Jerseygirl

I agree. From what I have read and heard on TV, the driver noticed the bomb, which probably prompted the bomber to detonate it early.

robin1234

I realise that there are various legalistic, and thoughtfully constructed, definitions of what is, and is not, terrorism. I’m simply going on the rule of thumb that a bomb, planted by a civilian, whether suicide or not, that is highly likely to kill or injure random people, is terrorism.

Jingsamichty

Yes, I also am not sure what the current legal definition of terrorism but it does seem to have been expanded somewhat to include what might previously have "just" been known as murder or attempted murder. If the "terrorist" had survived after setting off the bomb, what might he have been charged with? Is terrorism an actual offence? (Genuine question, I don't know.)

If someone had mental health issues, could they be a terrorist mitigated by diminished responsibility?

Lion in Winter

I strongly suspect that "terrorist" is a term selectively applied when it is politically expedient to do so. In this case, Patel et al are connecting this event to the killing of the MP a few weeks ago. The only obvious connection so far is that they are both violent acts with an unusual methodology. Hence the raising of the "alert level" when from all accounts so far there is no particular reason to do so. Beats focusing on government sleaze though, doesn't it.....

scrubbedexpat099

Not sure what other term there is for looking to blow up a hospital.

excpomea

I suspect the hospital was not the target.
He could not get close to the Remembrance day events due to police road closures.
He could have planned to walk the last 1/2 mile.

As for the cab driver jumping out before the bomb went off. Looks like the poor man was in the cab when it went off, then got out of the drives door and staggered away.

BritInParis

The timing suggests he was planning to attack the Remembrance Sunday service at Liverpool Cathedral as the two minute silence began but could not reach it in time. Pretty cut and dry act of terrorism; thankfully he only succeeded in blowing himself up. His ‘conversion’ to Christianity was likely a ploy to have his application for asylum accepted as Islamic societies don’t tend to look favourably upon apostates.

Lion in Winter

Possibly just mad. He had a history of mental health problems anyway, and so far no evidence of any ideological motive has been found. Whether it is or isn't "terrorism" seems moot. It was a life-threatening attempt at an attack.

"Investigators have not ruled out concluding that Emad al-Swealmeen’s alleged attack on Liverpool Women’s hospital had “no ideological or political motive” and was therefore not an act of terrorism."

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...box=1637145814

scrubbedexpat099

It does seem he may have converted back.