Live data from Hacker News

I face investigation for terrorism

craigmurray.org.uk

81–90 of 530 posts

Re: I face investigation for terrorism

#81
post #4

> I was detained under Section 7 of the Terrorism Act > I was not arrested but detained, and therefore had no right to a lawyer. > I had no right to remain silent. I had to give full and accurate information in response to questions. It was a criminal offence to withhold any relevant information. > I had to give up any passwords to my devices. It was a criminal offence not to do this. This is what I find so terrifyin…

>This is what I find so terrifying about the terrorism act. I cannot understand how this is legal

Simple: power balance determines what's legal and what's not.

Re: I face investigation for terrorism

#82
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does this work? If they have to provide writing what's the point? Surely the individual could just wipe their device in that time? If they confiscate the device during the initial detention then them issuing written notice that they need the password doesn't really change much since they're going to be getting access to your device whether you like it or not.

He was detained in a room. I am pretty sure there was a printer nearby and they could give him those documents in writing.

re-reading the act, it actually says "must be given in writing or (if not in writing) must be given in a manner that produces a record of its having been given;"

So being given verbally with a tape recorder or note-taker recording the interaction is actually sufficient. Sounds like the police had exactly that.

Re: I face investigation for terrorism

#83
As a sidenote has anyone else been surprised by the extreme political iron-fist and omnipresent media control to side with Israel?

When talking to colleagues, family, and even my Israeli friends there's a plurality of opinion, sadness, serious discussions, but when looking at mainstream media, even relatively moderate it seems like everyone and their grandma is screaming for bombs and are "tired of the stupid poor palestinians" like everyone forgot the enormous plights they have gone through, the hundreds of thousands dead over decades, the property stolen by settlers and that they were mostly moderate farmers before they were annexed and carpet bombed (There's countless of videos of this).

It's like living in a Black Mirror episode.

The worlds largest military carpet bombing a tiny strip of land and a downtrodden people, and i have never seen politicians this bloodthirsty.

At the same time i see very, very few public figures, colleagues included having the courage to call out the atrocities done by Israel continuously, for fear of "something" while there's never ending stories from the opposite side.

Can anyone tell me what that something is - and if this is some extreme geopolitical importance of Israel to the west that the idea of the western "free society" has finally come to some screeching halt?

How can there be such an enormous difference between "the man on the street" and the media landscape?

My grandparents fled war, and the way the west talking and behaving is so incredibly shameful to me, but i don't recognise this war hunger when i turn off the TV.

Re: I face investigation for terrorism

#84
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just an FYI Law enforcement is basically allowed to lie to you Most of those claims were BS but you have to call their bluff to find out. He didn't have to answer questions or give them passwords, and they will always tell you that you have to Edit: "allowed to" as in there's no consequences because of how difficult it is to prosecute them. It's intentionally ignored

> Law enforcement is basically allowed to lie to you Is this pretty universal or is it an American thing?

I believe in The Netherlands it is the same. I always assumed it to be universal.

Re: I face investigation for terrorism

#85
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> He didn't have to answer questions or give them passwords Section 49 of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 requires that if you know the information required and refuse to provide it, you can be sentenced to a maximum of 2 years imprisonment. However, the notice must be given properly in writing. So, while these officers perhaps were deceitful in asking verbally for passwords rather than giving a writt…

How does this work? If they have to provide writing what's the point? Surely the individual could just wipe their device in that time? If they confiscate the device during the initial detention then them issuing written notice that they need the password doesn't really change much since they're going to be getting access to your device whether you like it or not.

>Surely the individual could just wipe their device in that time?

And then they charge them with obstruction of justice and destruction of potential evidence.

Re: I face investigation for terrorism

#86
post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> He didn't have to answer questions or give them passwords Section 49 of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 requires that if you know the information required and refuse to provide it, you can be sentenced to a maximum of 2 years imprisonment. However, the notice must be given properly in writing. So, while these officers perhaps were deceitful in asking verbally for passwords rather than giving a writt…

Man, I totally forgot my password. Over the last 3 weeks I started forgetting passwords, only passwords. (Make note to mention this offhand to my dr at next appointment)

"Don't worry, we'll keep you imprisoned until you remember or manage to brute force it. We also don't care what you told your doctor..."

See how power works?

Re: I face investigation for terrorism

#87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They may stop and question anybody. But they cannot stop and question people for the purpose of, for example, recovering stolen goods. Basically, the officer must currently be working on a terrorism case to be able to use these powers.

Stolen goods can't be used for terrorism? I mean how am I supposed to know if you don't intend to use that banana you didn't pay for as part of a phalic terrorism display without getting access to your text messages?

You’re deliberately ignoring an honest explanation.

Re: I face investigation for terrorism

#88

Every one in the uk is a Terrorist according to the Terrorism Act. We really do live in a police state here. This isn't anything new ither this has been going on for nearly 20 years now since they first implemented it with the promise they wouldn't use it to harrass protestors it was the first thing they did. The voting public have no interest in freedom.

The voting public also doesn't have any way of doing anything against this in any meaningful or efficient way. Last I checked UK wasn't a direct democracy.

TBF it's not supposed to be a direct democracy.

You can start a campaign. They can bring about change, in the long run. If a think tank was campaigning for something you didn't like, I bet you'd be first to complain about it...

Re: I face investigation for terrorism

#89
post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

True, let's call it Apartheid then, not much better unfortunately. Also very important to highlight that most people living in Palestine were pretty provincial and moderate farmers before being carpet bombed by settlers which has unsurprisingly lead to extremism.

[flagged]

Re: I face investigation for terrorism

#90
Israel is an ethnostate[1], resolutions of Congress notwithstanding[2]. Imagine if Biden said "The US is a Nation-State Of The White People And Them Alone" the way a leading Israeli spoke about Israel[3].

But instead all major western governments are busy sucking up to Israel (this article is just one example) and declaring that Israel will always be our best ally.

[1] https://www.npr.org/2018/07/19/630368973/israel-passes-contr...

[2] https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/house-vote-resolution-israel...

[3] https://www.npr.org/2019/03/11/702264118/netanyahu-says-isra...

Post reply on HN