Jo Cox MP

[snowychap]

13 minutes ago, omariqy said:

I don't disagree.  My point was more that if we use the same criteria we use for other people committing atrocities then he is a terrorist.  You can't call Omar Mateen a terrorist and not this guy IMO.

You can if there are different circumstances surrounding them (though that doesn't necessarily mean there were).

What we shouldn't do is be so quick to label things as terrorist (and that goes for Obama, too) merely because there may be some kind of apparent, or even actual, political motivation. What the guy who did this and the bloke in Orlando have in common is that they're both killers and murderers. Why they actually did these things is probably not going to be evident in the immediate aftermath (or, necessarily, clear cut even in the light of day).

Edit: Sorry if it appears I'm trying to be argumentative, I'm not: it's just that with this (and the Orlando thing) and other events, what appears to be being looked for is reason when perhaps there really isn't any.

Edited June 17, 2016 by snowychap

[Chindie]

2 minutes ago, omariqy said:

I don't disagree.  My point was more that if we use the same criteria we use for other people committing atrocities then he is a terrorist.  You can't call Omar Mateen a terrorist and not this guy IMO. Even Obama came out a few hours afterwards and labelled him as a terrorist.  It's double standards.

Anyway I didn't want to get into an argument on the media. You have to feel for those kids who have lost their mother. It seems that Jo Cox was a pretty decent person standing up for the rights of refugees and the Palestinian people.

If he's found to have acted knowingly and with a political aim, then yes, it's certainly possible to argue it's terrorism (and personally I would do). I could understand why it wouldn't be called that however. As Snowy says it's not a helpful label often, and there's a variety of arguments against this kind of thing being able to be defined as terrorism, etc etc. 

If, however, its found that his apparent mental illness is to the extent of him suffering delusions for instance, then no. This ties into the discussion had sadly only too recently in regards to the homophobic word removed in Orlando, the action has to require both meaning and understanding on behalf of the perpetrator. Someone truly mentally delusional is unlikely to fit that.

[Chindie]

On the neo-Nazi stuff, I couldn't link this last night, but see below.

Southern Poverty Law Centre

Quote

Her alleged killer isThomas Mair, 52. According to eyewitness accounts, which are still under investigation, Mair was armed with a knife and a gun, either antique or homemade, and may have shouted “Britain First” when he attacked Cox, a possible reference to the far right Britain First party, whose leader, Paul Golding, is a former member of the white nationalist British National Party. The Daily Telegraph reported that Mair’s brother claimed Mair has a “history of mental illness,” and neighbors called him a “loner,” but he also has a long history with white nationalism.

According to records obtained by the Southern Poverty Law Center Mair was a dedicated supporter of the National Alliance (NA), the once premier neo-Nazi organization in the United States, for decades. Mair purchased a manual from the NA in 1999 that included instructions on how to build a pistol.

Mair, who resides in what is described as a semi-detached house on the Fieldhead Estate in Birstall, sent just over $620 to the NA, according to invoices for goods purchased from National Vanguard Books, the NA’s printing imprint. Mair purchased subscriptions for periodicals published by the imprint and he bought works that instruct readers on the “Chemistry of Powder & Explosives,” “Incendiaries,” and a work called “Improvised Munitions Handbook." Under “Section III, No. 9” (page 125) of that handbook, there are detailed instructions for constructing a “Pipe Pistol For .38 Caliber Ammunition” from components that can be purchased from nearly any hardware store.

The NA may be best-known for the work of its now-deceased founder, William Pierce, a former physics professor who also wrote racist novels. One, The Turner Diaries, tells the post-apocalyptic fictional story of a white man fighting in a race war that may have provided inspiration for Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh.

The Daily Telegraph also reported that Mair was a subscriber to S. A. Patriot, a South African magazine published by White Rhino Club, a pro-apartheid group. The club describes that magazine’s editorial stance as opposed to “multi-cultural societies” and “expansionist Islam.” According to the Daily Telegraph, a January 2006 blog post attributed to the group described Mair as “one of the earliest subscribers and supporters of S. A. Patriot.”

The link includes photos of his invoices for these purchases and an extract from the firearm manual.

[Richard]

4 hours ago, Awol said:

The poor woman wasn't even cold before the attempts to link the Brexit debate to a mentally ill murderer began. It's blatant & sickening political exploitation of a tragic death. 

I tend to agree.  Listening to the reactions to her murder in the immediate aftermath there was a not too subtle reference about this. Even today I've seen it and it is a disgrace.

Before anyone has a go this is not a commentary on Jo Cox,  it is a commentary on the reactions to this utterly tragic event.  I have nothing but admiration for Jo Cox and her husband and the totally gracious way he has responded.

I have no time at all for those attempting to make political hay out of this.

[blandy]

2 hours ago, snowychap said:

What we shouldn't do is be so quick to label things as terrorist (and that goes for Obama, too) merely because there may be some kind of apparent, or even actual, political motivation

I pretty much think the opposite. When someone does an act of this sort of horror in the name of a "cause", then to me that's pretty close to the definition of terrorism.

1 hour ago, Richard said:

I tend to agree.  Listening to the reactions to her murder in the immediate aftermath there was a not too subtle reference about this. Even today I've seen it and it is a disgrace.

....

I have no time at all for those attempting to make political hay out of this.

No doubt you're right. Sadly that's the level the whole Referendum thing has sunk to.

Unfortunately, because of that plunging of depths, to some people (or me at least)  "Look at those vile Remainers using a murder to discredit Brexit" is frankly equally abhorrent. People joining in with, (or even jumping in ahead of it "I bet some of those remainers will try and twist this to discredit..." ) the slanging is deeply, deeply unpleasant. No dignity at all. Much better to stay silent and maintain dignity.

[Ingram85]

2 hours ago, omariqy said:

I don't disagree.  My point was more that if we use the same criteria we use for other people committing atrocities then he is a terrorist.  You can't call Omar Mateen a terrorist and not this guy IMO. Even Obama came out a few hours afterwards and labelled him as a terrorist.  It's double standards.

Anyway I didn't want to get into an argument on the media. You have to feel for those kids who have lost their mother. It seems that Jo Cox was a pretty decent person standing up for the rights of refugees and the Palestinian people.

Think the difference comes from whether they are known mental health service users and have a current diagnosis or not.

Mair seemingly has a well known history of mental health difficulties, Mateen seemingly does not from what has been revealed.

Not sure you can label a service user who maybe hearing command hallucinations, relapsing or is possibly non concordant with medication a terrorist. You do need to look at his recent history and question his care support team/consultant to see if they were looking after him/monitoring him appropriately while he has been living independently.

What is for sure though, for me, is that I'm getting increasingly fed up after these atrocities of hearing authorities/services say "he was known to us" or "on our radar".  Like, what do want a medal? well done? Congrats? You almost did/could have done something?

Edit: Also, I'm not excusing him btw, he should get any conviction coming to him if he is deemed "well" enough to live independently, mental health shouldn't always excuse the crime. 

 

Edited June 17, 2016 by Ingram85

[mjmooney]

I regard terrorism as an organised thing, planned and executed by a politically motivated group. Neither Omar Mateen nor Tommy Mair are terrorists. But their unstable mental states were affected by what they saw as appealing ideologies. ISIS didn't mastermind Orlando, but I'm sure they approved. 

And BF didn't mastermind Birstall, but despite their protestations,  I can guarantee that many of their members will be thinking that Jo Cox "got what was coming to her". 

Edited June 17, 2016 by mjmooney

[hogso]

Seems she received 'malicious communications' from another person, whom was arrested and accepted a police caution. Almost certainly not unusual for an MP, and unlikely to be connected to her murder, but it does come months after female MPs said security was a 'key concern' when surveyed.

She seems like one the 'good guys', a million miles from the top brass of politics we see in the media day in, day out. It's a shame her good work and reputation has only come to light, outside of her constituency at least, after her murder. It makes me wonder how many other MPs across the nation are similarly well thought of.

[mjmooney]

2 minutes ago, hogso said:

Seems she received 'malicious communications' from another person, whom was arrested and accepted a police caution. Almost certainly not unusual for an MP, and unlikely to be connected to her murder, but it does come months after female MPs said security was a 'key concern' when surveyed.

She seems like one the 'good guys', a million miles from the top brass of politics we see in the media day in, day out. It's a shame her good work and reputation has only come to light, outside of her constituency at least, after her murder. It makes me wonder how many other MPs across the nation are similarly well thought of.

I have a lot of respect for my MP, even though he's a Tory. 

[HanoiVillan]

43 minutes ago, blandy said:

I pretty much think the opposite. When someone does an act of this sort of horror in the name of a "cause", then to me that's pretty close to the definition of terrorism.

No doubt you're right. Sadly that's the level the whole Referendum thing has sunk to.

Unfortunately, because of that plunging of depths, to some people (or me at least)  "Look at those vile Remainers using a murder to discredit Brexit" is frankly equally abhorrent. People joining in with, (or even jumping in ahead of it "I bet some of those remainers will try and twist this to discredit..." ) the slanging is deeply, deeply unpleasant. No dignity at all. Much better to stay silent and maintain dignity.

'Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than speak and remove all doubt'

[Chindie]

4 minutes ago, mjmooney said:

I regard terrorism as an organised thing, planned and executed by a politically motivated group. Neither Omar Mateen nor Tommy Mair are terrorists. But their unstable mental states were affected by what they saw as appealing ideologies. ISIS didn't mastermind Orlando, but I'm sure they approved. 

And BF didn't mastermind Birstall, but despite their protestations,  I can guarantee that many of their members will be thinking that Jo Cox "got what was coming to her". 

There's a debate whether 'line wolf' terrorists can exist. I personally disagree with it but there are arguments, some of out of sheer practicality, that it's impossible for a lone wolf to commit an act of terror.

Taking the word removed in Orlando and this madman as example (and working on what we currently understand...). In Orlando we have a mass murderer that has a history of homophobia who attacked a gay club and made attempts to assign the act to IS. In Yorkshire yesterday a man with an apparent history of mental illness, with affiliation to white nationalist groups, murdered a 'left wing' MP with a heavy association with helping refugees and also a Remain alignment in the referendum, possibly shouting 'Britain First' (or 'put Britain First').

Both could be terrorism. Yorkshire is simpler. If he acted knowingly with full understanding of what he was doing, understanding who she was, and his intention to kill her was due to her politics being in opposition to his apparent stance, then he does so knowing that the attack is an attack on that school of thought and, in essence, is a threat - you are not safe if you believe and act on those beliefs. That's terrorism. If he acted due to a delusion, or wasnt fully aware in any way, it's not. I could however understand, out of practicality really, why you wouldn't call this terrorism (and it's not because he's white and not Irish).

Orlando, is a little more complex. There doesn't seem to be much real connection that we are yet aware of with him to make him really an Islamic terrorist. He tried to link the action to IS but didn't really seem to have any connection to them. He also tried to connect, allegedly, to other opposing Islamic terror groups. It seems he didn't really understand a cause in that regard to any great degree so it's difficult to say he understood his actions in relation to a deep seated and understood cause in that facet. You can't 'utilise' the dead of an action if you don't understand or truly believe the reason you did it. He did, however, specifically target a group of people, an element of society that he was knowingly opposed to. Again it's a action that serves to make that group feel less safe. In this case is his choice of target that makes it terrorism than a real ideology. Here's both a mass murderer and a homophobic terrorist.

[snowychap]

47 minutes ago, blandy said:

I pretty much think the opposite. When someone does an act of this sort of horror in the name of a "cause", then to me that's pretty close to the definition of terrorism.

How do you know it's in the name of a cause? It may turn out to be but, even if it is, I'd go down the route of a mix of that which Mike described and the argument mentioned by Dean when talking about 'lone wolf' stuff (though I understand and accept that there is room for discussion in there).

The problem with labelling everything that is in the name of a 'cause' as 'terrorist' is that everything becomes the same. There is no room for nuance, no room to speak about dealing with organization A or group B or rogue state C or individual D: they are all merely terrorists. To what end? Does it make dealing with these problems easier? I don't think so. I think it merely satisfies our desire to have things put before us in black and white, to have stuff categorized so that we can believe that we understand it better.

I'd go further and say that we shouldn't use the word terrorism at all (because it doesn't really tell us anything) but that's a totally different discussion.

[mjmooney]

Three broad possibilities: 

1. Direct responsibility by an organisation AND by individuals. An organisation plans, directs and executes a criminal act. 9/11, Bataclan, etc. 

2. Indirect responsibility by an organisation, direct responsibility by individuals. An organisation propagates ideas which are likely to incite criminal acts by individuals susceptible to those ideas. Orlando, Birstall, etc. 

3. No responsibilty (in my opinion) by an organisation, direct responsibility by individuals. An organisation exists for entirely harmless purposes, but misguided individuals perpetrate criminal acts due to misguided 'loyalty' to said organisation. Football hooliganism. 

Edited June 17, 2016 by mjmooney

[tonyh29]

4 hours ago, blandy said:

I pretty much think the opposite. When someone does an act of this sort of horror in the name of a "cause", then to me that's pretty close to the definition of terrorism.

 

I'm kinda confused here  , Snowy appeared to be saying we shouldn't be calling an incident an act of terrorism as we Don't know the cause  ....

 

your answer doesn't seem to reflect the question ?

[snowychap]

1 hour ago, tonyh29 said:

I'm kinda confused here  , Snowy appeared to be saying we shouldn't be calling an incident an act of terrorism as we Don't know the cause  ....

 

your answer doesn't seem to reflect the question ?

To be fair, I did go on to say," ... , or even actual, political motivation."

So I was rather addressing two things in that sentence which may have muddied waters.

[Chindie]

'Nazi regalia' found at suspects home.

Not a shock.

[Awol]

12 hours ago, Seat68 said:

I know, yeah two different people, here is the fella I saw.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-36552367

Video at the end of that link.

 

 

Further twist.. the guy being interviewed by the Beeb on that link is Mr Clarke Rothwell.  Turns out he appears on the BNP membership list that was put out by wikileaks some years ago.

Apparently the Britain First group splintered off from the BNP & there is considerable animosity between them.

That's not to say he's lying, necessarily, but it is interesting nonetheless.

Finally the only other witness who allegedly heard the specific phrase is Mr Graeme Howard. He was quoted by the Guardian and appears not to live at the local Bond Street address reported by the newspaper. No record of him in the area has been found.

As awful as the crime itself clearly was, it's possible that something very troubling is being spun out off the back of this tragedy. I wonder how far, if at all, the 'respectable' media will pursue this prior to the referendum. 

 

 

[Awol]

@Seat68 

 

 

[Chindie]

The more that's discovered about the man the less the Britain First thing matters I feel. There's an increasing pile of concern behind him whether he shouted that or not IMO.

[Awol]

1 minute ago, Chindie said:

The more that's discovered about the man the less the Britain First thing matters I feel. There's an increasing pile of concern behind him whether he shouted that or not IMO.

Oh sure, clearly off his rocker and a far right extremist - whoever/whatever his affiliation may turn out to be. 

Thing is his motive is not yet public knowledge and journos alles uber der platz are directly and falsely linking the murder to the Brexit campaign. 

The establishment cynicism over this 'opportunity' to sieze the narrative is breath taking, so the detail does matter.