Yes, technically Brenton Tarrant is not a terrorist, but a uniformed Partisan Resistance Fighter.
As we know, Wikipedia is the mouthpiece of the Regime. Let's see what it has to say about being a Partisan?
>"A partisan is an armed fighter, who is not part of the regular troops of a country or state. The term comes from Italian, where it meant member of a political party. There is no separate legal status for partisans in international law. The law of war uses four criteria to legally define someone as a prisoner of war, if the person is captured:
>1. There is someone at the head of the organization, who assumes liability
>2. They can be identified by a sign or mark, which is visible from far away
>3. They carry their weapons openly
>4. They adhere to the customs and laws of war, during their operation"
Okay, so Brenton Tarrant stated quite clearly that he is resisting a foreign occupation of his nation by invaders. And a mosque is a base of operations for Muslims to take over infidel nations. They believe this.
Ah, but Tarrant is not a member of an organization.
True, but he does assume liability for his actions. He is essentially a one man army. And he is his own commander.
If anyone wants to argue that one man does not an organization make, one could simply respond by stating that Brenton Tarrant identifies as an organization. And if men can identify as women, dragons, and attack helicopters, it's more than reasonable to argue that he is an organization of one. And as stated before, he assumes liability for his actions.
Did he wear militaria insignia clearly visible?
Yes. Pic related. That is the military insignia of Europe waging war against invasion and occupation.
Did he carry his weapons openly? Absolutely. In fact, he made no effort whatsoePost too long. Click here to view the full text.