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

351–360 of 530 posts

Re: I face investigation for terrorism

#351

Post by 3seashells »

anigbrowl wrote: post #328
mikrotikker wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes they took legislation Joe Biden wrote and tweaked it a little which is why they came up with the patriot Act so quickly following the attacks.

Not everything in the world revolves around the USA. The UK had an ongoing terrorism problem in Northern Ireland, and had instituted plenty of draconian laws of its own pursuant to that, even before Biden became a Senator in 1972.

The terrorism history is not much more than a pretext though. The source of these draconian Laws are highly stratified societies, with inept elites for seeing troubled times and accidentally accelerating them.

Re: I face investigation for terrorism

#352

Post by olalonde »

anonzzzies wrote: post #341
marcus_holmes wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The UK is very worried about Scottish Independence. Mr Murray is a very vocal supporter of that, and an active figurehead in the independence movement. I don't know, but I'm assuming that his support of Hamas is a nice pretext for the British Establishment to have another pop at him. As we predicted when the UK proposed these monstrous laws: they are being abused to go after anyone who annoys the establishment. That'…

Pro Palestine doesn’t necessarily mean pro Hamas. It usually doesn’t, but of course some people (pro Israel usually) always manipulate/turn it that way. So please let us know where it shows he is pro Hamas vs pro Palestine (and actually against Hamas, which is what I would expect he is).

He explicitly stated his support for Hamas and Hezbollah in this tweet: https://twitter.com/CraigMurrayOrg/status/171333500612114051...

Re: I face investigation for terrorism

#353

Post by atoav »

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.

With every law that is as... vague.. as this, I always ask myself one question: "If the Nazis would rise to power, how badly could they abuse it by doing only slight changes to how it's interpreted?"

Here the answer is: Pretty bad

Your laws don't have to survive a well meaning democratic government. They have to survive one that is cunning, evil and tries to actively abolish the Rule of Law and democracy.

This is a bad law.

Re: I face investigation for terrorism

#354

Post by csomar »

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…

The reason for this is the expansion of the TSA (or airport security body). When you have a very small number of people/devices, you just let people in. When you have a large apparatus, you make use of it. And the large apparatus will try to find work for itself by stopping as many people as humanly possible. They'll also stop the most normal people out-there because they tend to make less of a fuss about it.

Recently, I flew SFO and they seemed to have a shortage of TSA officers or something (all security booths were empty). There were a couple old guys, they just randomly selected people for screening but everyone else were just let go without baggage screening.

Re: I face investigation for terrorism

#355

Post by anonzzzies »

olalonde wrote: post #352
anonzzzies wrote: post #341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pro Palestine doesn’t necessarily mean pro Hamas. It usually doesn’t, but of course some people (pro Israel usually) always manipulate/turn it that way. So please let us know where it shows he is pro Hamas vs pro Palestine (and actually against Hamas, which is what I would expect he is).

He explicitly stated his support for Hamas and Hezbollah in this tweet: https://twitter.com/CraigMurrayOrg/status/171333500612114051...

Ah indeed he did. Jikes, he gets his wish then.

Re: I face investigation for terrorism

#356

Post by throw310822 »

marcus_holmes wrote: post #333
throw310822 wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> charged with contempt of court, for "jigsaw identification" of a witness in another case, that of Alex Salmond Worth mentioning a couple of details about that case. Alex Salmond was the leader of the Scottish independentist party. Arrested in 2019 with the accusation of 14 instances of sexual abuses from 8 anonymous women. The subsequent trial cleared him of all charges.

And there's evidence (as Mr Murray documents, which was obviously his "real" crime) that this was all a fit-up by the current SNP leadership to discredit Mr Salmond so that they would be free from criticism from him about the lack of movement on independence and the SNP pivot from independence to culture war issues. Also, probably, the reason that the SNP leadership are now pushing for jury-less trials for sexual abu…

I am struck by the fact that you can be publicly disgraced while your accusers remain anonymous, and remain such (and I bet suffer no consequence) even after their accusations against you are proven false or irrelevant.

I don't know the details, but when 8 separate individuals accuse you, all without cause, it's hard to believe it's a coincidence.

Re: I face investigation for terrorism

#357

Post by neilwilson »

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…

"I cannot understand how this is legal."

It's legal because Parliament passed the legislation. Anything Parliament passes is legal. It's the very definition of legal.

Those who don't like that need to get the relevant people elected and change the law.

It's not a difficult system. We all have a vote.

There is no legal god in the British system and we recognise no external one. It's all down to the British people and their representatives.

Re: I face investigation for terrorism

#358

Post by shiroiuma »

quirino wrote: post #279
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

You can absolutely do this with Xiaomi phones. You can set up a second password in order to access what is virtually a completely different phone. You can even set a different fingerprint so that different fingers unlock different profiles. The feature is called Second Space

Somehow, I find it ironic that you have to buy a Chinese phone to get this feature.

Re: I face investigation for terrorism

#359

Post by shiroiuma »

hef19898 wrote: post #262
xdennis wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm saying that it's ridiculous to say it's an apartheid state when Israel has Muslims with full citizenship, but if Jew crossed into Gaza unarmed he would be slaughtered on the spot. Palestine is an apartheid state. Israel is not.

The better metric would be how many Arabs, including in the occupied territories, are Israelian citizens. By the way, apartheid doesn't depend on citizenship per se.

AFAICT, the West Bank could be called "an occupied territory", but Gaza definitely cannot. I don't know why people keep repeating this: Israel pulled out of Gaza 17 years ago and let it govern itself. A place can't be "occupied" when you don't have soldiers there and you're not administering the place.

Re: I face investigation for terrorism

#360

Post by coolThingsFirst »

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…

What if he remained silent?
Post reply on HN