The Student Room Group

Labour MP Jo Cox killed in shooting incident in West Yorkshire

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Tawheed
He doesn't look like a muslim. Even though this was a politically motivated attack, he isn't a terrorist, because he wasn't a muslim.

See the IRA, widely described as terrorists, if you are going down that route.
Original post by Grand High Witch
I agree. It's not so much the content (they don't seem to have encouraged violence or anything illegal) but the delivery. This is all too obvious in the terminology you often see used: "traitors", "destroying our country", "take back our country", etc. I can see how that sort of language could incite someone who is already mentally disturbed. I'm not one for sugar-coating language to avoid offending sensitive flowers, but this language is almost militaristic in nature and creates a culture in which fellow citizens are seen as "the enemy".


Agreed although I find his mental illnesses irrelevant. There are plentt on the far right who aren't mentally ill and there are plenty of mentally ill who don't commit terrorist attacks.
I know it sounds horrible but I just want to no his motive. Was it sickness or was it more. It doesn't change that the beautiful soul which was Jo Cox is no longer here...but it may give us something to learn from this horrific incident as in money invested into mental health etc
Original post by ubiquitousking
First bold: I would consider murder to be irrational behaviour regardless of whether or not they had a mental illness.
I'm not entirely sure I understand what you mean, though as you seem to be talking about rationality specifically for the scenario, then you talk about it more generally (or, rather, more ambiguously). As in, particular mental illnesses can result in violent behaviour, however many do not result in violent behaviour: the lack of rational behaviour is probably not due to the MI (if he indeed has OCD), and the expectation is not idiotic. If you're talking about it generally, then I agree: people with MIs do sometimes behave irrationally.


I was referring to rationality specifically for the scenario. Even people with OCD have been known to behave erratically and irrationally in violent situations. Aaron Ybarra pops to mind as a recent example. He was attempting to perform a mass shooting at Seattle Pacific University before he got disarmed. The Seattle police recently released CCTV footage of his actions, and they were very strange indeed. You could search for it yourself, I don't think I can link that type of content on TSR. I still hold my opinion - that it is idiotic to expect people with mental illness to behave rationally in such circumstances, depending on the mental illness. We don't know how severe Thomas Mair's OCD is. OCD can cause extreme violent behaviour.

Original post by ubiquitousking
Also, why does it matter whether expectations conform to reality? Doesn't stop you from contradicting yourself, it just means that at least one of your viewpoints is realistic...


It does stop me from contradicting myself. Let's say x = rational behaviour in the context, and y = irrational behaviour in the context. Only x or y can occur. Assuming the chance of y occurring is greater than x, which is what I am assuming, then in my opinion it idiotic to assume x will occur in any given event instead of y. That does not mean however, that if x occurred, I must deny it, only that I would have been wrong.

Original post by ubiquitousking
Second bold: again, generally or specifically? What do we know, specifically, about his MI? Do we not "know" that factors other than his MI are more probable motivators for murder and thus it isn't unreasonable to have that expectation (that he was behaving rationally insofar that it wasn't likely due to his MI)? (I'm hoping your answer is "no" here... ;p)
Generally, I can't see why expecting rational behaviour is idiotic, even if someone has a MI.

Third bold: alright

Spoiler



We don't know to what extent political beliefs or mental illness motivated the attack on Jo Cox. Obviously the significance of each factor varies from situation to situation. Again, this is my opinion based on what I have seen and read about past incidents. Maybe we don't hear about sufferers from mental illness committing violence that is unrelated to their mental illness often is because it doesn't make for good news stories.

You can move the part that says /QUOTE in brackets to split quotes, and then move the [QUOTE="...."] to where you want the quote to begin again.
According to this man, nobody shouted Britain first


Did anyone see that IMF crooked banker Christine Lagarde recently pleaded with Britain to remain in the EU? Do you think she's a good voice for the yes campaign?

I thought the Left who seem largely in favour of the EU, were all against these crooks.. I guess not.
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by tanyapotter
I'm simply teling you that Nazism is a far-right ideology. I don't know how it is that you're denying this.


:burn:

Let me get some sudo cream for that burn! :mwuaha::angry::colondollar:

Original post by The_Opinion
And i am telling you that it is something else, as far too many of the principles behind it don't follow right side thoughts.




Posted from TSR Mobile
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by XcitingStuart
:burn:

Let me get some sudo cream for that burn! :mwuaha::angry::colondollar:





Posted from TSR Mobile


What burn?
Thomas Mair had given his name as "death to traitors, freedom for Britain" while appearing in court. Make of that what you will.

Unfortunately now that he has been charged, reporting restrictions have kicked in. We are unlikely to get much insight into his motives and state of mind until the case goes to trial.
At the trial this morning, when asked his name the defendant replied:

'My name is death to traitiors, freedom for Britain'
I think its now beyond dispute that this person is an example of domestic far right terrorism
Original post by Quantex
Thomas Mair had given his name as "death to traitors, freedom for Britain" while appearing in court. Make of that what you will.

Unfortunately now that he has been charged, reporting restrictions have kicked in. We are unlikely to get much insight into his motives and state of mind until the case goes to trial.


Nothing to do with the far right though mate...
Original post by Bornblue
Nothing to do with the far right though mate...


Based on what information has appeared in the media, I'll be amazed if his motives/intentions were not motivated by far right politics.
Original post by Quantex
Based on what information has appeared in the media, I'll be amazed if his motives/intentions were not motivated by far right politics.


It's beyond any reasonable doubt now. Yet no doubt some will still claim he wasn't far right.
Reply 753
Original post by Bornblue
It's beyond any reasonable doubt now. Yet no doubt some will still claim he wasn't far right.


Yeah, it's funny how certain media outlets and people seem determined to focus on solely his mental illness and ignore his ideology, when the same media outlets and people would completely ignore the mental state of a radical Islamist shooter and focus solely on his ideology, why are some people so determined to absolve the far-right of any blame here?

Yes, it's clear this guy wasn't mentally stable, but what is also clear by what he shouted prior to the attack, what he said his name was and the numerous links he supposedly has with the far-right (including a photo that appears to show him with BF members on their own website), that much like any Islamist shooter, he was influenced by an ideology. The Orlando shooter clearly wasn't mentally stable either, yet most solely focused on his ideology afterwards.

http://indy100.independent.co.uk/article/britain-first-is-angry-the-entire-group-is-being-tarnished-by-one-man-fail-to-see-the-irony--bylAyAGqI4Z
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by Olie
Yeah, it's funny how certain media outlets and people seem determined to focus on solely his mental illness and ignore his ideology, when the same media outlets and people would completely ignore the mental state of a radical Islamist shooter and focus solely on his ideology, why are some people so determined to absolve the far-right of any blame here?

Yes, it's clear this guy wasn't mentally stable, but what is also clear by what he shouted prior to the attack, what he said his name was and the numerous links he supposedly has with the far-right (including a photo that appears to show him with BF members on their own website), that much like any Islamist shooter, he was influenced by an ideology. The Orlando shooter clearly wasn't mentally stable either, yet most solely focused on his ideology afterwards.

http://indy100.independent.co.uk/article/britain-first-is-angry-the-entire-group-is-being-tarnished-by-one-man-fail-to-see-the-irony--bylAyAGqI4Z


Olie, you deserve a sticker *applauds*
Reply 755
Original post by TimmonaPortella
You're concentrating on the wrong link. What I asked for evidence of was that Britain First as a group had encouraged violence, not that he was a Britain First supporter (as to that, as I've repeated many, many times now, I entirely do not care).

I wasn't even claiming that they hadn't encouraged violence, just arguing that putting up a big picture of a scary looking white working class man doesn't in itself establish that link, as FoS appeared to think it did.


They obviously haven't explicitly encouraged violence, but if you read their rhetoric, particularly the threats they made towards Sadiq Khan very recently, then it's clear they do have a very militant rhetoric and it's not that difficult to see how violence could arise from this sort of stuff, especially with mentally unstable characters like Mair.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/britain-first-muslim-elected-officials_uk_574352c4e4b0e71ef36d9617

And no, Jo Cox obviously wasn't Muslim, but she had been receiving a lot of hate mail prior to the attack for championing immigration, multiculturalism and seemed to have good relations with the local Muslim community, even her assistant was Muslim.
Original post by Olie
Yeah, it's funny how certain media outlets and people seem determined to focus on solely his mental illness and ignore his ideology, when the same media outlets and people would completely ignore the mental state of a radical Islamist shooter and focus solely on his ideology, why are some people so determined to absolve the far-right of any blame here?

Yes, it's clear this guy wasn't mentally stable, but what is also clear by what he shouted prior to the attack, what he said his name was and the numerous links he supposedly has with the far-right (including a photo that appears to show him with BF members on their own website), that much like any Islamist shooter, he was influenced by an ideology. The Orlando shooter clearly wasn't mentally stable either, yet most solely focused on his ideology afterwards.

http://indy100.independent.co.uk/article/britain-first-is-angry-the-entire-group-is-being-tarnished-by-one-man-fail-to-see-the-irony--bylAyAGqI4Z


Well said.

No doubt the next deflection tactic will be to claim that Britain First are not actually right wing...
Reply 757
Original post by KINGYusuf
Thomas Mair is apart of Britain First
Thomas Mair shouted "Britain First" according to 3 witnesses
Thomas Mair when asked for his name in court said "Death to traitors, freedom for Britain"

This was a TERRORIST attack

Those who disagree are obviously right-wing, ignorant cretins


Literally not terrorism by definition

It isn't an attack on the public

It was a political assassination
Hey guys! Remember Lee Rigby? he was butchered in the street by Michael Adebolajo and Michael Adebowale both got charged with murder but not terrorism. I don't see you campaigning to get them labeled as terrorists so please give it a rest. Is it because that case doesn't suit your agenda?
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by Olie
They obviously haven't explicitly encouraged violence, but if you read their rhetoric, particularly the threats they made towards Sadiq Khan very recently, then it's clear they do have a very militant rhetoric and it's not that difficult to see how violence could arise from this sort of stuff, especially with mentally unstable characters like Mair.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/britain-first-muslim-elected-officials_uk_574352c4e4b0e71ef36d9617

And no, Jo Cox obviously wasn't Muslim, but she had been receiving a lot of hate mail prior to the attack for championing immigration, multiculturalism and seemed to have good relations with the local Muslim community, even her assistant was Muslim.

Yeah i saw her assistant was a muslim
She clearly was a proper human being who didn't judge by your religion or skin colour

Quick Reply

Latest