.@R_Scrivens: “If Minassian targeted women specifically, then I'd be comfortable saying it fits the legal standard for a terror charge,”
True if we were talking about other forms of MRA, but these are incels. They blame women first, but also society.https://news.vice.com/en_ca/article/xw79y7/heres-why-alek-minassian-likely-wont-face-terror-charges?utm_campaign=sharebutton …
-
-
Right. Consider Breivik, most obviously. As long as the goal to advance a social ideology, it's terrorism.
-
Voilà. The main problem here is how terror laws are interpreted (and not just in Canada) It's easy to prove if you go by text book definition, but which judge would take ideologically motivated gender based violence committed by what is framed as a "poor soul", seriously ?
-
The Facebook post is unambiguously extremist and unambiguously indicates political intent, so it's very hard indeed to mount an argument against this being terrorism.
-
Lots of people may gravitate towards extremist political or religious ideologies due to their own emotional needs, but in this case if you took his frenzied and murderous narcissism away there really isn't much left over in the way of a coherent ideology.
-
“They have built up a tremendous volume of internal anger … and want others to experience their suffering and mental agony in the way they experienced it.” This quote explains the attack far better than his comments about "overthrowing the Chads and the Staceys".
-
It's not because the terminology seems absurd and puerile that it isn't without meaning. They have theorised a worldview that is "them against us", they encourage violence and some have committed it. They exploit personal grievances to radicalise and act on it.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.



