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

    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KimKallstrom)
    I'm afraid your victim complex doesn't correlate with reality. Firstly, the IRA were considered the poster boys in this country for terrorism for decades. Secondly, you might recall for example the Muslim guy who tried to behead that person in the tube station in Leytonstone. It was clear he was mentally ill and so the media portrayed him as such and did not call it a terrorist attack.

    Besides, if this imagined agenda against Muslims in the media actually existed, do you think loads of them would do that cringe-worthy thing they do of calling ISIS "the so-called Islamic State" in an effort to make people think they have nothing to do with Islam? Do you think they would participate in the cover up of the constant rape and sex-trafficking of thousands of girls well-under 16 across the country by gangs made up exclusively of Muslims just because the perpetrators were Muslim?

    Plus look at the Orlando shooting for example. The dominant narrative is to talk about guns and much of the media has been trying to push a view that somehow the homophobic stance pushed by the Christian right in America is to blame.....even though the shooter declared allegiance to ISIS, his local mosque invited imams as guest speakers who state that all gays must die and the guy's Afghan father having similar views. Basically everything possible to distance it and him from Islam and from Muslims. Yeah, looks like there's an anti-Muslim agenda here.

    Finally, here are articles describing white supremacist Anders Brevik as a terrorist:

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...-like-al-qaida

    https://www.rt.com/news/334435-breiv...ment-rejected/

    http://edition.cnn.com/2016/03/15/eu...eivik-lawsuit/

    http://www.news.com.au/world/europe/...c2bdcab7fb6730

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-14260297

    Even the Daily Mail which apparently is wayciss according to people:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...t-inhuman.html

    Even on TV:

    https://www.facebook.com/Channel4New...3590173691939/

    Why was I able to find all these in 30 seconds in the first couple of pages in Google if the media do not label white people as terrorists? Why are there countless more that I didn't link? B b b bb but muh victimhood.
    If you think i'm gonna read all that...no and you win whatever you argument is, we all have our own opinions.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    your*
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KimKallstrom)
    Here we go. There's always one isn't there?

    No not Jews, Zionists. There is a difference.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KimKallstrom)
    Yeah! And why didn't they call Anders Brevik or the IRA terrorists? What's that? They did? Idiot.
    I'm sorry, but it appears I have burst your bubble. It is absolutely unnecessary for you to call me an "Idiot" especially when what I said which was a relative comparison was true. The Government proclaimed the IRA as a terrorist organisation back in the 80s, the peak of the Troubles. That was the time where they used the term in a more appropriate and contextual manner. I understand about Breivik as he committed the attack to achieve a political aim, that's perfectly fine as that follows the guidelines for terrorism. You need to realise that I only made a comparison between a recent Muslim attack and a racial attack, I don't need to go so far to mention many more.

    Let's end this here, this unfortunate argument shouldn't carry on longer for no PARTICULAR reason other than stating our opinions on this matter.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LordPenguinz)
    Islam is a religion of peace, get a grip mate.
    Just have a look at these two sources alone and if they don't persuade you then nothing will. You're either mad or a Muslim, which is basically mad.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...rorist_attacks

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bV710c1dgpU

    All religions are bad.
    'Islamist terrorist attacks' are not actually committed by real Muslims though are they? They're committed by complete nutters who give themselves that label, but they are not really Muslims. If you call yourself a Muslim but you murder innocent people, YOU ARE NOT A MUSLIM. Just like the KKK aren't Christians. And no I'm not a Muslim, I'm an atheist.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Evilstr99)
    Here's an example, relevant to the classification of terrorism.


    The media classify the Orlando Shootings as a terrorist attack, because the perpetrator was a Muslim.But what about the Charleston Church Shootings? It was a racial attack on African-Americans yet the media doesn't classify this as a terrorist attack. Why? The perpetrator wasn't Muslim, he was White. Both of these attacks are orchestrated to achieve a political aim, which follows its formal definition. Why was THIS not the case with the latter?
    Because minorities are more likely to comit a terrorist attack. The perpetrator of Orlando comiteed a more larger scale of death tool than the Charleston Church Shootings. Also the guy from the Orlando was doing on behave of ISIS while the Charlestone was a lone wolf.
    Offline

    17
    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'??
    Of course it is terrorism. Uncostitutional violence in pusuit of an ideological agenda. The mental health of an individual does not alter this.
    What else could it be?

    Who is saying that it is not terrorism (apart from the Sun and the Mail)?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    That's so true omfg
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Evilstr99)
    Here's an example, relevant to the classification of terrorism.


    The media classify the Orlando Shootings as a terrorist attack, because the perpetrator was a Muslim.But what about the Charleston Church Shootings? It was a racial attack on African-Americans yet the media doesn't classify this as a terrorist attack. Why? The perpetrator wasn't Muslim, he was White. Both of these attacks are orchestrated to achieve a political aim, which follows its formal definition. Why was THIS not the case with the latter?
    But the Chalreston attack was terrorism. Anders Brevik's attack was terrorism. Timothy McVeigh was terrorism.

    I don't understand this "why aren't they called terrorism" argument.
    They are.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by slaven)
    Also the guy from the Orlando was doing on behave of ISIS while the Charlestone was a lone wolf.

    The aim was to form one-man cells which would carry out "spectacular" attacks every "5 - 12 years" before taking over Europe in "50 - 100 years", according to Breivik's manifesto. There would be no small assaults, only bloodstained atrocities, in order to achieve maximum psychological impact.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Maddass911)
    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.
    But the perpetrators of these two cases were charged with murder and attempted murder respectively, not terrorism offences.

    I'm confused about the point that you are attempting to make.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AneebMalik)
    The media is what controls our opinions and future governments. They have labelled us Muslims as terrorists...sadly but when it is a white male presumably christian the guy has a mental disorder. The 52 year old was radicalized by the political party giving us a concluding answer that it was a act of terrorism. The media only like to label Muslims bad in our present society. Not much we can do but voice our opinions as the oppressed.
    Show me a mainstream media source that claims that all "Muslims are terrorists". Everything I read seems to go out of its way to stress that extremists only represent a small and marginal minority.

    Mair is clearly a terrorist as his actions were ideologically motivated and aimed to further that ideological agenda.

    Just because someone is mentally ill, it doesn't mean that they can't be a terrorist. In fact, you have to have mental issues to be able to do some of that stuff. If you were thinking rationally, you wouldn't do it!
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cal-lum)
    However I totally agree regarding media bias - the Muslim faith being branded radical,
    But it is. Radical and extreme. What else would you call an ideology that permits or advocates slavery, sex slaves, wife-beating, gender discrimination, torture, punishing sexual and religious preference with death, and religious expansionism.

    If a political party started tomorrow with that manifesto, it would be banned as an extremist group.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dandaman1)
    Then if I shoot my neighbour because I don't happen to like his politics, I'm a terrorist. But if I shoot him because I don't happen to like something else about him, I'm not a terrorist... The line seems rather insignificant and difficult to differentiate, if you ask me.
    If you killed someone because you didn't like their politics, it would be murder, not terrorism.

    If you killed them because as a means of furthering your own political agenda, it would be terrorism.

    Terrorism involves a criminal and spectacular use of force to intimidate the public and/or authorities for the purpose of achieving political goals.
    It does not have to be "spectacular" - although I wouldn't call repeatedly shooting and stabbing a member of parliament in public, while shouting political slogans, "subtle".
    And I'm sure that other MPs who spend much of their time in highly public and open environments, are now feeling more than a little intimidated.
    So, by your own definition, it was terrorism.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    Show me a mainstream media source that claims that all "Muslims are terrorists".
    Does Breitbart count?
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    Terrorist attacks are considered as bombs going of....plus Muslims have their fair share of privileges so hush/
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    To anyone with half a brain it was clear he was a terrorist.

    End of.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hovado)
    Does Breitbart count?
    Where have they said all of them are terrorists?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Allah Akbar means God the greatest so I dont think either of them could be equated to this.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joecphillips)
    Where have they said all of them are terrorists?
    No idea i try not to read it, that stuff will make you pyschotic. All the far right loonies round here that try to push the all muslims are terrorist stuff quote it constantly though so must be something there.
 
 
 
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
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?
Useful resources

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

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