[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

The title of this thread is when is a terrorist not a terrorist, it is perfectly in order to point out if someone sees it that way, that the murderers of Lee Rigby were terrorists, thereby then making a conclusion as to if they see this man Mair as one too.

In both cases, the victims were not just murdered, they were brutally murdered with no chance to defend themselves, both were just doing their jobs in and for the UK and in their careers, they were both murdered for what they stood for and believed in.

No trace or mention of mental illness offered officially at their trials and all would have been seen be medical staff.
I see a strong connection as to the 2, both victims of the establishment one a serving Soldier another a serving MP.
he is a terrorist, pure and simple in my book, no matter ow you may want to dress him up as even just maybe, not certainly, mentally ill.

I still say that is an affront to people who are genuinely mentally ill, that savage pre-meditated murderers like this have anyone soiling the illness, by claiming that is part of the reason for their vile, savage and planned actions.

Mental illness comes in all shapes and sizes, with violence often being a consequence. That is in no way saying that everyione with mental illness is violent or dangerous or that those that are are necessarily responsible for their actions. Every case is different. He may simply be an evil 'b****rd', but still not convinced this makes him a 'terrorist'.

It is pretty obvious that the op has an agenda in attempting to state that not all terrorists are Muslims', but no one is saying they are. Of course there are plenty of non-Muslim terrorists, including white ones. But currently, in the West, those posing a threat to our way of life and causing widespread concern are. In my opinion, this makes the thread rather pointless.