43 Years for Far-Right Terrorist

[McAz]

He has been deemed sane enough to know that what he did was criminal - and that's all that matters.

[Trapper John]

Hardly a far right terrorist

A mentally ill man who'd reached the end of his tether, I wonder was he sent for psychiatric reports?

And when you apply the same to the killers of Lee Rigby?

He's a terrorist TJ, white people can be terrorists.

He was an ill man acting alone in what he clearly regarded as a personal vendetta. He wasn't claiming to be an avenging angel of Allah like the rest of those fuckers who don't manage to kill themselves along with a hat full of innocent victims.

I doubt he was ever going to be sent for psychiatric assessment because the powers that be wouldn't allow it - they clearly wanted a 'white, far right terrorist' to make an example of for people like you who have been taken in hook, line and sinker - it's good for business and it shows just how fair they can be to reassure the millions of muslims here that they are not being victimised.

But of course I'm sure you know that, it isn't hard to see.

[McAz]

He was no more ill than you are.

[Trapper John]

He was no more ill than you are.

Told you he was ill.

[McAz]

He was no more ill than you are.

Told you he was ill.

Seeding your defence early I see - clever.

[Raggamuffin]

He wasn't actually charged with an act of terrorism though, he was charged with murder and attempted murder - the killers of Lee Rigby were also charged with murder. The judge called it terrorism though.

[Trapper John]

He was no more ill than you are.

Told you he was ill.

Seeding your defence early I see - clever.

Not really, just didn't fancy arguing about semantics. Far right terrorist is rubbish and you know it.

[Trapper John]

He wasn't actually charged with an act of terrorism though, he was charged with murder and attempted murder - the killers of Lee Rigby were also charged with murder. The judge called it terrorism though.

Terrorism or terrorist implies more than one person being involved, a conspiracy to cause fear and terror most commonly associated with 'groups'

The murderers of Lee Rigby, note 'murderers' acted together so that was terrorism. There was also proven connections to terrorist groups who actively encouraged and groomed them. That is terrorism.

This bloke for whatever reason snapped, no-one actively encouraged him to do what he did, he wasn't acting on orders as part of a group or cell, 'right wing' or otherwise. He was at the time and probably is still now a sick individual who decided to extract what he saw some payback for the recent muslim atrocities.

[Raggamuffin]

He wasn't actually charged with an act of terrorism though, he was charged with murder and attempted murder - the killers of Lee Rigby were also charged with murder. The judge called it terrorism though.

Terrorism or terrorist implies more than one person being involved, a conspiracy to cause fear and terror most commonly associated with 'groups'

The murderers of Lee Rigby, note 'murderers' acted together so that was terrorism. There was also proven connections to terrorist groups who actively encouraged and groomed them. That is terrorism.

This bloke for whatever reason snapped, no-one actively encouraged him to do what he did, he wasn't acting on orders as part of a group or cell, 'right wing' or otherwise. He was at the time and probably is still now a sick individual who decided to extract what he saw some payback for the recent muslim atrocities.

What about David Copeland, who planted three nail bombs in London? He acted alone but would you call that an act of terrorism?

[Trapper John]

He wasn't actually charged with an act of terrorism though, he was charged with murder and attempted murder - the killers of Lee Rigby were also charged with murder. The judge called it terrorism though.

Terrorism or terrorist implies more than one person being involved, a conspiracy to cause fear and terror most commonly associated with 'groups'

The murderers of Lee Rigby, note 'murderers' acted together so that was terrorism. There was also proven connections to terrorist groups who actively encouraged and groomed them. That is terrorism.

This bloke for whatever reason snapped, no-one actively encouraged him to do what he did, he wasn't acting on orders as part of a group or cell, 'right wing' or otherwise. He was at the time and probably is still now a sick individual who decided to extract what he saw some payback for the recent muslim atrocities.

What about David Copeland, who planted three nail bombs in London? He acted alone but would you call that an act of terrorism?

Well I suppose any murder is an act of terrorism, I guess most people about to be murdered are terrified.

You have to be sick in the head to do something like ploughing into people in a truck or van or planting nail bombs in pubs - unless of course you believe you are doing it as an ongoing strategy to further a cause - like the IRA bombers of the 1970's for instance.

It was his use of the title which is meant to mislead - implying that there are groups of 'far right terrorists' planning and carrying out atrocities against muslims all year round, for years - which of course there isn't - the same can't be said about muslim terrorists becasue we have clear proof there is.

Was Ted Bundy a 'terrorist' or the 'Yorkshire ripper'? clearly they caused a lot of terror but they weren't regarded or charged as 'terrorists'

[Lady Murasaki]

It's an act of terrorism if there's a political aim, which it could be argued there was in this guys case. He may have been a single celled organism but his aim was linked to politics.

[Raggamuffin]

But is he a "far right" terrorist? He did it because he perceives that Islamic terrorists and grooming gangs are destroying this country. Does that make him "far right"?

[Lady Murasaki]

A lot of Muslim 'terrorists' have done what they've done because they feel the west has destroyed their countries. Does that make them 'Al Queda'? Or whatever the latest label is.

[Trapper John]

A lot of Muslim 'terrorists' have done what they've done because they feel the west has destroyed their countries. Does that make them 'Al Queda'? Or whatever the latest label is.

Not in their own countries it doesn't here it fucking well does. If they hate us so much for 'destroying' their countries why do they want to live with us? - I mean I wouldn't ask a person who murdered my family if I could stay with them for a few nights until I get sorted, would you?

[Raggamuffin]

A lot of Muslim 'terrorists' have done what they've done because they feel the west has destroyed their countries. Does that make them 'Al Queda'? Or whatever the latest label is.

And does it make them "far right"?