Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I face investigation for terrorism

craigmurray.org.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 530 posts

Re: I face investigation for terrorism

#91

Post by robaato »

fullarr wrote: post #11
kypro wrote: 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…

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

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/...

Conducting an examination 34. The examining officer must explain their role to the person and that Schedule 7 is a part of counter-terrorism policing at the port/UK border, but that this does not mean that they are suspected of being involved in terrorism. The purpose of the examination is to determine whether the person appears to be someone who is or who has been concerned in the commission, preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism. If requested, the examining officer must provide sufficient information, such as an identification number and location, to the person or his or her representative to enable the officer to be identified in the event of any query or complaint.

35. The examining officer will explain how the examination will be conducted and must offer a Schedule 7 Public Information Leaflet. The Public Information Leaflet is available in multiple languages, and outlines the purpose and provisions of Schedule 7, duties under Schedule 7, key points of the code of practice, including an individual’s rights, and relevant contact details (including those needed to provide feedback or make a complaint).

39. Where an officer decides it is necessary to examine a person for longer than an hour, then questioning under paragraph 2 and 3 of Schedule 7 may only continue beyond the hour point if the person has been detained under paragraph 6 of Schedule 7. Any period of examination, including detention, must not exceed six hours from the commencement of the examination.

Re: I face investigation for terrorism

#92

Post by [deleted] »

Laforet wrote: post #56

Arbitrary search and seizure at the border has been a steady feature in western countries for, like, the solid part of the past two decade. I have travelled to the USA three times during this period and during every single visit I had been pulled aside by the TSA for extra screening (SSSS). In the last 5 years or so when I return to my home country of New Zealand, I have been repeatedly searched by customs which has…

[deleted]

Re: I face investigation for terrorism

#93

Post by formerly_proven »

twic wrote: post #57
fullarr wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google Chicago PD blacksites It's a feature they aren't afraid of ignoring

If the UK authorities are extraordinarily rendering people to Chicago, that would be quite something. Rwanda was bad enough.

Take him to detroit

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ny4a-oxOndo

Re: I face investigation for terrorism

#94

Post by Roark66 »

fullarr wrote: post #11
kypro wrote: 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…

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 that actually true in the UK though? I was once "detained" in far less intimidating circumstances. I had a meeting in Bradford(UK) at 9am at some business client's place and I arrived by car half an hour early so I parked my car in an empty parking lot overlooking one of the main streets and I was sitting there waiting. Then a policewoman appears out of nowhere and asks me what am I doing there etc. I answered, and next she's asking if I have any id. When I asked what for, she used that phrase that "I was detained (but I forgot the reason why, something about assessing what I'm doing there)".Fine,I gave her my drivers license. She wrote the details down and then filled and gave me a piece of paper with various things along the lines of "you were detained today for the following reason..., you can complain here if you want etc.". She said thank you and walked away.

Later I learned some important person was visiting Bradford and they were doing security in advance. I wonder if they had a right to stop people like that prior to the" terrorist act".

Re: I face investigation for terrorism

#95

Post by jeroenhd »

spydum wrote: post #60
Condition1952 wrote: post #13

>I had to give up any passwords to my devices. It was a criminal offence not to do this. It is a real atrocity that most devices are unable to lie for us when a wrong password is typed and create a mock profile to waste time

the only software I recall doing this was TrueCrypt?

You can get sort of a hidden volume by messing with the alignment of a LUKS partition as well.

However, it may not be very smart to do this. Law enforcement aren't dumb, they'll see the signs of your hidden partition, and you can end up in prison for up to two years for your little stunt.

Unless you're hiding something much more incriminating, cooperation is probably your best bet.

Re: I face investigation for terrorism

#96

Post by bawolff »

TheDong wrote: post #17
8organicbits wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I volunteered that I thought I understood the tweet that worried them and agreed it could have been more nuanced. This was the limitation of twitter. It was intended to refer only to the current situation within Gaza and the Palestinian people’s right of self-defence from genocide. The only clue I see is the reference to a tweet. Anyone know which tweet this could refer to? Sounds like advocating violence, with a p…

It is likely the following tweet: https://twitter.com/CraigMurrayOrg/status/171333500612114051... > I have always viscerally opposed war. I have dedicated my life to conflict resolution and reconciliation. > But in the coming Gaza genocide, every act of armed resistance by Hamas and Hezbollah will have my support.

In other words, he opposes war except when he agrees with it.

Even the most hawkish person would probably say the same thing. "War is terrible except when i think one side is justified" is hardly a pacifist take.

Re: I face investigation for terrorism

#97

Post by kossTKR »

howmayiannoyyou wrote: post #89
kossTKR wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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]

What a bizarre thing to say. I wan't the jewish state destroyed? You are seeing ghosts my friend.

The fact that not carpet bombing and creating a huge concentration camp for millions that had their land annexed is now equal to wanting the Israel state destroyed is a testament to how one sided some of you people see thing conflict.

I'm pro peace, anti carpet bombing, and i see that Hamas has been supported by Israel to weaken PLO, and that settlers have stolen property and killed palestinians which has led to this extremism now, at the same time i understand the importance of an israeli state, and i understand the horrors of living in fear of rockets, though they kill a hundredfold less than the Israeli military.

It's not an even conflict in my yes.

Re: I face investigation for terrorism

#98

Post by ImaCake »

octopoc wrote: post #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-…

Lots of states are ethnostates to varying degrees. Japan and South Korea are arguably much more restrictive about who is considered a member than Israel. But there are many more; Finland, Iran, and Hungary come to mind. The New World has few ethnostates, but in Eurasia they are more the norm than the exception.

Re: I face investigation for terrorism

#99

Post by RHSeeger »

greggsy wrote: post #87
lesuorac wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

But does the answer actually say what the law states, or does the law state what the (ignoring) response is describing. What was intended by a law and what the law actually says can vary wildly; and calling that out, when the law gives far greater power than it was intended to, is both reasonable and important.

Re: I face investigation for terrorism

#100

Post by hef19898 »

howmayiannoyyou wrote: post #89
kossTKR wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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]

That is exactly not how I understand OP, regardless of a harsh choice of words. I do not like Israels policy around settlements and the treatment of Palestinians, for me this is just unacceptable. The same goes for calling for the destruction of Israel as a nation. People can actually critizise both things.

And one thing should be clear: not all Palestinians are Hamas members, nor are all Israelians supporting the settlement policies or the Nethayahu government. Punishing everyone for actions of a few is not a thing I support.

Post reply on HN