwards he was fucking dead. You're clearly talking out your ass which explains why you're so ignorant in your beliefs. If you don't support bill C-51 then you've clearly done research into it, so then go do research into this and you'll see that Michael Zehaf-Bibeau was clearly mentally ill, don't believe me? How about Global News://globalnews.ca/news/1866596/gen-lawson-knew-zehaf-bibeau-was-mentally-ill-on-day-of-ottawa-shooting-documents/The National Post://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/michael-zehaf-bibeau-a-crack-addict-who-tried-to-rob-mcdonalds-so-he-could-go-clean-in-jail-records-showCBC://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/michael-zehaf-bibeau-ottawa-gunman-asked-b-c-judge-to-send-him-to-jail-1.2810683Evidence^^^"You're just using mental illness as a blanket excuse with no evidence to support the claim. "Hypocrisy^^^You're reduced to making up facts to support your argument. Stop talking out your ass, link some sources or shut your mouth. Because nothing you have to say has any validity beyond this point.P.S. Islamic Terrorism exists (as a direct result of the US) I never said they didn't, what I was saying is that they're clearly not a tremendous threat. We've lost more Canadian soldiers to suicide over the decade (thanks Stephen Harper) than we did in Afghanistan. The NDP knows this.P.P.S. Islam isn't a fucking nation, just as revenge for a conflict he was never a part of isn't a political aim, especially for someone as mentally unstable as he was.

+Ferris Kerr _" What was his political aim and for whom? "_- his political aim was spelled out clearly in the video he made before the shooting.  Revenge for the nation of Islam.  "they are the sole reason it went through and is now law when they could have stopped it."- That's not true at all.  the Conservative have a majority, which mean they they don't need the support of any other parties to pass a bill.  It would have passed either way.  And the Liberals said they would change it if they gained power.  But again it is completely beside the point at issue here." He wasn't a terrorist, he couldn't have had political aims of any kind in any favor to anyone because he was mentally estranged"- Again that's not true at all.  He was examined by a psychiatrist before and after the shooting and was found mentally competent both times.  the only one who said he was mentally unstable was his mother....who hadn't seen him in years.  He may have had issue emotionally and with drugs, but that doesn't make him mentally incompetent. " I brought up the Liberals because through half the previous argument you were singing their praises and trying to say they weren't liars"- Doesn't seem like something I would do.  I'm no partisan.  If anything I may have pointed out that their support of c-51 is inconsequential.  " liars when in fact they very clearly are liars to their supporters to their potential voters and to their own morals."- But the only reason, with this issue, you are calling them liars is because you disagree with them._"Cor-rup-tionFraudulent, dishonest conduct by those in power."_- And your premise for calling it corruption is that you don't agree that terrorists exist."P.S. the news went balls wild telling Canada about a link to ISIS and that proves my point that he wasn't a terrorist because they had to lie to make him fit the legal definition."- actually the 'news' (a very broad category) treated the whole thing fairly if you ask me.   Asking if there was a link is not the same as asserting that there is a link.  And even if what you said is true, it doesn't disprove that there was any political motive."This specific case involving Michael Zehaf-Bibeau was not a matter of national security like the snakes in suits would like you to think, it's a matter of mental health."- You're just using mental illness as a blanket excuse with no evidence to support the claim.  And it's offensive to the mentally ill.  There is a long history of political terrorism world wide, and this fits the bill exactly.  The IRA the Uni-bomber, Nazi and Zionist terrorim, etc. I guess they were just all mentally ill because terrorism does not exist.And just because I acknowledge that terrorism exist does not mean that I support c-51.  Canadians are more likely to be hit by lightning then hurt by a terrorist.  I don;t believe in being tough on crime, I believe in being smart on crime.  But that includes acknowledging that crime exists in the first place.  In order to combat this we need a stronger social fabric and a fairer country.  It's a battle of ideas more then anything else...and we need good ideas. Not just to throw people in jail.  I would vote NDP.  But this is a stupid position for them to take....that Islamic terrorism does not exist.

+Matt Hoyte Okay, here's one more hole in your theory. What was his political aim and for whom? Also I never said they created the bill, I said they supported it begrudgingly or fucking not they are the sole reason it went through and is now law when they could have stopped it. The Liberals Supporting Bill C-51, besides being dishonest in their "firm stance" against the conservatives is giving more capability to CSIS so they can fight terrorists that don't fucking exist, in other words people they tell you are terrorists, in other words anybody. He wasn't a terrorist, he couldn't have had political aims of any kind in any favor to anyone because he was mentally estranged. I brought up the Liberals because through half the previous argument you were singing their praises and trying to say they weren't liars when in fact they very clearly are liars to their supporters to their potential voters and to their own morals.Cor-rup-tionFraudulent, dishonest conduct by those in power.P.S. the news went balls wild telling Canada about a link to ISIS and that proves my point that he wasn't a terrorist because they had to lie to make him fit the legal definition.This specific case involving Michael Zehaf-Bibeau was not a matter of national security like the snakes in suits would like you to think, it's a matter of mental health.

+Ferris Kerr _"there's still no evidence to support his "link" to ISIS or ISIL "_- There does not need to be a link to this group.  It only needs to be politically motivated violence in order to instill fear in the population.  "Liberal values and then go read Bill C-51. "- The liberals didn't create the bill.  they only begrudgingly supported it.  But they are different issues.  "The sooner you realize that the liberals are as corrupt,"- Supporting bill C-51 has nothing to do with corruption.  Just because you disagree with someone does not make them corrupt or ignorant.  And your preference for name calling over presenting facts makes your argument smell extremely weak." even more corrupt than the PC's "- There are no federal PCs.  They are the conservatives and their is nothing progressive about them.- Again you are bringing up the Liberals when they have nothing to do with my original point.  Just because the Liberals are wrong on one issue doesn't make the NDP right on another issue.  I won't get caught up in your partisanship.  The fact still stands...this was a terrorist action no matter how you want to frame it.ter·ror·ism - nounthe use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims.

+Matt Hoyte Well to this day it's still impossible to define the Ottawa incident as a terrorist attack because of both the definition of terrorism which the government would love to change, and the fact that there's still no evidence to support his "link" to ISIS or ISIL or who the fuck ever, it was pure flat out bullshit propagated by the media, and you clearly got swept up in the wave of ignorance. Lol, take one second to think about Liberal values and then go read Bill C-51. He might as well be a dictator if he becomes prime minister because he clearly does whatever he wants with zero thought. He decided he was going to help his opponent in limiting our freedoms the same year as the federal election, it's blatant, ridiculous, unacceptable and honestly a pretty stupid thing to do after all. The sooner you realize that the liberals are as corrupt, or even more corrupt than the PC's in almost every aspect the sooner you can go on to being a free-thinking human being.

+Ferris Kerr "Justin Himmler"?  Hyperbole much?I said nothing about Trudeau.  Yes the liberals support of Bill c-51 is also disappointing.  But what is most disappointing is the petty bickering between the left of center, while Harper eats their lunch.My point is that denying that this was an incident of terrorism is idiotic. I don't see the point.

+Matt Hoyte Still voting for Justin Himmler after he helped push Bill C-51 through? It's getting even harder as time progresses for you to say Liberals aren't bald-faced liars, not implying that it was ever easy.

+Matt Hoyte Not entirely true, out here in the West we felt the housing market crash and we sure as hell felt the resulting recession and the NDP's firm stance on creating jobs and trying hard to keep the jobs here we've already got has earned them some pretty good ridings in BC, Alberta, and Saskachewan.

Well that's news to me. But good luck bearing the cons with the left of Centre vote split down the middle. The ndp made all of their gains in quebec last election. And Trudeau is far far more popular then Mulcair or ignatieff. So it's not looking good for us. And Mulcair is the one taking all the pot shots at Trudeau. I say a progressive coalition is the only way.

We'll see, last election was a massive breakout for the NDP to be such a big opposition, I'm hoping they can get a majority Government the second time coming because that's the best opportunity for change, the current course we're on is really bad the XL pipeline, the Canada/China Trade Agreement, nope nope nope!!! Also that's not 100% true what you said earlier, Tom Mulcair stated that Decriminalization is an overnight process that they can essentially stop the prosecution of Marijuana smokers and then work from there into full blown legalization and establishing a market because obviously its going to be a matter of debate on how to properly regulate it but like he says its all about fact based decision making, and Tom Mulcair advocates the current methods being employed by Colorado, Oregon, and Washington State.

+Ferris Kerr Yeah, I'd be all for a coalition.  I think that it was Jack Layton that was the first to refuse a coalition with Dion.  BUt either way fights between them are usually hogwash and only help the conservatives.

+Matt Hoyte The NDP also wanted to make a coalition for 2015 with the Liberals to which the Liberals refused for some reason.

+Matt Hoyte It's true that idealogically the NDP and Liberals are pretty close together but in procedure I honestly prefer the NDP and Thomas Mulcair himself over Justin Trudeau, but lets be honest all that matters is that Harper gets thrown out of office, that's one of the things that caught my eye about Tom Mulcair when he called out the so-called "Fair Elections Act" Stephen Harper and his Conservatives deliberately trying to disenfranchise aboriginals and seniors. Also like I said before the NDP has a really good chance of having a strong majority Government, which means some real change. Trudeau wants that XL pipeline or whatever and that's not good for the West at all we're going to lose so many jobs.

+Ferris Kerr I'm not sure about that vote you mentioned - would you have a link to something on it?  You know the Cons put out omnibus crime bills with tons of stuff in it - so it probably wasn't a cut and dry vote for stiffer penalties.Official NDP policy is to decriminalize pot not legalize it.  the difference is that it would still be illegal if decriminalized, it just wouldn't be a criminal offence - organized crime would still profit from it, and even more so.  The Liberals and NDP aren;t actually that far apart, which is why they split the progressive vote and hand power to the conservatives.  And as far as I can tell Mulcair is the petty bickering commander and chief.  This guy was a terrorist plain and simple and arguing otherwise, when all the fact show otherwise, makes him look bad.  also that whole sexual harassment thing was just stupid...but that's another topic.

+Matt Hoyte Something you might not know that was recent is that Trudeau actually voted with Harper to increase penalties for possession which is just another example of the Liberals just flat out saying one thing and doing another, no decisions the liberals would ever make would have no weight in the office of Prime Minister, because they sure as heck wouldn't be a majority Government. The NDP is the best chance at real, positive change in Canada. More jobs, better wages, pensions, Legalizing Marijuana and giving it a private, but regulated market promoting product assurance, private business, and building the economy.

+Ferris Kerr I wanted to like the NPD.  But it seems like they are trying to outflank the Liberals on the right - especially in the last Ontario provincial election.  Federally their stance on decriminalizing pot is fairly dumb compared to the liberals legalize and regulate stance.  I just haven't heard very many good ideas from them.  Liberals have some good policy ideas ( not flawless though).But that's all beside the point here.  This was an act of terrorism regardless of what you think we should do about it.  Let's not act like cowards and curtail our freedoms because of these zealots.

+Matt Hoyte And just to clarify, I did not say the WORST liars, but some of the worst. I agree that the Cons are definitely the worst in our generation.

+Matt Hoyte Lol? Liberals brought in the ridiculous changes to the firearms act and took away thousands of guns from lawful citizens, the long gun registry was recently removed because it was apparent that it had absolutely no effect on crime like the liberals SAID it would.

+Ferris Kerr _"Liberals have been some of the worst liars in Canadian politics"_- Really? Care to back up that assertion with any facts?  Cause as far as I can tell the Harper conservatives take the cake as far as bald face lies go.  Haven't heard any Liberals advocating taking away people's rights.

+Matt Hoyte Liberals aren't doing Canadians any favors in the light of this "attack" either, they're also calling for reform which is bullshit we don't need more of our rights taken away. Liberals have been some of the worst liars in Canadian politics, I find it really hard to trust anything they try and say.

+Matt Hoyte If you could link this "evidence of terrorism" that would be great. Even if that is real, those statements he made. he was a mentally deranged individual, that is not a direct link to ISIS and ISIL like the Cons keep saying.

+Ferris Kerr _"just because he was Muslim does not mean he's trying to "wage war" on Canada"_- No, it's because he left a video where he explicitly stated that his goals were violent jihad.  And there is NOTHING to show that he was mentally ill except a baseless claim from his estranged mother.  He had a clean bill of mental health from when he was in jail.  He was denied a passport because he wanted to join ISIS.No one claims he was trying to wage war because he was a Muslim.  He was trying to wage war because he shot a soldier on guard duty and tried to shoot MPs.  Have you been in a cave?  What do you propose he is motivation was - he was just crazy?  hate to break it too you but mentally ill people generally don;t try and shoot up parliament.  that's not a reason or an excuse.Don;t mistake me for a conservative, I'm very liberal.  I always vote to the left.  But some have to pull their heads out of their asses and wake up to the fact that Islamic Jihadist do exist, whether it's politically convenient or not.I'm also married to a Muslim so don't mistake me for an anti-Muslim bigot.  Calling him a terrorist is not a justification for war either.  But it doens't change the facts of the matter.  Truth matters, and that's the central liberal truth I stand for.

The only idiots here are people that are unable to take into account the facts. Let me break it down for you. Definition of terrorism: the use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims. The Ottawa Shooting was a mentally unstable man that tried to shoot up parliament, just because he was Muslim does not mean he's trying to "wage war" on Canada it's propaganda plain and simple and the only people pushing it are the Conservatives.