Essays

The Sad Case of Thomas Mair – Politically Motivated Murder, Not Terrorism

Jo Cox and Thomas Mair
Jo Cox and Thomas Mair

by Max Musson

ACCORDING TO the mass media we should regard the actions of Thomas Mair, in his murder of Labour MP Jo Cox, as the manifestation of neo-Nazi terrorism. It is not enough they claim, for Jo Cox’s killing to be regarded as murder, or even politically motivated murder, it must in their view be regarded as ‘terrorism’, and the reason for this is clearly to provide a pretext for the demonization and persecution of patriots and White nationalist political activists.

Numerous articles reporting the murder of Jo Cox have made reference to the importance of understanding the ‘terrorist’ nature of Mair’s actions in light of the Brexit vote earlier this year, the election in America of Donald Trump, and the rise of ‘far-right’ political parties on the continent. The inference being that the kind of people who voted for Brexit, elected Donald Trump and who support ‘far-right’ political parties, are likely to engage in political violence and acts of terrorism. This of course is nonsense and an insult to the seventeen million people who voted for Brexit and the large numbers of people who support Donald Trump and continental politicians such as FN Leader Marine Le Pen in France. It is iniquitous to conflate patriotism, and a reasoned opposition to mass immigration with terrorism, but there again, iniquity is what large sections of our mass media are all about.

It is wrong to compare the activities of patriotic and White nationalist political groups in this country with terrorism and with the actions of Muslim extremists such as Al Qaida and ISIL, because there are obviously no terrorist groups within the nationalist community in Britain in the way that there are active Muslim terrorist groups. This is why MI5 do not waste their time raiding the houses of patriotic and nationalist activists, they know there is nothing to find.

It is clear that Thomas Mair’s murder of Jo Cox was not simply murder, the evidence produced during his trial demonstrates that it was indeed politically motivated, but there is a distinction between politically motivated murder and terrorism — a very important distinction.

Terrorism by definition seeks to cause terror in the hearts and minds of others. It seeks to influence the behaviour of others through the fear of violent acts that will be perpetrated as a consequence of not complying with the demands of the terrorist.

Prior to her murder, Thomas Mair did not, as far as is known, make Jo Cox aware that her life would be in danger if she continued to behave in the way she did. He did not attempt to coerce her through fear of the consequences of her actions. Furthermore, he did not publish a statement following her murder threatening to visit similar violence upon anyone else. How could he credibly present such a threat? He acted alone and made little or no attempt to evade subsequent capture by the police.

It is clear from the police investigation, that despite Mair’s penchant for White nationalist and National Socialist focused literature to which he evidently subscribed, he was not a member of any political organisation and in murdering Jo Cox did not commit that act in the furtherance of the aims of any specific organisation. Thomas Mair does not appear to have explained his motivations during his period in custody nor during his trial, and his circumstances indicate only that he deliberately targeted Jo Cox because she was his local MP and because of his hatred of her politics.

It is evident that Thomas Mair regarded his urge to kill Jo Cox as a manifestation within him of mental illness. Indeed in what would appear to be a vain attempt to avert the consequences of his internal frustrations he sought professional help just the day before he eventually murdered the Labour MP. Clearly, Mair was no terrorist!

Thomas Mair was a loner, and a sad loner at that, who may well have committed the brutal murder of Jo Cox simply because he felt he had no other lawful or legitimate way of effectively expressing his opposition to her and her political aims. Had he been a member of a White nationalist political party or campaign group, and had he found expression through the activities of such a group, he may well have felt otherwise, and therefore if the political establishment in this country were to cease their demonization and persecution of those deemed ‘right-wing political extremists’, the potential for politically motivated murder by sad loners might be avoided.

If we compare the lone actions of Thomas Mair with the activities of groups like ISIL and Al Qaida, the stark difference is that these extremist Muslim groups are organisations that attempt to coerce others through the fear of violent repercussions. They attempt through the issue of edicts and fatwas prior to the event to strike fear in the hearts of their enemies, and following their violence, they claim responsibility so that others will be aware of the dangers of continuing to defy them. These groups are therefore, by definition ‘terrorist organisations’, employing fear in order to achieve their political aims.

Had Thomas Mair written to Jo Cox threatening her prior to her murder if she did not desist from her political activities, and had he issued a proclamation after the event, claiming responsibility in the name of some political organisation or cause, then he could rightly have been described as a ‘terrorist’, but he did neither of these things and did not make any attempt to gain political notoriety from his trial. He pleaded not guilty and refused to speak in answer to questions. Throughout his trial, he did the opposite of what a terrorist would have done.

The irony is that the people who seek to portray Thomas Mair as a ‘terrorist’ do so in the hope of branding all people who feel aggrieved at British membership of the European Union, or who feel aggrieved by mass immigration into our country, as potential terrorists — as the kind of dangerous political extremists that should be targeted by police action under the governments proposed counter extremism measures. They are the kind of people who wish to stifle the freedom expression of those with whom they disagree, by needlessly and unjustly criminalising the beliefs of patriots and White nationalists.

They are the kind of people who if successful will create the oppressive conditions in which more people who hold beliefs similar to Thomas Mair will come to feel isolated and desperate, and regrettably in extreme cases where mental illness plays a part, may cause them to react in the same way Thomas Mair did.

When more than seventeen million people demonstrate their wish for Britain to be free of domination by the European Union, and it is acknowledged that most of them were motivated by opposition to mass immigration into this country, this is a time for government to give legitimate political expression to the wishes of our people, not to consider ways of suppressing them.

* * *

Source: Western Spring

For Further Reading

Previous post

Jews Demanding Money Again -- and Again -- and Again

Next post

Debased Whites in Negro Ball Brawl

2 Comments

  1. Jim
    December 4, 2016 at 9:57 am — Reply

    I’m surprised the jews didn’t blame Dr. Pierce for the white traitors murder; you know, white demon spirit control from the grave…..

  2. Paul
    December 9, 2016 at 8:28 pm — Reply

    How many innocent children or other native British or Europeans have been dispossessed, murdered or worse by the self righteous and exalted conspiracy of this young Jewess? One is too many but this is inchoate genocide with a smile.
    How then can this depressed but resolved man be called terrorist or mentally ill?
    Is he not just defending himself and what he “perceives” as his life, property, people and most importantly his duty?

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Slander, crude language, incivility, off-topic drift, or remarks that might harm National Vanguard or its users may be edited or deleted, even if unintentional. Comments may be edited for clarity or usage.