Quiz question of the week...

In the aftermath of the Metropolis tragedy, which could have ended in a bloodbath, was it said that all the English speakers who dared to criticize the PQ were responsible for what had happened?

Was this tragedy used to ban any criticism of the sovereignist project? Has a link been made between Richard Henry Bain (who wanted to kill Pauline Marois) and all English speakers?

Did we say that the columnists of The Montreal Gazette were responsible for the death of technician Denis Blanchette?

Non. 

And that's good.

NO AMALGAM!

"There should be no mixing up," we repeat.

OK.

But let's apply this principle to everyone.

Take the horrible tragedy of the great mosque of Quebec.

In the aftermath of this terrorist attack that claimed the lives of six innocent people, a pseudo-intelligence expert said that columnists who denounce the rise of Islamism had "blood on their hands".

It was a disgusting accusation.

If that's not an amalgam, I wonder what is. That this "expert" is still being asked to give his point of view in some media after the outrageous comments he made is astounding.

As if the people who denounced Islamism (a liberticidal political-religious ideology responsible for thousands of deaths in the world, especially in Muslim countries) were calling for the assassination of Muslims!

As if we had to stop denouncing the horrible crimes committed by the Islamists because of the attack in Quebec!

If a crackpot entered a church and killed six priests, would the people who condemn pedophile priests be accused of being accomplices to this madman?

To have put these ideas in his head?

To have encouraged him?

Of having conveyed words that put all priests at risk?

On that account, nothing more will be written about anything.

Because any position could be perceived as an encouragement to murder.

We will no longer criticize the federal government or the provincial government, because a madman could enter parliament or the National Assembly with a firearm. It's happened before, by the way...

In both places.

AN ODIOUS ACCUSATION

In Buffalo, a racist cuckoo who believes there is a conspiracy to use immigration to wipe out white civilization has killed 10 people, most of them African Americans.

Does this mean that from now on, no columnist will be able to write about the impacts of mass immigration on a population? Under the pretext that it could excite the crackpots of the far right?

And feed the delusions of followers of the Great Replacement theory?

At some point, let's calm down!

Just as The Montreal Gazette columnists are not responsible for the Metropolis tragedy (and it would be silly to say so), the pundits and commentators who argue that perhaps we should lower the immigration thresholds in Quebec are not responsible for the Buffalo tragedy.

We can be against the point of view of these people.

But associating them directly or indirectly with psychopaths who killed innocent people is odious.