why isn't he labelled a terrorist? Watch

h3isenberg
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#21
Report 4 years ago
#21
(Original post by SophiaLDN)
Yes. You don't think he has extremist views? He has a keen interest and references the KKK & BNP in his book. He also watched videos of men being executed under a swastika flag. To me, that's an extremist given that he is obsessed with the extreme far-right.
No he does, I meant it rhetorically as in saying he has extremist views because of his links to far right organisations, which doesn't make him a terrorist.

My point was that this guy wasn't even at first called a terror suspect or even suspected of planning to commit terror offences which is what the media first jumps to if it was someone else.
He can't be suspected of terror offences because there's no known motive and he has already been jailed. How can he be a suspect if he's already jailed?
0
reply
yo radical one
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#22
Report 4 years ago
#22
(Original post by Safiya122)
So you don't see terrorism interlinking to these? Okay then:rolleyes:
If he used that bomb to attack civilians, then yes he would be a terrorist, but he did not and he managed to convince a jury that he had no intention of doing so and so he is not a terrorist.

The IRA were White and Catholic and they were terrorists.
0
reply
Jemner01
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#23
Report 4 years ago
#23
I like how the article includes far-right politics as if it's a relevant factor to building nail bombs. He's probably not labelled a terrorist because he didn't use the various weaponry he apparently had no intention of using the weapons. Of course, we can't take his word for it, but a terrorist has to have an agenda. This was just someone with a fascination with weapons.
0
reply
Aj12
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#24
Report 4 years ago
#24

(Original post by Safiya122)
If this had been a Muslim, he probably would have been labelled as one. Typical media.

(Original post by citydeer)
because hes white
Or because he never planned an attack.... To be a terrorist requires attempting to, or planning to carry out an attack. If you read the article and comments from the judge and prosecutor you would understand this.
0
reply
DiddyDec
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#25
Report 4 years ago
#25
(Original post by SophiaLDN)
Good point.

But how do we know if he just was caught pretty early or had no intention of committing a crime? He has a load of weapons also. Something similar happened in 1999 with that neo-nazi militant setting off nail bombs in London. But you're right, it does make a difference yet someone who makes bombs & has a clear prejudice against others is very different to kids making bombs out of boredom..

Lets say a Muslim guy: made a nail bomb at home, watched a beheading and had links to Anjem Choudary yet he didn't plan anything.. im pretty sure the media would call him a terror suspect straight away.
We don't know whether or not he actually had a plan, but we cannot assume anything. There is no evidence so one cannot prosecute for such an offence.

The Muslim guy would probably be called a terror suspect, but then so was Mr McGee, until he was cleared of those charges.
0
reply
BoerGenocide
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#26
Report 4 years ago
#26
Maybe he's the White Nelson Mandela?
0
reply
MatureStudent36
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#27
Report 4 years ago
#27
(Original post by SophiaLDN)
Oh? What about those 3 Muslims who were called 'terrorists' because they planned to behead members of the public in the street? They didn't commit the offence yet but are still called terrorists...

This guy has links to far right groups in Europe & watched far-right executions on his computer. Different sides of the same coin. What's the difference other than the fact that his name is Ryan & not Abdul or something brown.. :rolleyes:
The guys that planned to behead people are terrorists because they planned to commit a criminal act to further a political cause and undermine democracy.

Out friend here was a squaddie who made a bomb with no intent to use it to further a political aim.

It's all about the intent.
0
reply
Safiya122
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#28
Report 4 years ago
#28
(Original post by yo radical one)
If he used that bomb to attack civilians, then yes he would be a terrorist, but he did not and he managed to convince a jury that he had no intention of doing so and so he is not a terrorist.

The IRA were White and Catholic and they were terrorists.

(Original post by Aj12)
Or because he never planned an attack.... To be a terrorist requires attempting to, or planning to carry out an attack. If you read the article and comments from the judge and prosecutor you would understand this.
He created the bomb because he was bored - yeah that sounds like absolute bull. Why would you even do something like that? I still believe, had it been a Muslim - regardless of whether the bomb would have been used or not, he would have been called a terrorist.
0
reply
MatureStudent36
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#29
Report 4 years ago
#29
(Original post by DiddyDec)
We don't know whether or not he actually had a plan, but we cannot assume anything. There is no evidence so one cannot prosecute for such an offence.

The Muslim guy would probably be called a terror suspect, but then so was Mr McGee, until he was cleared of those charges.
There wasn't a plan to commit an act.

Follow the trial more closely.
0
reply
DiddyDec
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#30
Report 4 years ago
#30
(Original post by MatureStudent36)
There wasn't a plan to commit an act.

Follow the trial more closely.
There wasn't evidence to say he had a plan. Plans don't have to be written.
0
reply
Aj12
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#31
Report 4 years ago
#31
(Original post by Safiya122)
He created the bomb because he was bored - yeah that sounds like absolute bull. Why would you even do something like that? I still believe, had it been a Muslim - regardless of whether the bomb would have been used or not, he would have been called a terrorist.
Quite a few people do that, hence why books like the Anarchists cookbook exist. He was called emotionally immature by the court so we aren't dealing with a healthy rational person here.

You can believe what you like but it does not change that this man in the eyes of the law was not a terrorist. It is completely pointless to speculate on what could have been or might be in different circumstances.
0
reply
Aj12
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#32
Report 4 years ago
#32
(Original post by DiddyDec)
There wasn't evidence to say he had a plan. Plans don't have to be written.
Thankfully we live in a system where evidence is usually required to convict someone of something.
0
reply
MatureStudent36
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#33
Report 4 years ago
#33
(Original post by DiddyDec)
There wasn't evidence to say he had a plan. Plans don't have to be written.
No.

But the court weighing up the evidence decided that there was no plan to use the device for nefarious activities.
0
reply
Safiya122
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#34
Report 4 years ago
#34
(Original post by G8D)
You have so little knowledge of the criminal justice system. Either that or the chip on your shoulder is blocking your view...
I guess it's normal to make a bomb because you're bored then :rolleyes::plz2:
0
reply
DiddyDec
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#35
Report 4 years ago
#35
(Original post by MatureStudent36)
No.

But the court weighing up the evidence decided that there was no plan to use the device for nefarious activities.
(Original post by Aj12)
Thankfully we live in a system where evidence is usually required to convict someone of something.
I have already said both of these things in my previous posts. I don't understand why you are both reiterating what I have already said.


(Original post by DiddyDec)
We don't know whether or not he actually had a plan, but we cannot assume anything. There is no evidence so one cannot prosecute for such an offence.
0
reply
Safiya122
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#36
Report 4 years ago
#36
(Original post by G8D)
Who says it's normal... he's been convicted of a crime...
I didn't say it was normal, that's the thing that I'm most concerned with. Why even do something like that?
0
reply
DiddyDec
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#37
Report 4 years ago
#37
(Original post by Safiya122)
I didn't say it was normal, that's the thing that I'm most concerned with. Why even do something like that?
Blowing things up is fun.
0
reply
Safiya122
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#38
Report 4 years ago
#38
(Original post by G8D)
Stop back-peddling. Justify your previous comment where you implied that me supporting him not being labelled a terrorist somehow amounted to me calling his behaviour normal.
I did not say that. I never said that. You assumed that, that's not my fault. I didn't even think of that. LOL. But if you think that's what I was implying then go ahead and think what you want. :rolleyes::laugh::laugh:
I love how you people come up with assumptions out of random. Maybe if you read the comments properly, you wouldn't come out with such bull. Oh well.
0
reply
Safiya122
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#39
Report 4 years ago
#39
(Original post by G8D)
MIDF go home.
I am home, thanks for the concern though
1
reply
Shueb95
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#40
Report 4 years ago
#40
Don't think a white Cristian has ever been labelled a terrorist, correct me if I'm wrong.
1
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Have you registered to vote?

Yes! (191)
39.71%
No - but I will (29)
6.03%
No - I don't want to (33)
6.86%
No - I can't vote (<18, not in UK, etc) (228)
47.4%

Watched Threads

View All