When does a crime become an act of 'terrorism'?

[Varun]

British police have said 52-year-old Khalid Masood was the man who carried out Wednesday's attack outside the parliament in London.

Police say Masood was born in the UK as Adrian Russell Ajao, and he used many aliases.

ISIL, also known as ISIS, has claimed that Masood was one of its so-called soldiers. But British police have not confirmed that he was affiliated with any group.

They have also not confirmed a motive and are trying to establish what he was exposed to.

Nonetheless, the chief of counterterrorism has called Masood a "terrorist".

When does a crime become an act of "terrorism"?

http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/insidestory/2017/03/crime-act-terrorism-170324211626664.html

Interesting topic given the current climate. Click through to watch the debate.

 

[kingusama92]

While I know Muslims are quickly and sometimes unfairly defined as a "terrorist", I think in this case it was easier to make the proclamation of terrorism.

1) The method of attack (i.e. common terrorism tactic inspired from ISIS)
2) His past as a suspect for terrorism (was cleared due to lack of evidence)
3) The place where this attack occurred (right outside parliament)

Not much of a reach to be honest.

 

[Zaz]

Why isnt this incident referred as terrorism

http://metro.co.uk/2017/03/26/four-...rowd-of-people-on-busy-london-street-6534068/

Sound familiar? Its not on the main headlines anywhere...

 

[Gabbar Singh]

Most dictionaries define it as the unlawful use of violence or threat of violence in order to purport a political, religious, or ideological aim.

 

[Rayyman]

An act of terror or violence carried out with a political motive.

 

[HitWicket]

Why isnt this incident referred as terrorism

http://metro.co.uk/2017/03/26/four-...rowd-of-people-on-busy-london-street-6534068/

Sound familiar? Its not on the main headlines anywhere...

Because there's nothing to suggest it's politically motivated?

 

[PakLFC]

If the perpetrator is a Muslim only then is it terrorism. If not the killer was insane or had psychological problems. When the NATO army with biblical verses written on their weapons were killing Afghans it was not terrorism at all.

 

[PakLFC]

Of course Christian and other religious nutcases are ignored by the USA and rest of the world. India killing Kashmiris is not terrorism or the baldy Hindu fanatics with painted foreheads making threats all the time is really an expression love! . Israel killing Palestinians is not terrorism either. America killing Iraqis or Afghans was them doing God's work to bring in what they call the rapture. In Burma the Buddhists killing Muslim's again for no reason is not terrorism but simply a way of convincing them that they are not wanted here.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/progre...use-attack-list-ignores-christian-terrorists/

 

[PakLFC]

Adityanath, Togadia and co who want the bodies of dead Muslim's dug up then terrible things done to them are not a terrorist at all. There are ton's of video's of there kind making so many threats or comments to provoke the Muslim's but no action is ever taken against him. On the contrary Hafiz Saeed who has never made any anti Hindu statements is a terrorist because he speaks of the oppressed people of IOK. It is actually this hypocrisy and double standards that fill the hearts of many Muslim's with hate. When there is no justice for the long suffering they will turn to weapons to take matters in to their own hands. Don't tell me Hafiz is a terrorist when he has never made threats against any religious community unlike the aforementioned Hindu's.