Khayre was no terrorist, he was an ice addict who had lost all grip of reality

Today, we are so familiar with the man who kills in the name of Islam. Islam equates to terrorism in media terms. It appears that today only Muslims are terrorists. But when a white supremacist commits similar acts of violence they are labeled unstable, troubled, going through depression or they had a problem with drugs or family breakdown.

Just over two weeks ago, 35 year old Jeremy Joseph Christian, stabbed to death two men in Portland, Oregon, after they came to the aid of two Muslims who were being abused by Christian. This was clearly motivated by an ideological cause, his belief that white Christian Americans were superior to others. Yet what were the charges?

Two counts of aggravated murder, one count of attempted aggravated murder, one count of first-degree assault, one count of second-degree assault, five counts of unlawful use of a weapon, three counts of second-degree intimidation and two counts of menacing. No mention of terrorism whatsoever.

The Burke Street hoon, who killed 6 innocent people, was an unstable ice addict. If his name had been Mustafa, then we would never had heard the end of it…Terror in Melbourne CBD! City under siege! Lone wolf Terrorist. Why is Dimitrious Gargasoulas not a lone wolf terrorist then?

He committed an act of violence. Yes. There were multiple deaths. Yes. It was in a public place. Yes. Similar to the London attacks he used a car as a deadly weapon. What was his ideological intention? He was angry against the world. He felt victimized and had a chip on his shoulder against the police.

The Government also states that, 'a person may be convicted of a terrorist act offence if the person was reckless as to whether his or her actions would amount to a terrorist act'. Was Gargasoulas reckless? Did it amount to terror in the streets? He definitely terrorized Melbourne that day.

These cases are complex and there is no one size fits all when we talk about radicalization or extremism. However, we need to seriously reassess the way we define terrorism. There are dozens of copy cat killings which are not necessarily what they first appear to be. The definite common denominator in all the alleged terrorist acts that have occurred in the past three years in Australia is that all the perpetrators had a history of mental illness or violent crime. They were all 'lone wolves', they were not sophisticated assassins, with years of training and links to terror support networks.

Yes, there are some crazy people out there and some of them are Muslim and some are undoubtedly driven by an ideology, but the overwhelming majority of Muslims around the world, equally abhor these violent actions and condemn them unequivocally.

We need to stop assuming just because someone is Muslim that when they commit a violent crime that it automatically becomes a terrorist act; because they were lone wolves; because they were 'apparently' representing IS.

Consistency in reporting these crimes is important and if we are to continue this approach then we need to call it the same way for everyone not just one segment of society. It's quite ironic, because by singling out Muslims, we are in fact, playing into IS' hands and creating the fear that they want to see in the world and further widen the rift between between 'us and them'.