Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Why isn't the murder of Jo Cox being broadcasted as a TERRORIST ATTACK? Watch

    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AnnieGakusei)
    But they couldn't find anything which told them he had an official affilitation with ISIS. And if his verbal statement was enough to make him a terrorist, then Jo Cox's killer (who supposedly shouted "Britain First" is also a terrorist because he was acting in the name of an ideology.

    Bear in mind the Orlando guy was also most likely a closet homosexual and the pressure could have mentally destablised him.
    There is uncertainty about if he actually said Britain first that is the problem, there has been conflicting reports.

    If that is why he did this then it is terrorism but until it is confirmed then it should not be said that it definitely is.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Because Islam is a political ideology.
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by littlenorthernlass)
    I've always thought that terrorists were foreigners trying to influence other countries...
    Terrorism is the use of violence, or threatened use of violence, in order to achieve a political, religious, or ideological aim.

    The terrorist in this case was motivated by the ideology held by groups such as Britain First rather than the ideology of Islamism held by Islamic terrorists which is probably where your understanding of terrorism comes from.
    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Maddass911)
    So, as we all know Mrs Cox, 41, was shot and stabbed in the street as she headed to a scheduled constituency surgery on Thursday. A 52 year old man has been arrested.

    So my question to all you guys is why isn't the media broadcasting this as a terrorist attack? We all remember the murder of Lee Rigby and also the Leyton tube station knife attack.

    As you all know the attackers in the above mentioned attacks were Muslim. So, is it that for a attack to be shown as a terrorist attack the attacker has to be a muslim.

    Also I dont know if this is true but apparantly the scum who murdered Mrs Cox shouted 'Britain First'. Can't that be related to what the muslims shout 'Allah Akbar'??
    Label it what you like simple fact is a mentally ill person (fact) who happened to support a far right South African group and a neo nazi group (fact) killed a politician that was out spoken on helping migrants (fact)

    You can label him a nutter, terrorist or an extremist and you wouldn't be wrong.

    But

    Who cares? It doesn't change what he's done or why he did it. It's over. He doesn't belong to a group who do these things


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paul514)
    Label it what you like simple fact is a mentally ill person (fact) who happened to support a far right South African group and a neo nazi group (fact) killed a politician that was out spoken on helping migrants (fact)

    You can label him a nutter, terrorist or an extremist and you wouldn't be wrong.

    But

    Who cares? It doesn't change what he's done or why he did it. It's over. He doesn't belong to a group who do these things


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    That is the key point. It isn't necessary to attach the label "terrorist". We use that label either to change trivial acts into very serious wrongs or to attach exceptional law and order responses to serious crime.

    The killing is inevitably a serious crime anyway but it is not one that requires a law and order response different to that for any non-political murder.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    That's no true it is being investigated as a terrorist attack and counter-terrorism police are investigating the suspects links to far right political groups
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    That is the key point. It isn't necessary to attach the label "terrorist". We use that label either to change trivial acts into very serious wrongs or to attach exceptional law and order responses to serious crime.

    The killing is inevitably a serious crime anyway but it is not one that requires a law and order response different to that for any non-political murder.
    That guy who stabbed people in the Tube in Leytonstone was widely broadcast as a terrorist attack and the Met Police treated it as such. It was clear almost from the outset that he was a loner with chronic mental health difficulties.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    Terrorism is the use of violence, or threatened use of violence, in order to achieve a political, religious, or ideological aim.

    The terrorist in this case was motivated by the ideology held by groups such as Britain First rather than the ideology of Islamism held by Islamic terrorists which is probably where your understanding of terrorism comes from.
    I'm finding it hard to grasp how someone who kept neo-Nazi books and gear at home and shouted 'Britain First' when carrying out a vicious attack on an MP calculated to kill is not a "terrorist".
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    That guy who stabbed people in the Tube in Leytonstone was widely broadcast as a terrorist attack and the Met Police treated it as such. It was clear almost from the outset that he was a loner with chronic mental health difficulties.
    I am certainly not saying "don't" but in context it is unimportant and there is a danger of one obsessing about this detail when it really doesn't matter.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Anti-Muslim conspiracy theory is strong here
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by littlenorthernlass)
    I've always thought that terrorists were foreigners trying to influence other countries...
    Most recent terrorist attacks that have happened in the West have been undertaken by individuals who are citizens of the nations and were born and raised in the nation.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Epicurean)
    Most recent terrorist attacks that have happened in the West have been undertaken by individuals who are citizens of the nations and were born and raised in the nation.
    Well said,habibi
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jebedee)
    Because Islam is a political ideology.
    And far right extremists aren't following a particular political Ideology?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    I am certainly not saying "don't" but in context it is unimportant and there is a danger of one obsessing about this detail when it really doesn't matter.
    It points to the way the media and the authorities choose to spin things and that does matter. For whatever reason, there appears currently to be a conspiracy of the main media and the government to not properly address right wing terror, or the rise of the far right, or the racist agendas that have been allowed to dominate regular politics under a Tory government that at least partly kowtows to its hard-right wing, including the UKIP wing of the Tory Party, that plays the racism card every chance it gets.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    It points to the way the media and the authorities choose to spin things and that does matter. For whatever reason, there appears currently to be a conspiracy of the main media and the government to not properly address right wing terror, or the rise of the far right, or the racist agendas that have been allowed to dominate regular politics under a Tory government that at least partly kowtows to its hard-right wing, including the UKIP wing of the Tory Party, that plays the racism card every chance it gets.
    Hands over tin foil hat
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    It certainly does have terroristic elements, but it pisses me off that the only reason people like you are pushing this so hard is because you want to deflect attention from Islamic terrorism and to obfuscate the fact it is by far the greatest terrorist threat and the source of the most violence by far
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Thutmose-III)
    It certainly does have terroristic elements, but it pisses me off that the only reason people like you are pushing this so hard is because you want to deflect attention from Islamic terrorism and to obfuscate the fact it is by far the greatest terrorist threat and the source of the most violence by far
    It's nothing to do with Islamic terrorism, nor does it detract from such.

    We want consistency, people would not hesitate to call an attack by an Isis supporter terrorism but there appears to be hesitation to call an attack inspoter Britain first members terrorism.


    Accepting that there is far right terrorism in no way, shape or form detracts from the fact that there is islamic terrorism.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    I was rather curious about what Britain First themselves had to say on the incident, and looking at this video they seem more concerned about their name being tarnished (if it isn't already) and trying to disprove the 'lies' in the media, than the tragedy itself.
    https://www.facebook.com/OfficialBri...0748277403766/
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    That is the key point. It isn't necessary to attach the label "terrorist". We use that label either to change trivial acts into very serious wrongs or to attach exceptional law and order responses to serious crime.

    The killing is inevitably a serious crime anyway but it is not one that requires a law and order response different to that for any non-political murder.
    Why does Islamic or IRA attacks require that label then?

    All we ask is for consistency. If an attack an inspired by a view of Islam, or Christianity/Irish nationalism we would call it terrorism. Why is there any hesitation about calling an attack inspired by the far right terrorism?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    He just gave his name as 'Death to traitors, freedom for Britain' in court so I think we can safely say he was using violence for political aims which is LITERALLY WHAT TERRORISM IS. And the reason it is actually important to be calling him a terrorist is that if a so-called Muslim (I say so-called because no real Muslim would commit an act of terrorism) had stabbed and shot a British MP and shouted 'Allahu akbar' (an equivalent to 'Britain First' I suppose) everyone would obviously label him as a terrorist. To be honest we just need consistency. Either we call everyone who commits acts of terrorism a terrorist, or we don't call anybody a terrorist. You can't pick and choose based on someone's ethnicity.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: June 23, 2016
  • 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.

  • Poll
    Would you like to hibernate through the winter months?
    Useful resources
  • 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.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.