Dobba
Full Member
Yeah but he did do volunteer work and liked gardening, so...Looking all the more like a terrorist.
Yeah but he did do volunteer work and liked gardening, so...Looking all the more like a terrorist.
How is this different from Lee Rigby's killer Michael Adebolajo going on an Allah and infidel rant when he apwas asked how he pleads?Par for the course for a deranged and irrational person.
How is this different from Lee Rigby's killer Michael Adebolajo going on an Allah and infidel rant when he apwas asked how he pleads?
Yes, I would agree - a political assassination by a violent extremist, targeting Mrs Cox specifically, not simply a random person who was in the wrong place at the wrong time. Terrorists don't usually specifically select (or know anything about) their individual victims, except insofar as they represent something the terrorist opposes or are in a place with its own significance to their "cause".It was an assassination, not terrorism.
There's a fine line between criminal assassination and terrorist assassination. Per the FBI's definition, Muir's actions of using assassination to affect government policy (shouting Britain first, death to traitors, freedom for Britain) makes it fall more under a terrorist assassination and not a criminal one.It was an assassination, not terrorism.
What? Terrorists go after specific targets all the time.Yes, I would agree - a political assassination by a violent extremist, targeting Mrs Cox specifically, not simply a random person who was in the wrong place at the wrong time. Terrorists don't usually specifically select (or know anything about) their individual victims, except insofar as they represent something the terrorist opposes or are in a place with its own significance to their "cause".
Simply put, it isn't.How is this different from Lee Rigby's killer Michael Adebolajo going on an Allah and infidel rant when he apwas asked how he pleads?
Yet the Daily Mail will go on about him being a 'timid gardener'...Simply put, it isn't.
There's a fine line between criminal assassination and terrorist assassination. Per the FBI's definition, Muir's actions of using assassination to affect government policy (shouting Britain first, death to traitors, freedom for Britain) makes it fall more under a terrorist assassination and not a criminal one.
DAILY MAIL COMMENT: Don't play politics with this senseless tragedy
Jo Cox's death was utterly senseless. Yet this hasn't stopped some in the Remain camp trying to make political capital by insidiously implying that Brexit campaigners bear a share of the blame.
If he was in control of his actions at the time, then he will be punished.What can/will the courts do? He is obviously sick. He will presumably get the help he needs rather than be punished.
Looks fairly familiar to some comments earlier in the thread.Irony from the Mail:
A timid loner acting all on his own without any outside influence on the actions and motivations that he absolutely developed alone, on his own, without anyone else, that just happen to reflect the exact views of the right-wing media and political entities.
We've had Cameron declaring the Labour party as a threat to national security, Farage standing in front of literal, Nazi propaganda, with BREAKING POINT plastered all over the place, and countless others constantly informing the people of Britain that remaining in the EU poses unavoidable risk to themselves, their families and their very way of life. We've had the likes of the Mail, Sun and Telegraph describing people so desperate to escape the conflict that rages in their home country that they are willing to risk their lives to get out, as "invaders", and a barrage of comments about terrorists slipping through the net ready to pounce and destroy our towns and cities. We've had the far-right parties, such as Britain First, issue a rallying cry to its followers to take direct action against Muslim elected officials, including the newly elected Mayor of London, direct action in the places that they live, work and pray. But no, this man came up with this idea completely out of the blue.
We hear nothing about mental health and support for those who need it, with those suffering left to deal with it on their own and stigmatised for it. We sit and watch as the Tory government does its utmost to dismantle the NHS and any other service that benefit, first and foremost, the most vulnerable in our society, because we apparently can't afford it, despite the fact that their own leader has been outed as a tax-evading waster, all whilst our attention is turned to some mum of 6 from a council estate who has the audacity to own a 40" TV, or how an immigrant family in Leeds is somehow scrounging literally all of the welfare whilst simultaneously taking jobs off poor Britons. But it's the health service that's let this man down.
Wow, up to 167,000 now. Going up in thousands every few minutes.
and now there is open politicisation in play.
How can you not politicise a discussion about the politically motivated murder of an active politician?
Quite frankly, there are some in this thread who need to step back and think before they post. We've had snide remarks from the opening page, people looking for arguments over definitions, and now there is open politicisation in play. Above all, I simply cannot imagine that any of this would see approval from Jo Cox herself.
And has now risen to £387,000. I hope that many of my fellow Current Eventers were also able to make some form of contribution.
Yes, I would agree - a political assassination by a violent extremist, targeting Mrs Cox specifically, not simply a random person who was in the wrong place at the wrong time. Terrorists don't usually specifically select (or know anything about) their individual victims, except insofar as they represent something the terrorist opposes or are in a place with its own significance to their "cause".
How can you not politicise a discussion about the politically motivated murder of an active politician?
I'm quite cynical about that. It looks staged to me.
It's blatantly staged.
First of all, why on earth would you wear your Vote Leave/Remain t-shirts to a church (presumably to show your respects for Jo Cox).
Second of all, what possible reason is there to take a picture of this unless to make some sort of point?
And finally, why is Jonathan Arnott, a prominent member of UKIP, the one posting this image to social media? It's not like UKIP are desperately trying to deflect attention away from the part they've played in delivering extreme rhetoric to the public in the wake of this...oh wait.
No, I don't like it, either. (Arnott is a UKIP MEP? I suppose if he stands and people want to vote for him...)
The LEAVE are stuck with this terrible argument though. Hardly likely to admit some of the terrible quasi-racist campaigning contributed are they? It has to be lone wolf unwellness for them to be able to process it, proceed forward. I can't carry on with that but you know what I mean, perhaps.
Meanwhile, on the other side, you can have a guess that any link they can find between Mair & him being incited to do it, ''Who have you spoken to?'' ''Where's your phone?'' may well end up in the papers between now & Thursday. I find it difficult to think Jo Cox was targeted as part of a conspiracy but you never know. I bet they are asking him how he knew where she would be with some enthusiasm.
I am also in the camp that wishes this whole thing just wasn't happening.
Brilliantly put.How can you not politicise a discussion about the politically motivated murder of an active politician?