Edmonton Police Officer RAMMED WITH CAR, STABBED Near Sports Stadium, Reports of ISIS Flag in Front Seat

Not many Amish in Alberta, strongly suspect the Hutterite Brethren. Amish rely on horses, Hutterites can use engine powered vehicles. The black flag is another indication, Hutterites typically dress in black art darker colours.

It was the Harper Government who botched this. The Harper Government let him in.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Harper

Pardon how long this is….
Following every terror attack, claims that “hate crimes” skyrocket against the Muslims in our communities where the hate crimes occurred. The term “hate crime” should never have come into existence. I have two reasons: 1. Hate does not lead to crime, though sometimes people use it as an excuse to commit crimes, but invariably, the things we consider hate crimes are crimes that are already covered by other laws, which come with other punishments. For the graffiti on the bus bench that was labelled a hate crime, a sentence of five months in jail was given because of the element of what the judge and prosecuting attorney considered “hate”. However, vandalism of that small level, should have been no more than a fine. Every “hate crime” placing unpleasant items near a mosque or other religious institution are no different than a political office being targeted the same way. It’s a protest, just as the words on the bench were a protest, against the consistent actions coming from a particular group. But we already have laws to govern those behaviours that make the ‘hate crime’ distinction redundant and a source of unfair persecution, favoring one point of view or values over another. For unpleasant items left on private or public property intentionally, we have laws regarding littering and public mischief. These are misdemeanour behaviours. Adding that title of “hate crime” to the offence actually creates a sense of hate for the person expressing their frustration, anger, hurt, and fear.
Which brings me to my second point: 2. These “hate crimes” as they are mislabelled, are not overly violent nor are they overly dangerous. The vast majority of them are harmless in essence and extremely mild compared to something like a terror attack or a violent, senseless rape or rapes, as is seen coming from members of this particular group. And the very fact that people are doing them at all is literally an expression of frustration, of hurt, of fear, and of justified anger, particularly when that group has doctrines that teach their people to act that way, and it is in following those doctrines that the violent event occurred.
Many times we are told to value our diversity and to comfort and find courage with one another to face another day uncertain of such a similar event unfolding, or perhaps one that is worse, rather than to identify and root out the true source of the problem: bad judgement on behalf our or global leadership in allowing such people to infect the rest of a population not prone to such behaviours, thus spreading the disease instead of containing it, or “fighting religious extremism, violence, or hate” is claimed all the while spreading that very thing to every nation on earth little by little in the name of compassion for the suffering of the innocent in that community. Only to find out later they are not all as innocent nor as victimised nor as interested in our physical safety, often undermining our concern for these rapes and murders, terror attacks, and so forth, and often slinging mud back our way at how much more “violent” and “unsafe” our own peoples are. So the intolerance their community has for us as human beings incapable of those atrocities and who are in shock at their lackidasical attitudes toward such events is met with severe punishments for misdemeanor behaviours and their extreme behaviours met with protection and words expressing more understanding than anything with the perpetrators, even often “justifying” it for our “involvement” in overseas wars.
It is the most ridiculous, circular argument on the planet and the reality is that if THEY are expected to deserve safety, WE are expected to deserve safety. If their violent and abusive beliefs are to be “respected” then our beliefs that these acts are NOT acceptable should be respected. Equality demands that if they can do bad things, we can speak out, oppose, and make laws preventing those behaviours just as much as they can speak out against us speaking out against their bad behaviours.
I am not encouraging acts of vandalism nor offence against their community, but I am saying that those who find themselves unable to hold back are hurting more than you are, and those feelings should be respected, understood to be what they really are, which is pain and frustration, fear, and justified anger, and that if we can put up with constant nasty, abusive, violent ideas, practices, and beliefs from that community, then they can overlook the stupid little misdemenor acts of those who are genuinely unable to take any more of that group’s violent, inhuman nonsense.
And removing the hate crime element is the only appropriate way to handle any of such a response. Leave it with the misdemeanor laws alone. Where there are more serious offences such as assault, attempted murder, and so on, then of course, use those laws to prosecute appropriately, but unless I start seeing a bunch of nonMuslims going into Muslim neighborhoods and shooting up the place, I’m sorry, but there’s not an “equal” amount of hate directed AT the Islamic community as there is coming FROM the Islamic community toward our people.
Besides, if Muslim peoples commit these types of hate crimes, and I daresay the way they over react to these minor indiscretions after a terror attack, such over reactions should be considered hate crimes just as much as our people’s justified reactions toward a community whose members consistently senselessly hurt and kill total strangers and innocent people the world over wherever they reside.
If they are not here to abhor and reject those elements of their beliefs as we do,
why
are
they
here?