[krona]

> I'm not sure why they think that given that the Ariane Grande event seemed to be radicalisation through family

Just on a point of fact, Abedi almost certainly wasn't radicalized by his own family, although some of them knew it was happening.

From The Telegraph/NYT:

Salman Abedi is understood to have made calls to two mobile phone numbers based in Libya, which were not registered to his family, moments before the massacre that killed 22 people.

Abedi, 22, has been connected to Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (Isil) terror group Katibat al-Battar al-Libi, based in Libya, which is credited with being behind a number of attacks in Europe, including the Paris attacks which left 129 people dead and dozens injured after coordinated attacks on the Bataclan concert hall and the Saint-Denis Stadium. Two senior US intelligence officials told the New York Times that Abedi was in contact with al-Battar members both on his visits to Tripoli and by phone while in the UK.

There is lots of other information which ties these dots together, such as the particular materials and techniques used to construct the bomb he exploded.

[acqq]

That info doesn't mean that he haven't received radical ideas in his mosque and his family. Unless you consider "Islam will rule the world soon" and "death to the homosexuals" not radical. Specifically in the mosque site there were "favourite videos" of one U.S. Islam preacher with these messages.

"Freedom" of religion is not understood properly today.

[krona]

"Islam will rule the world soon" and "death to the homosexuals" are not radical ideas in Muslim communities, and certainly aren't sufficient to incite anyone in the legal sense.

Radicalization takes place within an atmosphere of complicity, which is part of the problem, but hardly the root cause.

On the other hand, teaching young impressionable men how to make a bomb designed specifically to kill people, and to give them the mens rea, motive and encouragement is radicalization.