Soldier shot, gun battle on Parliament Hill, Ottawa

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: Soldier shot, gun battle on Parliament Hill, Ottawa

Postby elfismiles » Thu Oct 23, 2014 9:10 am

Image

Pictured: Soldier, 24, shot dead by Muslim convert Michael Zehaf-Bibeau who opened fire on Canadian Parliament in terrifying attack that left capital on lockdown
Michael Zehaf-Bibeau, 32, was shot dead after opening fire at Parliament Hill
He was born in Quebec but reportedly recently converted to Islam and had his passport seized after being designated a 'high-risk traveler'
He shot reserve soldier Corporal Nathan Cirillo at the National War Memorial before running inside Parliament and exchanging gunfire with guards
Heroic Sergeant-at-Arms Kevin Vickers shot him dead
Police initially said there were multiple gunmen and at a press conference, they would not rule out other suspects
Witness accounts of a suspect include descriptions of him as short with long hair, overweight, wearing a dark jacket and 'Arabic scarf'

By Lydia Warren and James Nye for MailOnline
Published: 09:31 EST, 22 October 2014 | Updated: 07:15 EST, 23 October 2014

Image

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... orial.html

Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
User avatar
elfismiles
 
Posts: 8511
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:46 pm
Blog: View Blog (4)

Re: Soldier shot, gun battle on Parliament Hill, Ottawa

Postby elfismiles » Thu Oct 23, 2014 9:13 am

Suggesting ... that North America is a scaredypants / sissypants blubbering blob of fearmongering crybabies looking for every excuse to ratchet up the warfare states of mind.

See below...

Lord Balto » 22 Oct 2014 21:44 wrote:
elfismiles » Wed Oct 22, 2014 2:25 pm wrote:"Combat aircraft over Canada after shootings"



FBI raising alert posture after ISIS chatter
http://www.abc15.com/news/national/wash ... -shootings


Suggesting what? That ISIS has ICBMs or long range bombers? Do you sometimes get the feeling that the West is being run by a bunch of psychodoodles? Or are these pathological general types planning on nuking Kobani?



Special report: America's perpetual state of emergency
Gregory Korte, USA TODAY 5:57 p.m. EDT October 22, 2014

WASHINGTON — The United States is in a perpetual state of national emergency.

Thirty separate emergencies, in fact.

An emergency declared by President Jimmy Carter on the 10th day of the Iranian hostage crisis in 1979 remains in effect almost 35 years later.

A post-9/11 state of national emergency declared by President George W. Bush — and renewed six times by President Obama — forms the legal basis for much of the war on terror.

Tuesday, President Obama informed Congress he was extending another Bush-era emergency for another year, saying "widespread violence and atrocities" in the Democratic Republic of Congo "pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the foreign policy of the United States."

Those emergencies, declared by the president by proclamation or executive order, give the president extraordinary powers — to seize property, call up the National Guard and hire and fire military officers at will.

"What the National Emergencies Act does is like a toggle switch, and when the president flips it, he gets new powers. It's like a magic wand. and there are very few constraints about how he turns it on," said Kim Lane Scheppele, a professor at Princeton University.

If invoked during a public health emergency, a presidential emergency declaration could allow hospitals more flexibility to treat Ebola cases. The Obama administration has said declaring a national emergency for Ebola is unnecessary.

In his six years in office, President Obama has declared nine emergencies, allowed one to expire and extended 22 emergencies enacted by his predecessors.

Since 1976, when Congress passed the National Emergencies Act, presidents have declared at least 53 states of emergency — not counting disaster declarations for events such as tornadoes and floods, according to a USA TODAY review of presidential documents. Most of those emergencies remain in effect.

Even as Congress has delegated emergency powers to the president, it has provided almost no oversight. The 1976 law requires each house of Congress to meet within six months of an emergency to vote it up or down. That's never happened.

United States of Emergency

U.S. presidents have declared 52 states of emergency since Congress passed the National Emergencies Act in 1976. Thirty are still in effect. A breakdown by president:

Instead, many emergencies linger for years or even decades.

Last week, Obama renewed a state of national emergency declared in 1995 to deal with Colombia drug trafficking, saying drug lords "continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy and economy of the United States and to cause an extreme level of violence, corruption and harm in the United States and abroad."

In May, President Obama rescinded a Bush-era executive order that protected Iraqi oil interests and their contractors from legal liability. Even as he did so, he left the state of emergency declared in that executive order intact — because at least two other executive orders rely on it.

Invoking those emergencies can give presidents broad and virtually unchecked powers. In an article published last year in the University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform, attorney Patrick Thronson identified 160 laws giving the president emergency powers, including the authority to:

• Reshape the military, putting members of the armed forces under foreign command, conscripting veterans, overturning sentences issued by courts-martial and taking over weather satellites for military use.

• Suspend environmental laws, including a law forbidding the dumping of toxic and infectious medical waste at sea.

• Bypass federal contracting laws, allowing the government to buy and sell property without competitive bidding.

• Allow unlimited secret patents for Army, Navy and Air Force scientists.

All these provisions come from laws passed by Congress, giving the president the power to invoke them with the stroke of a pen. "A lot of laws are passed like that. So if a president is hunting around for additional authority, declaring an emergency is pretty easy," Scheppele said.

In 2009, Obama declared a state of national emergency for the H1N1 swine flu pandemic. That emergency, which quietly expired a year later, allowed for waivers of some Medicare and Medicaid regulations — for example, permitting hospitals to screen or treat an infectious illness off-site — and to waive medical privacy laws.

Unlike the Ebola crisis, the swine flu had hospitalized 20,000 people and killed 1,000 when Obama declared an emergency.

At a congressional hearing last week, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Tom Frieden said another emergency power — the ability to waive procurement regulations — may be helpful in responding to Ebola.

The White House said an Ebola emergency isn't necessary. "I'm not aware of any consideration that currently is underway (for) any sort of national medical emergency," spokesman Josh Earnest said last week. "I wouldn't rule it out, but frankly ... that's not something that we're actively considering right now."

Presidential emergency powers are hardly new. The Militia Acts of 1792 gave the president the authority to take over state militias to put down an insurrection, which is what President George Washington did two years later during the Whiskey Rebellion. President Abraham Lincoln commandeered ships, raised armies and suspended habeas corpus — all without approval from Congress.

President Franklin Roosevelt declared a state of emergency in 1933 to prevent a run on banks, and President Harry Truman declared one in 1950 at the beginning of the Korean War. After President Richard Nixon declared two states of emergency in 17 months, Congress became alarmed by four simultaneous states of emergency.

It passed the National Emergencies Act by an overwhelming majority, requiring the president to cite a legal basis for the emergency and say which emergency powers he would exercise. All emergencies would expire after one year if not renewed by the president.

Three days after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, President Bush issued Proclamation 7463. It allowed him to call up the National Guard and appoint and fire military officers under the rank of lieutenant general.

President George W. Bush sits with his National Security
President George W. Bush sits with his National Security Council during a meeting in the Cabinet Room of the White House on Sept. 12, 2001, the day after the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington.(Photo: Doug Mills, AP)


That proclamation has been renewed every year since 2001, including by Obama last month.

As of Sept. 30, about 25,700 guard and reserve troops remain involuntarily called up to federal service on the authority of Bush's proclamation, the Pentagon says. Canceling the state of emergency would allow them to go home.

Eight generals and admirals have been appointed to their positions despite laws limiting the number of general officers in each service. That's because the state of emergency allows the president to bypass the law and appoint an unlimited number of one- and two-star generals.

Those numbers are down significantly from their peaks over the past decade. There were 202,750 guard and reserves called up involuntarily in 2003. In 2009, the military had 89 more generals and admirals than Congress allowed for in a non-emergency situation.

The Department of Defense is conducting a review of how it would meet staffing needs if the president fails to renew the state of emergency, said Navy Lt. Cmdr. Nate Christensen, a Pentagon spokesman. That review has been going on quietly for years, and the emergency has been extended each time.

Bush's Proclamation 7463 provides much of the legal underpinning for the war on terror. Bush cited that state of emergency, for example, in his military order allowing the detention of al-Qaeda combatants at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and their trial by military commission.

The post-9/11 emergency declaration is in its 13th year. Eleven emergencies are even older.

OLDEST EMERGENCY

The oldest operational emergency was issued by President Carter in 1979. For Mohamad Nazemzadeh, that state of emergency isn't an academic debate. He's on trial because of it and could get up to 20 years in prison if convicted.

Nazemzadeh, an Iranian-born Ph.D. biochemical engineer, was a research fellow at the University of Michigan where he did research on new radiation therapies to cure cancer and epilepsy. In 2011, he attempted to broker the sale of a $21,400 refurbished MRI coil to an Iranian hospital.

Mohamad Nazemzadeh
Mohamad Nazemzadeh(Photo: University of Michigan)

That's illegal under a string of executive orders dating back to the Carter administration. Carter, invoking his emergency powers under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, imposed an embargo on trade with Iran in 1979. That emergency has been renewed every year since.

In its current form, the executive order has an exception for medicine — but not medical equipment.

In 2010, Congress passed the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions Accountability and Divestiture Act. The law tightened sanctions against Iran but included broader exceptions, including for medical equipment such as the MRI coil.

Nazemzadeh's lawyer, Shereen Charlick, argued that Congress delegated the emergency powers to the president and intended to take part of them back with the 2010 law.

"The congressional exemptions trump the executive order. Since Congress is the lawmaking body and gave the president the emergency powers in the first place, it can remove the authority it delegated to the president. That's my argument," Charlick said. "I did not prevail on that argument. I still think I'm completely right."

Judge James Lorenz rejected that argument. "It is undisputed that the plain language of IEEPA vests authority to the president to declare an emergency and implement economic sanctions," he said in his ruling in January. Even though Congress made it legal to send medical equipment, the president can use his emergency powers under the old law to require a license, the judge ruled.

Nazemzadeh didn't have a license. Such licenses are routine but expensive.

"If you look at the history of IEEPA, it was to give the president extra powers in times of emergency. It wasn't intended to permanently expand the powers of the executive branch. It's all on fairly shaky ground," said Clif Burns, a Washington sanctions lawyer.

The president uses that emergency power because it's the only tool he has to enforce sanctions. Congress has twice allowed the Export Administration Act to lapse — first from 1994 to 2000 and again since 2001 — because of a dispute over anti-boycott provisions involving Israel.

"The president, as well as his predecessors, have declared a number of national emergencies in the context of IEEPA in order to impose economic sanctions, including with respect to the situations in Iran, Syria and in order to address terrorism and proliferation concerns," said Ned Price, a spokesman for the National Security Council. He declined to discuss the internal deliberations around the declaration or renewal of national emergencies.

OVERTURNING EMERGENCIES

The National Emergencies Act allows Congress to overturn an emergency by a resolution passed by both houses — which could then be vetoed by the president. In 38 years, only one resolution has ever been introduced to cancel an emergency.

After Hurricane Katrina in 2005, President Bush declared a state of emergency allowing him to waive federal wage laws. Contractors rebuilding after the hurricane would not have to abide by the Davis-Bacon Act, which requires workers to be paid the local prevailing wage.

An aerial view shows the flooded area in the northern
An aerial view shows the flooded area in the northern part of New Orleans on Sept. 13, 2005, 16 days after Hurricane Katrina hit the city.(Photo: Menahem Kahana, AFP/Getty Images)


Democrats — and some Republicans from union-friendly states such as Ohio and West Virginia — cried foul. Rep. George Miller, D-Calif., introduced a resolution that would have terminated the emergency. Bush, under pressure from Congress, revoked it himself two months later, and Miller's resolution was moot.

"The history here is so clear. The Congress hasn't done much of anything," said Harold Relyea, who studied national emergencies during a 37-year career at the Congressional Research Service. "Congress has not been the watchdog. It's very toothless, and the partisanship hasn't particularly helped."

If anything, Congress may be inclined to give the president additional emergency powers. Legislation pending in Congress would allow the president to invoke an emergency to waive liability for health care providers and to sanction banks that do business with Hezbollah.

Scheppele, the Princeton professor, said emergencies have become so routine that they are "declared and undeclared often without a single headline."

"If we had to break the glass and flip the switch in order to do it ... it would be helpful for the alarm to go off at least. It's a sign that normal law isn't set up right," she said. "States of emergency always bypass something else. So what we need to look at is what's being bypassed, and should that be fixed."

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/poli ... /16851775/
User avatar
elfismiles
 
Posts: 8511
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:46 pm
Blog: View Blog (4)

Re: Soldier shot, gun battle on Parliament Hill, Ottawa

Postby elfismiles » Thu Oct 23, 2014 9:38 am

MinM, can you elaborate on this? :starz:

http://cannonfire.blogspot.com/2014/10/ ... ather.html
http://xymphora.blogspot.com/2014/10/mi ... ibeau.html

MinM » 23 Oct 2014 01:45 wrote:Apparently this guy killed the 'Canadian Terrorist'
Image
Which reminded me of this ..
Jeff » Fri Jun 03, 2011 4:11 pm wrote:What an inspiring sight this is.

Image

Rogue page disrupts throne speech with Harper protest
<snip>


http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/arti ... otest?bn=1
User avatar
elfismiles
 
Posts: 8511
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:46 pm
Blog: View Blog (4)

Re: Soldier shot, gun battle on Parliament Hill, Ottawa

Postby Lord Balto » Thu Oct 23, 2014 11:44 am

jingofever » Thu Oct 23, 2014 12:10 am wrote:
Lord Balto » 23 Oct 2014 03:45 wrote:Being as NORAD was instituted to block a Soviet attack across the pole, one has to wonder if some mental defective at the Pentagon has decided that the "Russkys" are really behind ISIS. And not their own utter stupidity in destabilizing the region.

Recently there was a scandal about officers or whoever in the Air Force's nuclear weapons command or whatever cheating on their monthly or whenever tests that make sure they know what they are doing. The news said there was low morale among those soldiers who work with nuclear weapons because they have nothing to do anymore. So maybe NORAD is just bored or the Pentagon is trying to make them feel useful.


I recall reading that the general in charge had them set all of the launch codes to 0000.

As for whoever predicted that the other "multiple shooters" would magically vanish, I commend you! Headline from the Guardian 12 minutes ago:


Ottawa attack: police confirm only one gunman

Canadian police have confirmed there was only a single gunman involved in a brazen gun attack on the national parliament on Wednesday that left a soldier dead.

Ottawa police said that they are satisfied there was one attacker, and police chief Charles Bordeleau told CBC that there is no longer a threat to public safety.

Police said in the initial hours after the shootings that as many as two other gunmen may have taken part. But as the day wore on, it appeared increasingly likely that the attack was the work of one person.


In other words, whoever planned this managed to get their assets out before the police took possession of the building. Reminds me of the 2nd Oswald out the back door of the TSD and into the station wagon. I guess as long as this M.O. keeps working there's no need to change it.
User avatar
Lord Balto
 
Posts: 733
Joined: Sat Jul 28, 2007 5:34 pm
Location: Interzone
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Soldier shot, gun battle on Parliament Hill, Ottawa

Postby Luther Blissett » Thu Oct 23, 2014 2:22 pm

After reading through this (and monitoring twitter for eyewitnesses all afternoon), it's some straight wildness that they now claim this person acted alone. What a conspiracy theory they are attempting to propagate.
http://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comme ... in_canada/
The Rich and the Corporate remain in their hundred-year fever visions of Bolsheviks taking their stuff - JackRiddler
User avatar
Luther Blissett
 
Posts: 4990
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 1:31 pm
Location: Philadelphia
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Soldier shot, gun battle on Parliament Hill, Ottawa

Postby norton ash » Thu Oct 23, 2014 4:21 pm

It's really smelling bad already. Multiple reports that there was much shooting in the Centre Block AFTER Zehaf-Bibeau was (poetically) killed by the Sergeant-at-Arms, and what's up with all the reports of a shooting near the Rideau Centre? (Just did some cross-checking above and Cannonfire is making the same points.)

I hope that Canadian Crisis Actors' Equity is keeping an eye on this at least. Folks gotta get paid.
Zen horse
User avatar
norton ash
 
Posts: 4067
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 5:46 pm
Location: Canada
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Soldier shot, gun battle on Parliament Hill, Ottawa

Postby RocketMan » Fri Oct 24, 2014 7:00 am

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/o ... rs-toughen

The Canadian government indicated on Thursday that it intends to speed up proposals to toughen the country’s anti-terror laws in the wake of the attack on parliament in Ottawa, including a measure that would allow “preventative detention”.

[...]

The governing Conservatives have made no secret of their plan to install new anti-terror powers, giving the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) more powers to track, investigative and detain would-be homegrown terrorists. Harper promised the proposals would be brought forward.

“They need to be much strengthened, and I assure you, Mr Speaker, that work which is already under way will be expedited,” Mr Harper said.

Details of those new powers have yet to be released, but justice minister Peter MacKay indicated to reporters that they will include measures to allow the preventive detention of suspected would-be terrorists.

“We’re examining all those sections of the criminal code, and all measures under the law that will allow us, in some instances, to take pre-emptive measures,” he said.


-I don't like hoodlums.
-That's just a word, Marlowe. We have that kind of world. Two wars gave it to us and we are going to keep it.
User avatar
RocketMan
 
Posts: 2813
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 7:02 am
Location: By the rivers dark
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Soldier shot, gun battle on Parliament Hill, Ottawa

Postby Luther Blissett » Fri Oct 24, 2014 9:50 am

The Rich and the Corporate remain in their hundred-year fever visions of Bolsheviks taking their stuff - JackRiddler
User avatar
Luther Blissett
 
Posts: 4990
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 1:31 pm
Location: Philadelphia
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Soldier shot, gun battle on Parliament Hill, Ottawa

Postby elfismiles » Sun Oct 04, 2015 1:17 pm

hat tip to illustrious leader Jay-Dub {aka JW aka Jeff Wells} via FB...


New photos reveal sequence of Cpl. Nathan Cirillo shooting
Shaamini Yogaretnam, Ottawa Citizen
More from Shaamini Yogaretnam, Ottawa Citizen
Published on: October 2, 2015 | Last Updated: October 2, 2015 6:14 PM EDT

By the time reports began to emerge about a shooting at the National War Memorial last Oct. 22, Cpl. Nathan Cirillo was lying by the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier dying in a pool of his own blood, and the troubled Muslim convert Michael Zehaf-Bibeau had taken his rampage to Parliament Hill.

Many Canadians have seen the CCTV footage of Zehaf-Bibeau’s dash onto the Hill, his hijacking of a car, and his measured jog up the steps into Centre Block, rifle in hand. And we have seen the cellphone video shot by Zehaf-Bibeau himself as he sat in his car, preparing to bring Islamic terrorism to the capital.

But we know relatively little of what actually happened at the War Memorial. Until now, the only image of the attacker seen by the public was a single, grainy photograph of Zehaf-Bibeau with a scarf around his face, holding his rifle and staring straight into the camera, with the distinctive stonework of the memorial behind him.

Since then, questions have persisted about who took the photo, when it was taken and how it made its way onto social media even as the police were still hunting what they believed was a second shooter somewhere in the downtown core.

The Citizen has obtained a series of photographs, spanning a period of less than two minutes, that show the terrible drama of the shooting at the War Memorial, including the last known photograph of Cpl. Cirillo taken before Zehaf-Bibeau started firing seconds later.

These photos are not the work of a professional photographer, nor are they grabbed from security camera footage. Instead, they were taken by a French visitor as he waited with his wife to hop on a tour bus. From the first casual snapshots of the Memorial to the deliberate photographs of a killer in action, these shocking images fill in important gaps in the record. They help us track Zehaf-Bibeau’s movements and actions at the War Memorial, hint at Cirillo’s desperate attempt to flee his killer and show the first frantic efforts of passersby to save his life.
IMG_7408 _1

9:53:38 A.M. — The last known picture taken of Cpl. Nathan Cirillo before he was shot while standing guard at the National War Memorial on Oct. 22, 2014 was captured seconds before the shooting began by a French tourist waiting nearby for a tour bus. Cirillo, left, stands next to friend and fellow soldier Cpl. Branden Stevenson.
9:53:50 A.M. — Just 12 seconds later, the tourist snaps a photo of Michael Zehaf-Bibeau pointing his rifle at Cirillo, who has moved from his post to seek cover, as has Cpl. Stevenson. Zehaf-Bibeau shot Cirillo three times.

9:53:50 A.M. — Just 12 seconds later, the tourist snaps a photo of Michael Zehaf-Bibeau pointing his rifle at Cirillo, who has moved from his post to seek cover, as has Cpl. Stevenson. Zehaf-Bibeau shot Cirillo three times. Ottawa Citizen
9:53:52 A.M. — Two seconds later, with his gun still raised, Zehaf-Bibeau sees the tourist, who captures a picture of the attacker looking straight at his camera. A tightly cropped version of this image, later photographed by police off the screen of the tourist’s camera, would become the world’s first glimpse of the gunman.

9:53:52 A.M. — Two seconds later, with his gun still raised, Zehaf-Bibeau sees the tourist, who captures a picture of the attacker looking straight at his camera. A tightly cropped version of this image, later photographed by police off the screen of the tourist’s camera, would become the world’s first glimpse of the gunman. Ottawa Citizen
9:54:36 A.M. — Some 44 seconds after making eye contact with Zehaf-Bibeau — and less than a minute after the gunshots began — the tourist takes a picture of military staff and bystanders coming to the fallen soldier’s aid. He then shows police his pictures.

9:54:36 A.M. — Some 44 seconds after making eye contact with Zehaf-Bibeau — and less than a minute after the gunshots began — the tourist takes a picture of military staff and bystanders coming to the fallen soldier’s aid. He then shows police his pictures. Ottawa Citizen
His focused eyes stared directly at the camera.
The country’s first look at home-grown terrorist Michael Zehaf-Bibeau, shared initially on social media in the hours after the attack while police were still trying to determine how many active shooters they were seeking, appeared to show him in the act of gunning down Cpl. Nathan Cirillo on Oct. 22, 2014.
A scarf covered his face, he was holding a rifle and the stonework behind him looked familiar, as if it could be part of the National War Memorial.
But where in fact was he? Who took the picture and when? And how did it find its way onto social media after the shooting?
ISIS Media account posted a picture Wednesday, October 22, 2014 , claiming to show Michael Zehaf-Bibeau, the dead Ottawa Parliament Hill shooting suspect. (Twitter) ORG XMIT: POS1410221636230109

This photo of a photo was tweeted and widely circulated on Oct. 22, 2014, the day of the shooting. An ISIS social media account quickly said it showed the shooter, Michael Zehaf-Bibeau.

As a country grappled with what was happening in the capital, that heavily-zoomed, grainy and cropped picture emerged in a cloud of confusion that swirled from jihadi propaganda to conspiracy theory to silence from official law enforcement. Before police would even release the dead gunman’s name, the world knew what he looked like.

At the time, police sources told the Citizen a French tourist visiting Ottawa had taken the photograph. After a lengthy search, the Citizen found that man and has exclusively obtained the original photographs he took that day.

Together with his account of what happened, they show not the accidental snaps of a fumbling tourist but the intentional and deliberate acts of a man who knew something horrible was happening and was determined to document it.

Jean Paul and his wife were visiting Canada for 32 days in the fall of 2014, touring Quebec City, Gaspésie and the Saguenay before ending up in Ottawa. Jean Paul, who has asked the Citizen to use only his first name, is 63 and recently retired.

The morning of Oct. 22, Jean Paul, his wife, her sister and her husband, had purchased tickets for a city bus tour. The tour departed from Sparks Street at 10 a.m. and the group was nearly a half hour early. And so, only because they were nearby, they walked over to the National War Memorial, where two ceremonial guards were standing duty.

“All four of us were on the square,” Jean Paul told the Citizen in an interview conducted in French and that has been translated for print. “We were taking pictures. I moved a bit closer than them to take pictures, a bit closer to the guards and particularly the commemorative plaque on the Memorial.”

Jean Paul and his companions saw a man approach, as if from nowhere, with what he described as a “hood” over his face. He approached from the west side of the cenotaph, from the rear. Rifle pointed, the gunman fired once, then again.

“I realized that this wasn’t a movie, that it was really an attack.”

It was then that Jean Paul began taking pictures of Zehaf-Bibeau.

The succession of photographs tells the story of a quiet morning rapidly turned violent. First, the Frenchman captured the last known picture of Cirillo before being shot as he stood as sentry along with his friend and fellow soldier, Cpl. Branden Stevenson.

Then, just 12 seconds after that photo was taken, Jean Paul captures Zehaf-Bibeau with the barrel of his Winchester sporting rifle aimed downward at Cirillo, who is out of the picture, as he fires at the soldier. Cirillo’s unloaded rifle, carried by all ceremonial guards, lies abandoned at the foot of the Memorial.

“I took two pictures of him killing Nathan Cirillo,” Jean Paul said.

“I saw him with my own eyes shoot at Nathan Cirillo and his colleague next to him.”

Two seconds later, with his rifle still raised, though now level, Zehaf-Bibeau sees Jean Paul taking his picture.

“He looked me straight in the eyes. And he raised his rifle and yelled: ‘This is for Iraq.’ And then he ran off, he ran behind. He ran off and headed for the Parliament.”

It is this picture, closely cropped, that would become the world’s first frenzied look at the gunman. The grainy zoomed-in photograph, disseminated online with no identifying markings, is part of a larger image that clearly places Zehaf-Bibeau in between the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier and the cenotaph, its granite base behind him and the unmistakeable dates “1914-1918” over top of his head. Just 44 seconds after making eye contact with Zehaf-Bibeau, and less than a minute after Cirillo and Stevenson first heard gunshots, Jean Paul takes a picture as military staff and bystanders come to the fallen soldier’s aid. Zehaf-Bibeau, at this point, has left the War Memorial and is in the process of storming Parliament Hill.

The image of Zehaf-Bibeau that began circulating online six hours after the shooting appeared to be a picture of a picture – a cellphone taking a picture from a camera’s display screen. The image was brought to wide public attention by a pro-ISIL Twitter account after it had allegedly already appeared in what Internet sleuths claimed was a tweet directed to the Ottawa Police Service’s official account. The Citizen has never verified the existence of that tweet to the police account. Many assumed, in those early moments, that a supporter of Zehaf-Bibeau, perhaps even an accomplice, had taken the picture and released it to the Internet using tactics familiar to jihadi sympathizers.

Yet, it was Jean Paul who captured those moments.

He wasn’t deterred after seeing and hearing the gunfire and witnessing a man’s murder.

“For me, it was very important to capture this very serious time.”

As onlookers began gathering around the mortally wounded soldier, Jean Paul walked over to an Ottawa police officer and told him he had taken pictures of what had just happened. Another officer who was called over took his camera and looked at the pictures.

“He wanted to know exactly who it was, how,” Jean Paul said.

The camera, and all four tourists, were taken to police headquarters on Elgin Street. Four officers individually questioned each member of the group.

“We swore on the Bible that we were telling the truth, nothing but the truth.”

Police returned the camera to him but not before retrieving the images, one of which was forwarded to the entire police email distribution list. It’s believed that several Ottawa police employees forwarded a zoomed-in picture of the gunman to civilian email addresses. The leak of the photo onto the Internet is believed to have originated from law enforcement sources, but it’s not clear whether it was Ottawa police, OPP, RCMP or one of the other forces in Canada or the United States who had access to the photograph that started the chain that led to it being posted online.

Ottawa police conducted an internal investigation and found that no officer forwarded the email that contained the image, but three civilians did. Those civilian employees were quietly and informally disciplined for the breach, discipline that ranged from a verbal reprimand to a two-day suspension.

Jean Paul refused interview requests that morning as reporters and cameramen began descending on the scene. It didn’t feel right to him to commercially exploit the fact that someone was killed in front of him.

He has agreed to release the photos now, nearly a year after the attack, to help answer questions that remain unanswered about that day. At his request, the Citizen has made a donation to the memorial trust fund for Cirillo’s young son Marcus.

Their experience that morning is a tie that now binds Jean Paul, his wife, her sister and their brother-in-law, he said.

“That was for us a certain moment that was very, very, very hard to digest.”

Jean Paul was in Valencia, Spain in March, continuing his travels, when fireworks pierced the night air. He called it a “complicated” feeling for himself. The sounds of that morning repeat in his life – he lives in the country where hunting is common and whenever he hears what could be a gunshot, he’s triggered.

“It’s a memory that remains present in the mind.”

Months after the October 22 shooting, jihadists carried out an attack at Charlie Hebdo offices in France.

“All that brought back very difficult moments for us,” Jean Paul said. “And for the Canadian people. Because it’s terrorism. It’s terrorism pure and simple.”

“We will be thinking very, very much about the Canadian people on October 22, that’s clear.”



CORRECTION: This story was updated to clarify the timing with respect to the Parliament Hill shooting and the attack on the Charlie Hebdo offices.

syogaretnam@ottawacitizen.com

twitter.com/shaaminiwhy
How a french tourist photographed a terror attack

Image

Graphic: How a French tourist photographed a terror attack Dennis Leung / Ottawa Citizen

Note:

The time stamp for each photograph was extracted from each photo taken by the French tourist. These times are not identical to the sequence of events detailed In the Independent Investigation Into the Death of Michael Zehaf-Bibeau, prepared by the OPP for the RCMP. But since the times in that report are not themselves internally consistent, we have have used the time stamps from the tourist’s camera.

http://ottawacitizen.com/news/national/ ... r-memorial
User avatar
elfismiles
 
Posts: 8511
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:46 pm
Blog: View Blog (4)

Previous

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests