MP Jo Cox murdered in West Yorkshire [Thread title edited]


Nut job is a nut job.

"On 14 May 2010, Stephen Timms was approached by 21-year-old female Islamist extremist Roshonara Choudhry, during a constituency surgery at the Beckton Globe Library in Kingsford Way, Beckton, East London. Choudhry stabbed Timms twice in the abdomen with a 15 cm (6-inch) kitchen knife, before being disarmed. She stated that she had been influenced by watching sermons of Anwar al-Awlaki, a leader of al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, and that her attack was to punish Timms for voting for the Iraq War, and seek revenge for the Iraqi people."

https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Stephen_Timms

The attempted murder of Timms was based on his vote for the War in Iraqi; of course that does not mean those against the War in Iraqi are of the same disposition as Roshonara Choudhry. Far from it in fact.

The common denominator between Roshonara Choudhry and Thomas Mair is mental instability. Reading beyond that would be to slant things with a particular agenda I think.
 

Eh... Not quite, don't think you can rightly compare someone who massacre'd a large chunk of what would likely be the future politicals of a leading party, to a single murder.

He also bombed their parliament/some official building can't remember.

No this is just mental tit, who has angled himself into a belief to justify his pitiful attempt at showing how the right wing can "do something".

I'm still waiting for breiviks accomplices in London to do something, nothing as of yet.
 
Well I think that's quite strong evidence to confirm his motivation.

Horrible human being.

At this stage, I think it's not easy to confirm what Mair's precise motivation was. To suggest that we can do this from one newspaper headline seems to me to be premature. We should wait for profession psychologist to present his findings in regard to what mix of factors motivated Mair. One thing is pretty clear: The man had a history of mental illness, and did not see the World as the normal, average UK citizen does.
 
Eh... Not quite, don't think you can rightly compare someone who massacre'd a large chunk of what would likely be the future politicals of a leading party, to a single murder.

He also bombed their parliament/some official building can't remember.

No this is just mental tit, who has angled himself into a belief to justify his pitiful attempt at showing how the right wing can "do something".
There's no difference, other than the number killed.
 
I really want to know more about the gun used. We have reports of it looking homemade, but a biro drawing on TV makes it look like an antique muzzle loader. If it turns out he has no firearms licence to buy ammunition then the improvised firearm line gets more complicated. If it was an old pistol then I don't see how he could have got 3 shots off.

If it was an old muzzle loader, or even some form of improvised gun making basic ammunition isn't that hard as long as you don't want long distance accuracy and aren't worried too much about high power (or your own safety whilst making it), or after too much.
Reliable, safe to handle, fast to manufacturer and consistent ammunition is hard, something to use at point blank range against an unarmed, unsuspecting woman who is just doing her job without any security not so hard :(

By the sounds of it he'd been buying magazines and books from the likes of the survivalists and far right in America where things like how to make your own ammo is likely covered, and there is a long history of improvised and "easy" to make guns (even multi shot) going back to at least the second world war.
 
At this stage, I think it's not easy to confirm what Mair's precise motivation was. To suggest that we can do this from one newspaper headline seems to me to be premature. We should wait for profession psychologist to present his findings in regard to what mix of factors motivated Mair. One thing is pretty clear: The man had a history of mental illness, and did not see the World as the normal, average UK citizen does.

It's not a newspaper headline. It's what he said in court when asked his name. Reported by all major news sources.

Not sure how the phrase "Death to traitors, freedom for Britain" can suggest anything other than right wing extremism.

What led him to reach this conclusion is a matter for psychologists, but his motivation is clear.
 
It's not a newspaper headline. It's what he said in court when asked his name. Reported by all major news sources.

Not sure how the phrase "Death to traitors, freedom for Britain" can suggest anything other than right wing extremism.

What led him to reach this conclusion is a matter for psychologists, but his motivation is clear.

What motivates the mentally disturbed is often far from obvious, and a good deal more complicated than you seem to be trying to make out. What I am suggesting is that we wait until the professionals have completed their work before we rush to thinking we know what the motivation was. Of course, if you must believe that Mair's motivation can be so easily determined (from a headline or two), then that is a matter for you.
 
It's not a newspaper headline. It's what he said in court when asked his name. Reported by all major news sources.

Not sure how the phrase "Death to traitors, freedom for Britain" can suggest anything other than right wing extremism.

What led him to reach this conclusion is a matter for psychologists, but his motivation is clear.

Do you not thing calling himself "Death to traitors, freedom for Britain" is indicative of mental health issues?
 
I really want to know more about the gun used. We have reports of it looking homemade, but a biro drawing on TV makes it look like an antique muzzle loader. If it turns out he has no firearms licence to buy ammunition then the improvised firearm line gets more complicated. If it was an old pistol then I don't see how he could have got 3 shots off.

And if it does turn out to be a black powder muzzle loader it's going to be another nail in the coffin for gunpowder based reenactment which is already close to being regulated out of existence.
 
At this stage, I think it's not easy to confirm what Mair's precise motivation was. To suggest that we can do this from one newspaper headline seems to me to be premature. We should wait for profession psychologist to present his findings in regard to what mix of factors motivated Mair. One thing is pretty clear: The man had a history of mental illness, and did not see the World as the normal, average UK citizen does.

I think we can confirm one thing. HE'S A ****ING LUNATIC.
 
What motivates the mentally disturbed is often far from obvious, and a good deal more complicated than you seem to be trying to make out. What I am suggesting is that we wait until the professionals have completed their work before we rush to thinking we know what the motivation was. Of course, if you must believe that Mair's motivation can be so easily determined (from a headline or two), then that is a matter for you.

I'm not saying we can claim to know his entire backstory and what caused him to get into the mindset he was in from a single statement.

I'm saying that I think it's safe to say that he murdered a politician in the name of a misguided political view.

What was previously a tenuous link by way of a number of witness statements (one of which retracted) and reported links to neo nazism is now blatantly obvious.
 
24 pages of excusing a terrorist as being a 'nutter', pathetic and not surprising as many I bet share his same views on here going by past readings.

What was the title before it got edited? "brown Muslim terrorist kills MP"?
 
Do you not thing calling himself "Death to traitors, freedom for Britain" is indicative of mental health issues?

Anyone that murders anyone else has mental health issues.

Sounds like those on the right are desperately trying to disassociate themselves.
 
I think the main concern right now should be who or if anybody else / group was involved in this politically motivated assassination.

His family would be a first step for a grilling, claiming they had no idea about his political views is hard to believe. Any groups he was associated with like Britain First etc and perhaps his local community. Was he acting alone or under guidance of someone else or a group.
 
Back
Top Bottom