Not sure if this has been done, but why are bomb threats not "terrorism" if they're "financial"?

[ELF1981]

With the Tesco thing the other day, most of the news reports I heard or read all seem to say "bomb threats not linked to terrorism".

I thought ALL bomb threats would be linked to terrorism, in the fact that no matter what the "aim" behind them, the idea that somewhere "safe and normal" can be blown up, does make people worry.

Why does it seem that in the eyes of reporters, if the perpretator of said bomb threats are not Irish or Muslim then it is not terrorist activty?

Am I the only one who thinks this? If so, I'll shut up!

I see what you mean, but I think the distinction is that this was about blackmail rather than hurting people for the sake of it.

I did wonder the same, as far as I'm concerned all bombs threats are terrorism. What they should have said was the bomb threats weren't linked to any known terrorist groups. Or similar

I think they probably mean that they aren't considered a threat to 'national security' rather that they are aimed at a specific groups e.g. a supermarket, a bank, people who work with animals.

Not that that helps any of us who might be caught up in the consequences.

Glad it wasn't just me then who thought it!

I wondered this too.

Also on the news last night they were discussing the fact that 2 of the people arrested in Paisley were released without charge. They then linked this with a piece aboutt he police wanting the power to hold people for longer than 28 days, implying that the 2 had been released as a result of the current time limit running out. However the Paisley suspects were released after 14 days so i couldnt understand why these 2 clearly separate news items were linked together in that way?

I think it is just a distinguishing term. Not least because the intent of the action does affect some aspects of it. A person who is planting a bomb to blackmail is almost certainly someone you can negotiate with. A terrorist who is looking to destroy building/commerce and take human life is only looking to instill fear.
Companies have insurance and specialist companies who work with people who threaten damage or product tampering to get money. If it is an act of terrorism then insurance does not cover it and the govt has to step in.
A bit long winded ( sorry) but i think it is to do with the primary intent of the bombers/terrorists not the method they use