PDA

View Full Version : Justin Trudeau on the Terror Attacks in France



RangeBob
01-10-2015, 02:35 PM
Statement by Liberal Party of Canada Leader Justin Trudeau on the Terror Attacks in France

January 9, 2015
Inuvik, North West Territories

Liberal Party of Canada Leader, Justin Trudeau, today issued the following statement on the terror attacks in France:

“This week, the world has been gripped by the horrific acts of terror in France, beginning with the attack on the French satirical newspaper, Charlie Hebdo.

“On behalf of the Liberal Party of Canada and our Parliamentary Caucus, I extend our thoughts and prayers to the victims and their families, and our support and condolences to the people of France as they grapple with these senseless acts of violence. Moreover, we offer our deep and sincere gratitude to the brave law enforcement personnel who have selflessly and courageously sought to bring an end to this terrorism.

“Those who carried out these attacks – like those who did so in Ottawa and St. Jean-sur-Richelieu – wanted to leave us with images of fear and chaos; they wanted us to believe that they are martyrs, and to strike fear into our hearts. We will not allow them to do so. They are criminals, and criminals do not dictate how we act as a nation, how we govern ourselves, or how we treat each other. They will not dictate our values. These individuals represent a perversion of Islam, and we must continue to work in mutual cooperation and respect with the Muslim community to prevent the influence of distorted ideology and propaganda masquerading as religion.

“As proud democracies, we are welcoming and peaceful: nations of fairness, justice, and the rule of law. We, and our allies, will not be intimidated into changing that by anybody. Instead, these are the very values and ideals upon which we must rely in the days ahead, and which must form the bedrock of our response.

“We will not allow these threats to define us. We will walk forward together, never apart.”

hxxps://www.liberal.ca/statement-by-liberal-party-of-canada-leader-justin-trudeau-on-the-terror-attacks-in-france/

Zinilin
01-10-2015, 03:08 PM
That's more than 40 characters.

lone-wolf
01-10-2015, 03:14 PM
They are criminals, and criminals do not dictate how we act as a nation, how we govern ourselves, or how we treat each other. They will not dictate our values.

His words say one thing, but his actions and past words were completely opposite.

Billythreefeathers
01-10-2015, 03:30 PM
that was well read,

Kane63
01-10-2015, 03:45 PM
“We will not allow these threats to define us. We will walk forward together, never apart.”

Hear, hear. Let's send Justin in first!

blacksmithden
01-10-2015, 05:12 PM
Those who carried out these attacks – like those who did so in Ottawa and St. Jean-sur-Richelieu – wanted to leave us with images of fear and chaos; they wanted us to believe that they are martyrs, and to strike fear into our hearts.

Soooo wrong....so very very wrong. There are far too many people out there who think the only purpose of these attacks are to strike fear into the hearts of non-believers. That is NOT the primary intended goal of the fanatics. The primary goal is to KILL non-believers....the end....full stop. Choosing high vis targets, they're playing the psychological game for sure, but make no mistake that their primary goal is to kill...not to scare.

tigrr
01-10-2015, 06:02 PM
If you think for a minute that he wrote something like this well???????? His handlers write all his releases.
He couldn't teach drama class to 8 year olds. So he got into politics.

RangeBob
01-10-2015, 06:07 PM
They are criminals
Not terrorists.
Not related to anyone to go to war against.

Remember Liberal Mark Holland in Question Period saying that criminals shouldn't be in jail.

Foxer
01-10-2015, 07:06 PM
Wait a minute - doesn't he want to find the root causes?

ROADGLIDE45
01-10-2015, 07:18 PM
That's more than 40 characters.

He must of had a nap between paragraphs, that's a lot to memorize all at once.

kennymo
01-10-2015, 08:12 PM
Wait a minute - doesn't he want to find the root causes?

No, no, it's send them mittens and hot cocoa.....

Foxer
01-10-2015, 09:13 PM
No, no, it's send them mittens and hot cocoa.....

no, that's for the survivors. You know, because they had such a crappy day, getting raped and blown up and all. Plus a pamphlet about how to survive the harsh winter, which unfortunately begins with 'locate the hotel's gift shop... "

OEM
01-11-2015, 12:55 AM
No, no, it's send them mittens and hot cocoa.....

Don't forget parkas.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Gaidheal
01-11-2015, 07:07 AM
They are criminals, and criminals do not dictate how we act as a nation, how we govern ourselves, or how we treat each other. They will not dictate our values.

Um, what?

That is the basis of most of his campaign platform.

Foxer
01-11-2015, 12:02 PM
Well lets' just get down to the nuts and bolts of it. It suffers from the same problem we see in almost all of his public responses, it's just a tiny bit cleaner because he had a little time to think about it. So lets have some fun and break down the 'fail' politically speaking in this little speech.

Length of time to get the response

It took a HELL of a long time for him to come out with this politically speaking. Mulcair and Harper both released their comments very quickly, but Justin waited much longer. This is VERY telling about his organization behind the scenes. I doubt he 'waited' for the 'right time' - he couldn't get it prepared any faster. That speaks to the need for several people to 'vet' it before it was approved. Most likely because Justin is running his campaign and his leadership like a committee. And that is ALWAYS death, either during an election or when ruling after if you win. More signs his team won't be able to adapt to unforseen questions and issues during an election.

Meaningless buzzwords are meaningless

Trudeau is horrible for using buzzwords that are supposed to elicit emotional responses but don't because they're overused. For example - senseless violence. This was NOT senseless violence. Senseless means something that happened for no reason. The terrorists HAD a reason, it's a fairly well defined reason, it's just a reason we find abhorrent and that we cannot abide. The words 'senseless violence' have been so overused that they don't have an impact on people. Harper called it 'heinous' and 'barbaric' - words that make sense and actually resonate. Mulcair called it a terrible attack against democracy and freedom of the press. (although he did use senseless in there too, which shows why he's not winning right now :) ) Trudeau always chooses overused words that sound 'intelligent' but really don't mean anything to anyone.

Gobbledegook

Trudeau never says anything in one word that he could just as easily say in ten. Mulcair and harper both turned out pretty tight and concise statements. Trudeau's rambles on and on to get more words in. For example, while harper and mulcair may have thanked the security forces trudeau says:

"Moreover, we offer our deep and sincere gratitude to the brave law enforcement personnel who have selflessly and courageously sought to bring an end to this terrorism."

Note all the bold words. For the most part, they're unnecessary. You can get away with one or two of those but not all of them, people start to fall asleep. And it gets worse as the sentance goes on - Deep and sincere, well ok. Law enforcement is brave, well Of course law enforcement is 'brave', but whatever. "selflessly and courageously" - ok, you said they were brave, how are they selfless and courageous is just another word for brave. "sought" - who in the hell says "sought" anymore? NOBODY, that's who - unless you're a first year drama.... oh.

And of course he's referring to the police who have 'sought' the terrorists. Thank god he added that so I didn't get confused and think he was talking about the brave and courageous police who have sought to put an end to jaywalking.

Repetition

A good political announcement says what it's going to say and then drops the mike and walks off :) You don't rehash what you've said. Yet, justin does just that. He begins the third paragraph by saying we won't let the bad guys terrify us. He elaborates saying we wont let them change who we are. THEN he goes on to say how we have to work with islam to address this. THEN he goes on at length about how we're a proud democracy and we won't let them change that - he's talked about that, gone on about muslims and now he's back to that. THEN he talks about how these values must form the basis of our response (whatever the hell that means). THEN HE GOES BACK AGAIN and says how we won't let them change us.

You make a point and move on, you don't make a point and then make it again and then make it again etc. Maybe touching on it if you're summing up a longer speech but hell, this was only supposed to be a few lines.

And finally:

Vague calls to action that nobody can figure out.

This is common for justin - whenever he's addressing an issue he gives these really convoluted and vague sounding answers to the problem that nobody can figure out and which mean nothing substantial at all.

Harper said "Canada will stand with France". Ok - so, we'll support france and its' actions. Pretty straight forward. Mulcair said that we will never be silenced. Ok - doesn't really call for any action but it's a firm stand and a commitment to continue to defend free speech. Fair enough. Pretty clear - one short sentence in each case.

Justin said "As proud democracies, we are welcoming and peaceful: nations of fairness, justice, and the rule of law. We, and our allies, will not be intimidated into changing that by anybody. Instead, these are the very values and ideals upon which we must rely in the days ahead, and which must form the bedrock of our response."

WHAT THE EFF IS THAT!?!? What does that mean? What do you mean by the 'bedrock of our response'? Which of those values did you think we WEREN'T going to rely on? Or are you saying that we should make peace with the terrorists? How should we be 'fair' with them after this? Justice? Are you saying we should SUE them? And what law are you afraid WE'RE going to break after this horrible attack?

Does ANYBODY know what the hell he intends to do or recommends that we do? Harper's going to support france's actions, Mulcair is going to support the defense of free speech, Justin is going to .. what? What the hell is he saying? "bedrock of our response", is he saying we should throw rocks at them? What the F*** Justin???

And this is his biggest flaw. He does it all the time, and at the end of the day people walk away going "nice speech I guess but I have no idea where he stands on this or what actions he's going to take if he were prime minister". He gives these excesively wordy responses with all kinds of flowery language that doesn't tell you a damn thing.

And THAT is my analysis of Justin's speech. I believe this is exactly why he's starting to fall in the polls - he's forced to appear in public and talk about serious issues and he serves up this pablum. He says nothing noteworthy and he takes twice as many words to do it.

Forbes/Hutton
01-11-2015, 12:53 PM
Many of the talking heads are spinning the attack as an attack on free speech.

I was waiting for JT to pick up that banner too, it would be typical for the hypocritical little git if you consider how much free speech he's allowing in his own party on abortion.