- Reaction score
- 6,505
- Points
- 1,360
:goodpost:
DBA....I stole that for my FB page.
DBA....I stole that for my FB page.
Bruce Monkhouse said:DBA....I stole that for my FB page.
Jim Seggie said:In my mind tampering with rail signals thus endangering lives is more than mischief.
It's terrorism .
Jim Seggie said:It's terrorism .
True Look what they did with the last one caught in the act, they welcomed him home and let him go.ObedientiaZelum said:I agree but short of flying a jet into the CN tower I can't see the Canadian government labeling any Canadian citizens terrorists regardless what they do.
ObedientiaZelum said:I agree but short of flying a jet into the CN tower I can't see the Canadian government labeling any Canadian citizens terrorists regardless what they do.
Baloo said:Trust me, in no way shape or form, am I coming to the defence of 'Idle No More,' or any form of Native protest in this issue.
That being said, I think some people are being slightly hyperbolic when they label anything that has taken place so far as 'terrorism.' No-one, from the government to the Canadian public, is being harmed, threatened or otherwise put in any sort of conceivable danger, at this point. I say at this point, because things can always change. No, people are being inconvenienced. Shutting down a passenger railway, highway, or border crossing for several hours cannot, nor should it be, considered 'terrorism.' Really, every protest is in some form an attempt to coerce a group of people into action.
Let's not start comparing anything that has happened so far with the 'Toronto 18' or incidents of ecology-related arson.
Now, whether or not they should be allowed to do so, without consequence, is another matter entirely.
Baloo said:Trust me, in no way shape or form, am I coming to the defence of 'Idle No More,' or any form of Native protest in this issue.
That being said, I think some people are being slightly hyperbolic when they label anything that has taken place so far as 'terrorism.' No-one, from the government to the Canadian public, is being harmed, threatened or otherwise put in any sort of conceivable danger, at this point. I say at this point, because things can always change. No, people are being inconvenienced. Shutting down a passenger railway, highway, or border crossing for several hours cannot, nor should it be, considered 'terrorism.' Really, every protest is in some form an attempt to coerce a group of people into action.
Let's not start comparing anything that has happened so far with the 'Toronto 18' or incidents of ecology-related arson.
Now, whether or not they should be allowed to do so, without consequence, is another matter entirely.
Baloo said:Let's not start comparing anything that has happened so far with the 'Toronto 18' or incidents of ecology-related arson.
Baloo said:Let's get this out of the way, before it goes any farther.
Yes, it is an offence, for justified reasons, to tamper with a railway signal. Yes, this could in theory endanger people's lives. This will go against my generalization of "any sort of conceivable danger," as a whole. I will not debate that, nor was that my intent. I am not sloughing it off as simple carelessness or "whattaya gonna do?" But let us put this into perspective.
As we all know, we can 'what if' this all to death. We can assume that the train was going to be diverted into Reactor B at Chalk River, or we can assume that the lines were going to be stopped to emphasize the shutting down of rail services, as there were protesters on the tracks. Either way, it doesn't matter. No-one here, unless more information has been divulged since, has any clarification on the statement made by the Winnipeg Free Press, or the subsequent investigation by VIA Rail.
There is nothing here, to remotely suggest 'domestic terrorism.' Period. What, we're going to wantonly throw out that term against a movement that none of us agree with, because of a vague, but potentially serious, alleged incident? I maintain that this isn't the same thing as the Toronto case.
recceguy said:"The definition of “terrorist activity” in section 83.01 of the Criminal Code has two components. The first component incorporates a series of offences enacted to implement international legal instruments against terrorism. The second, more general, stand-alone component, states that a “terrorist activity” is an act or omission undertaken “in whole or in part for a political, religious, or ideological purpose, objective or cause” that is intended to intimidate the public or compel a person, government or organization to do or refrain from doing any act, if the act or omission intentionally causes a specified serious harm. Specified harms include causing death or serious bodily harm, endangering life, causing a serious risk to health or safety, causing substantial property damage where it would also cause one of the above listed harms and, in certain circumstances, causing serious interference or disruption of an essential service, facility or system, whether public or private."
http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?DocId=3066235&Language=E&Mode=1&Parl=39&Ses=1&File=15