I face investigation for terrorism • Hacker News Board

Re: I face investigation for terrorism

#321

Post by RajT88 » Wed, Oct 25, 2023, 2:35 AM UTC

skrebbel wrote: post #79

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'…

How does this look in practice? I’m not saying you’re wrong but your formulation suggests that some faceless people at the British Establishment Country Club put down their whiskeys, ordained that mr Murray be bullied and so it went. That’s the stuff of movies and dictatorships, right? Do random UK civil servants really abuse the system to this extent for personal or political gain?

> some faceless people at the British Establishment Country Club put down their whiskeys, ordained that mr Murray be bullied and so it went.

I don't mean to go off-topic, but the last few years have shown that this is how power and influence really works in our world. There is no other way to explain (for example) why no clients of Jeff Epstein's brothels have as yet been named and prosecuted. Conveniently, a few have identified themselves through their actions. But they are all free men still, with no signs of any pending comeuppance, or really even an investigation into their involvement.

Re: I face investigation for terrorism

#322

Post by catlover76 » Wed, Oct 25, 2023, 2:44 AM UTC

m000 wrote: post #196

kossTKR wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Great question, i'm in a scandinavian country that is what is so surprising to me. I have family both here in the US and the UK, and everywhere seems to be the same. It's almost like there's been some secret doctrine implemented. As an example the "relatively" moderate labour parties of both Denmark and the UK as come out as pretty extreme militaristic hardliner supporters of Israel doubting the effectiveness of ceas…

> It's almost like there's been some secret doctrine implemented. At least during Cold War, people were aware that there's a Cold War going on. Now everything is supposed to be fine and dandy, yet it feels we're constantly subjected to psy-ops even from "our side". I don't think that the rise of conspiracy theories in recent years is a coincidence: Something is in play, some people can "sense it" but there's just not…

There is no conspiracy theory needed; people are generally bigoted and biased, and the fact that the latest escalation was set off by a very brutal terrorist attack (or series thereof) by Hamas, a terrorist organization that doesn't really give off "freedom fighter" vibes, and which has a religious extremism component than titillates and scares people, only exacerbates the issue.

This is just the past few decades of Western coverage of this conflict on steroids, or exaggerated so much that the bias is becoming obvious to people who never paid much attention before.

Re: I face investigation for terrorism

#323

Post by lmm » Wed, Oct 25, 2023, 2:47 AM UTC

SemioticStandrd wrote: post #282

matthewdgreen wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know anything about this person other than what's on his Wikipedia. And what that says is: he's a 65-year old former diplomat and noted human rights activist with (as far as I can tell) zero history of violence or terrorist acts. If the government seriously thinks he's capable of following through on violent acts because he wrote a Tweet saying "I support Hamas", I suspect the government is badly mismanaging…

You can’t be that naive, can you? It’s obviously not the Tweet they’re worried about. They think the Tweet is indication that he supports Hamas enough to aid or promote them secretly. “If this guy is this outspoken publicly for his support of Hamas, what must he be doing to support them behind closed doors? Does he donate to them? Organize for them?” Whether or not that’s enough to search him is another debate, but t…

> They think the Tweet is indication that he supports Hamas enough to aid or promote them secretly. “If this guy is this outspoken publicly for his support of Hamas, what must he be doing to support them behind closed doors? Does he donate to them? Organize for them?”

If they think that then why just him and not the thousands of other people tweeting similar things?

The thought process is evidently "oh, it's that bloody git again, have we got anything we can pin him for this time?"; if you don't see that it's you who's being naive. (I'm agnostic about whether it's specifically about Scottish independence, the Assange case, or something else; one way or another he's a thorn in the side of the powerful, and that's why the book is being thrown at him)

Re: I face investigation for terrorism

#324

Post by jskrn » Wed, Oct 25, 2023, 2:48 AM UTC

xdennis wrote: post #257

Kudos wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you trying to suggest that it's the Jews who are oppressed?

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.

Full citizenship? https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/21/middleeast/arab-israeli-citiz...

Re: I face investigation for terrorism

#325

Post by lmm » Wed, Oct 25, 2023, 2:55 AM UTC

skrebbel wrote: post #79

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'…

How does this look in practice? I’m not saying you’re wrong but your formulation suggests that some faceless people at the British Establishment Country Club put down their whiskeys, ordained that mr Murray be bullied and so it went. That’s the stuff of movies and dictatorships, right? Do random UK civil servants really abuse the system to this extent for personal or political gain?

It's the same as any other large organisation. Someone at the top says "oi, so-and-so has been a real pain lately huh". Someone one level down says "is there anything we can do about so-and-so?". Someone the next level down says "well, let's start a file on so-and-so, see if he's up to anything, no harm in that". And then since UK antiterrorism law is terribly written (or brilliantly written, depending on your perspective) such that essentially everyone with even a vague interest in politics breaks it all the time, and the surveillance state means the proof will be a couple of keystrokes away, once you look for a reason to go after someone you find one.

Probably no-one sat down and designed the system to work like this. But it works well for everyone involved, so...

Re: I face investigation for terrorism

#326

Post by Anthony-G » Wed, Oct 25, 2023, 3:00 AM UTC

kridsdale3 wrote: post #319

Anthony-G wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for posting the official position of the UK state. I was curious how many far right, non-Islamic organisations are listed as proscribed organisations so I counted them: * Atomwaffen Division (AWD) * Feuerkrieg Division (FKD) * Sonnenkrieg Division (SKD) * National Action * The Base Out of all these, I’d only heard of National Action . It’s not clear (to me) that all the proscribed groups are actually active in…

Isn't "The Base" == Al Qaeda?

According to this list, this particular group is described as:

> The Base is a predominantly US based militant white supremacist group, formed in 2018. It draws influence from a collection of essays by prominent National Socialist, James Mason, which advocate the use of violence to initiate the collapse of modern society through a ‘race war’ and the subsequent creation of a white ethno-state. This ideology is known as ‘accelerationism’.

Al Qa’ida (AQ) are listed separately:

> Inspired and led by Usama Bin Laden, its aims are the expulsion of Western forces from Saudi Arabia, the destruction of Israel and the end of Western influence in the Muslim world.

Re: I face investigation for terrorism

#327

Post by r3trohack3r » Wed, Oct 25, 2023, 3:00 AM UTC

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

This is possible on many devices.

Though I’m not sure I want it.

The possibility of no-trace hidden partitions I can’t disprove the existence of does not seem like it would serve me well in the backroom of some government facility where my rights have been revoked.

Re: I face investigation for terrorism

#328

Post by anigbrowl » Wed, Oct 25, 2023, 3:02 AM UTC

mikrotikker wrote: post #301

jkaplowitz wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with you in general, but regarding this specific phrase in this specific context: > Governments took advantage of the extreme fear created after the 9/11 attacks to pass these absurd laws. Unless I misunderstand the legislative history, the law that was used here (Schedule 7 to the Terrorism Act 2000) dates from July 2000, so before 9/11. Still part of the same trend as what happened after 9/11, of course, bu…

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.

Re: I face investigation for terrorism

#329

Post by lmm » Wed, Oct 25, 2023, 3:04 AM UTC

bawolff wrote: post #208

logicchains wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>You have to imagine very hard to consider gaza to have been annexed Israel didn't annex Gaza, it (via the UK) annexed Palestine upon its creation, with Gaza and the West Bank being the land that remains un-annexed.

That makes even less sense. To annex something means to add it to an existing state. Israel by definition can't annex something before it exists. The UK controlled the area at the time, but they basically gave up and left. I don't understand how you could say they were annexing it at this point in time either. Israel is closer to being a succesor state to mandatory palestine than anything else. Generally internationa…

> Israel by definition can't annex something before it exists.

That seems like a purely semantic argument. If a bunch of people from a particular political movement show up somewhere and seize a bunch of land and declare it's part of their nation, whether that nation is completely new or existing doesn't change the morality of that anywhere. E.g. the formation of South Ossetia on Georgian territory is widely recognised as either annexation or something morally equivalent to it.

> Generally international law recognizes the right for ethnic groups to self-determination (Palestinians often rightly complain that they effectively have not had this in the modern period, but the right applies to both sides). It is not considered annexation for a group from one state to split off and form a new state via self-determination.

That's arguably true for people who declare independence in the territory they're already living in. Not for people who settle on someone else's territory and then claim it as theirs.

Re: I face investigation for terrorism

#330

Post by anigbrowl » Wed, Oct 25, 2023, 3:12 AM UTC

kridsdale3 wrote: post #319

Anthony-G wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for posting the official position of the UK state. I was curious how many far right, non-Islamic organisations are listed as proscribed organisations so I counted them: * Atomwaffen Division (AWD) * Feuerkrieg Division (FKD) * Sonnenkrieg Division (SKD) * National Action * The Base Out of all these, I’d only heard of National Action . It’s not clear (to me) that all the proscribed groups are actually active in…

Isn't "The Base" == Al Qaeda?

No, although the name was likely picked to cause exactly such confusion. 'Al Qaeda' is commonly translated as 'the base' but there's no connection between the two. AQ was a pretty elaborate and complex organization in its heyday though it seems mostly moribund now. The Base existed mostly virtually and was more focused on promoting stochastic terrorism by disseminating incitement and instructional materials, but without any real infrastructure/finance.