Earlier quoted context omitted.
What if he remained silent?
I don't know. He said it's a crime. What usually happens when you commit a crime in the presence of the police?
They beat you and choke you to death?
I face investigation for terrorism
411–420 of 530 posts
Re: I face investigation for terrorism
#412Earlier quoted context omitted.
> First of i doubt he's done that. https://twitter.com/CraigMurrayOrg/status/171333500612114051... he's done exactly that. and he's done this as well: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/may/11/former-ambas...
This is not support of Hamas though, it is an acknowledgement that there will understandable reactions to the ongoing carpet bombings and warcrimes done by Israel right now. I.e self defence from whatever group holds power there right now.
you wrote:
> This is not support of Hamas though, it is an acknowledgement that there will understandable reactions
that guy wrote:
> But in the coming Gaza genocide, every act of armed resistance by Hamas and Hezbollah will have my support.
this isn't "acknowledgement", this is support for the terrorists.
Re: I face investigation for terrorism
#413As 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 pa…
US Media is owned by US Bomb-makers. Fact.
They want the war because it sells bombs.
Re: I face investigation for terrorism
#414Earlier 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.
Step one; get overreaching, extreme powers passed into law because they'll only be used to fight "terrorism". Step two; redefine everything as terrorism.
We're already at step two, since no one sincerely thinks Craig Murray is a terrorist.
Re: I face investigation for terrorism
#415Earlier quoted context omitted.
You’re deliberately ignoring an honest explanation.
No, they're pointing out the ways that explanation is dishonest. You cannot look at the political landscape and tell anyone in good conscience that officials will use an honest interpretation of the law.
And again, that's not at all a theoretical exercise here.
No one sincerely thinks Craig Murray might be a terrorist. Those who would say such a thing are in fact not sincere. They just say it as a political loyalty statement, or to psych themselves up to abuse him/gloat in his abuse.
Re: I face investigation for terrorism
#416> 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…
UK law is such complete ass. There is no getting around just how stupidly bad the Parliamentary Supremacy doctrine is. Parliament passed it so it is constitutional. There aren't enough insults in the world for the people who would think any of this qualifies as a good idea.
Re: I face investigation for terrorism
#417What did they say was the crime? They had to suspect you did something. A probable cause. In the United States if you are suspected of cyber-terrorism they will just breach your WiFi/router and take the information without your knowledge. They will create zero days and exploit your devices. All under the terrorism statute. That’s why it’s best to never attach you iPhone to your home WiFi networks.
Re: I face investigation for terrorism
#418Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
What I said so far is not just an opinion:
>> The United Nations, International Committee of the Red Cross, and many human rights organization however continue to consider the occupying power as Israel controls Gaza's borders, with the exception of the Egyptian border, airspace and access to the sea and exercises what they consider to be effective military control over the territory.[21][22][23]
>> In his statement on the 2008–2009 Israel–Gaza conflict, Richard Falk, United Nations Special Rapporteur wrote that international humanitarian law applied to Israel "in regard to the obligations of an Occupying Power and in the requirements of the laws of war."[181] Amnesty International, the World Health Organization, Oxfam, the International Committee of the Red Cross, the United Nations, the United Nations General Assembly, the UN Fact Finding Mission to Gaza, international human rights organizations, US government websites, the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office, and a significant number of legal commentators (Geoffrey Aronson, Meron Benvenisti, Claude Bruderlein, Sari Bashi, Kenneth Mann, Shane Darcy, John Reynolds, Yoram Dinstein, John Dugard, Marc S. Kaliser, Mustafa Mari, and Iain Scobbie) maintain that Israel's extensive direct external control over Gaza, and indirect control over the lives of its internal population mean that Gaza remained occupied.[182][183] In spite of Israel's withdrawal from Gaza in 2005, the Hamas government in Gaza considers Gaza as occupied territory.[184]
>> Several rights groups have characterized the situation in Gaza as an "open-air prison", including the United Nations,[193] Human Rights Watch,[194] and the Norwegian Refugee Council.[195] This characterization was often cited by a number of human rights activists, politicians, and media news outlets reporting on the Gaza-Israel conflict and the wider Palestinian-Israeli conflict.[196][197][198][199][200][201] Former British Prime Minister David Cameron,[202] US Senator Bernie Sanders,[203] former Israeli diplomat Gideon Levy,[204] and Israeli historian Ilan Pappe have endorsed this characterization as well.[205]
>> Human Rights Watch issued a report on the situation in the Gaza Strip, which it called an "open-air prison" due to the blockade and held Israel responsible as the occupying power, and to a lesser degree Egypt, which has restricted movement of Palestinians through its border.[194]
Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza_Strip
Seems we have a choice now, either we believe all the entities having prepared extensive reports (all cited in the wikipedia article) or we believe Israelian PR and legalese on the status of Gaza according to international law (which doesn't change the an iota when it comes to the humanitarian situation there). Your choice.
I am not saying Hamas actions are justified. And I am not saying Israel shouldn't get support. Ehat I am saying is, that we cannot ignore the humanitarian crisis affecting millions of people that is at the core of the conflict. And whatever support the West can give should aim at renewed, and serious, peace talks. That means that Israel has to give up something, too. After all, Israel has the right to exist as a state the same way Palestinians have the right to live freely, un-oppressed and peacefully.
Re: I face investigation for terrorism
#419Earlier quoted context omitted.
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 b…
That this level of wisdom is buried layers deep in an HN post is a bit of a shame.
Spot on.
Re: I face investigation for terrorism
#420Earlier 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 think it’s universal. It started in the United States though. Look at this case: Frazier v. Cupp (1969). That is what started it all. Many other nations picked up on it. This case was argued before the Supreme Court.
In hindsight we can see that police are very dishonest, lying, thugs. They have no real ethics. FBI was caught sleeping with female “suspects”’for intelligence. Think about that. Fucking for intelligence. They were exploiting women.
NSA has intelligence analysts that were using and still are using a program called “section 702” of the intelligence act to spy on women they want to have sex with, ex girlfriends, others. Intimate details of their lives. It was written up in Wired. It looks to be renewed.
So you have power hungry cops, FBI, NSA Analysts who are ugly, fat and corrupt. Can’t get laid, ethical issues. Who the Supreme Court says can lie straight to your face. But they can arrest you if they think you are lying? Stop trying to help them. Let them drown. They are the real threat. The real terrorists. If we did this we be in jail.