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

401–410 of 530 posts

Re: I face investigation for terrorism

#401

Post by shiroiuma »

hef19898 wrote: post #400
shiroiuma wrote: post #396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should they be obligated to allow Gazans to participate in normal life in Israel? They're de-facto two separate countries. Why isn't Egypt getting the same criticism? They could do the same, but they don't. And there are many other Arab nations in the region that, while not directly bordering Gaza, could help out if they wanted. Iran does (though not Arab), but they provide them with weapons. Before the attack, I…

Egypt isn't getting the same crticism because: a) they never occupied Gaza to begin with b) they have yet to bomb Gaza Egypt gets the same criticism when it comes to the embargoe so. But you know who is stopping Egypt from annexing (interesting choice of words, by the way) Gaza? Israel. And you actually have not the slightest idea what apartheid is and how it works.

a) Egypt used to own Gaza (they lost it in a war they started, along with a big chunk of Sinai, which was later returned in a peace deal)

b) Gaza doesn't shoot rockets into Egypt regularly, so of course they don't bomb them

c) I've never seen it

d) Last I heard, Israel tried to get Egypt to take Gaza back. How is Israel preventing Egypt from taking them?

I do know what apartheid is: it's what happened in South Africa, when two groups of people lived in the very same place (i.e., in the same towns and cities) and were treated differently by the state. It's just like how Black people were treated in the US during the Jim Crow era. What's happening with Gaza is nothing like this.

Re: I face investigation for terrorism

#402

Post by M2Ys4U »

marcus_holmes wrote: post #59
diggan wrote: post #3

Some context: > Craig John Murray is a Scottish author, human rights campaigner, journalist, and former diplomat [...] he became a political activist, campaigning for human rights and for transparency in global politics as well as for the independence of Scotland [...] Murray was one of few people granted access to Julian Assange's extradition hearing which started in the Old Bailey on 7 September 2020. He published…

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'…

> 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.

Murray is also a crank and conspiracy theorist, who has been a vociferous supporter of Bashar al-Assad and the Syrian regime.

Saying this is about Scottish independence is hilarious.

Re: I face investigation for terrorism

#403

Post by kmlx »

MyFirstSass wrote: post #260
kmlx wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> that his support of Hamas say what now? is there any proof he supports those terrorists? in which case, it's pretty clear why he was detained. edit: found it: https://twitter.com/CraigMurrayOrg/status/171333500612114051... yup, terrorism charges incoming. from the same guy that did this: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/may/11/former-ambas...

Looks more to me like he's a human rights activist that has been targeted by the security state as Naom Chomsky et. al comments in the just posted article. His own comments are about desperate measures when carpet bombed. That you want to swiftly send him to jail tells me totalitarianism is becoming fashionable again.

> That you want to swiftly send him to jail tells me totalitarianism is becoming fashionable again.

where did i write that? he'll have a fair trial according to the law. he can then convince the judge he doesn't actually support a terrorist organisation (as it's illegal to do that in the UK).

Re: I face investigation for terrorism

#404

Post by screye »

ddmf wrote: post #156

He tweeted: >"But in the coming Gaza genocide, every act of armed resistance by Hamas and Hezbollah will have my support." >“If that is a crime, send me back to jail.” > https://x.com/CraigMurrayOrg/status/1713335006121140511 You can't openly support a terrorist group in the UK. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/...

I would like to live in a world where my fellow adults have the liberty to make a complete and utter fool out of themselves.

At the same time, if hysteric antisemitism is spreading like wildfire, then I wonder what the right tool to address it is. I'm guessing it must be a surreal time to be a Jewish person on the left.

Re: I face investigation for terrorism

#405

Post by bhouston »

golemiprague wrote: post #314
bhouston wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Supporting designated terrorist organizations is not cool. Also Hamas just committed a bunch of grizzly murders of innocent civilians, not exactly resistance fighters at the moment. I am all for root causes and opposing the seemingly never ending Israeli occupation, and the settlements which are forcibly displacing Palestinians from their homes, but aligning one’s self with Hamas, especially at this time, is both mor…

Judea and Samaria (aka west bank) were part of the land promised to the Jews by the league of nations in the San Remo convention, which is binding by international law and originally also included Jordan. Considering the Arabs have never agreed to the partition plan of 1948 it is well within Israel right to contest this area and the common definition of "occupied territories" is not that clear cut considering no coun…

What the hell is this wacky answer?

People that argue that one side deserves the land because of x, y and z while the other side doesn’t are part of the problem. Your view of the world is a huge part of the problem. It is partisan and zero sum and justifies discrimination and ethnic cleansing using pseudointellectualism and cherry picked historical facts.

Re: I face investigation for terrorism

#406

Post by credit_guy »

boffinAudio wrote: post #389
credit_guy wrote: post #239

Maybe some lawyer can explain to some complete noobie. I thought you always have the right to not answer any questions until you have your lawyer present, and that you have the right to that one phone call to a lawyer. My knowledge comes entirely from movies and novels. I understand that there could be exceptions, but what is the basic rationale of the exception here? The UK is a country of laws, and generally the la…

The exception is that the airport is not a part of the UK sovereign territory, but is rather considered an extra-territorial possession of the UK, akin to a colony, which can be governed separately.

Thank you. I guess that could be the explanation. Still, it's strange that you could be "detained" and interrogated and not be allowed to see your lawyer, and not have the right to remain silent. In the US I would expect to retain all my rights even if I travel to the US Virgin Islands, for example, even if these islands are not part of any state.

Re: I face investigation for terrorism

#407

Post by kmlx »

denton-scratch wrote: post #193
kmlx wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/... > PROSCRIBED TERRORIST ORGANISATIONS > Proscription makes it a criminal offence to: > belong to or invite support for a proscribed organisation; > arrange a meeting in support of a proscribed organisation; and. > wear clothing or carry articles in public which arouse reasonable suspicion that an individual is a member or supporter of the proscribed organ…

> i think he broke the first rule. He didn't say that anyone else should support a proscribed organisation; he didn't even invite support for their actions. He just said that he intended to support them. And he's not a member of Hamas; so I don't see how you figure that he broke rule #1. But the Home Secretary is now demanding that the police arrest and charge anyone carrying a Palestinian flag (note: not just a Hama…

> He didn't say that anyone else should support a proscribed organisation; he didn't even invite support for their actions. He just said that he intended to support them.

i think the problem here is the medium. he didn't say he supported the terrorists in private to a friend. he posted it on twitter for everyone to see. i guess one could make a case that it's an invitation for support?

Re: I face investigation for terrorism

#408

Post by junofan »

derivagral wrote: post #227
oarfish wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What did it say? Tweet seemingly was removed.

Not sure how formatting will go, from desktop twitter: Craig Murray - @CraigMurrayOrg To be entirely plain. 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. If that is a crime, send me back to jail. 7:24 PM · Oct 14, 2023 · 167.9K Views

Dang, he forgot to mention that one in the article…

Re: I face investigation for terrorism

#409

Post by IAmGraydon »

biolurker1 wrote: post #384

Anyone saw his blog post titled "now we have your attention" right after Hamas killed everyone at the rave? Weird that he got questioned you say?

Yeah the guy is complaining about being investigated for terrorism when he clearly and openly supports terrorist organizations including Hamas, according to his blog. Get a grip, HN.

Re: I face investigation for terrorism

#410

Post by tremon »

OhioMan2943 wrote: post #369
neilwilson wrote: post #357

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"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…

Except for the fact that the house of lords is a lifelong appointment and people have taken cash bribes for appointments. Which is the very definition of undemocratic

That doesn't mean it's not legal. It can be undemocratic but still legal.
Post reply on HN