Article content continued

His claim “the attack does not appear to have been culturally motivated, therefore not linked to terrorism” has provoked mockery for implying terrorism is a cultural phenomenon, not applicable to the “murderous misfits,” as he called the suspects from Nova Scotia and Illinois.

Like hatred — both a subjective emotion and an aggravating factor in law — terrorism has long been confusing, and different according to whether it is described in a political, legal, or cultural context, and especially if it involves Muslims.

Continue reading…

[/np_storybar]

Sure enough, Mr. MacKay did use the occasion to promote his government’s anti-terrorism legislation. “An individual that would so recklessly and with bloody intent plot to do something like this I would suggest would also be susceptible to being motivated by groups like ISIS and others,” he said.

But the thwarted attack had not, in fact, been terrorism, he said: “The attack does not appear to have been culturally motivated, therefore not linked to terrorism.”

That’s what the Mounties said, too. “I can tell you that it’s not culturally based,” Mr. Brennan told reporters of the plot. He wouldn’t rule out terrorism, but said the “investigation is not leading us down that particular avenue at this time.”

“They were four individuals that had a friendship. Their friendship was not based on culture or ideology,” he added.

It is almost exclusively Mr. MacKay who has since been the subject of opprobrium, however — not to mention outright conspiracism — because the definition of terrorism in Canada’s criminal code stipulates nothing about “cultural” motivations. Rather, it requires that the act in question must be for “a political, religious or ideological purpose.”