SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:
A man has appeared in court in London on six counts of terrorism -- one of which was related to researching and using encryption.
Samata Ullah, 33, appeared in court last week charged under the Terrorism Act 2006.
The Metropolitan Police said in a press release that Ullah was charged with one count of providing instructions in the use of encryption to a person who was preparing an act of terrorism.
But a second charge relating to his use of encryption cites a controversial statute under British law, which in the name of a terrorism offense can criminalize acts that on their own are legal.
Specifically, Ullah was charged with a count of preparing to engage in an act of terrorism namely by "researching an encryption program, developing an encrypted version of his blog site and publishing the instructions around the use of program on his blog site."
(Score: 5, Insightful) by archfeld on Thursday October 13 2016, @04:00AM
One would really hope that this is just the tip of the iceberg and there is more to this story than we see currently. At the bottom of this slippery slope is a boy scout going to jail for helping a Muslim lady crossing the street, and a public school science teacher giving instructions to someone on an anonymous terror watch list.
For the NSA : Explosives, guns, assassination, conspiracy, primers, detonators, initiators, main charge, nuclear charge
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 13 2016, @04:27AM
There was plenty to the story, and it seems the guy was probably arrested legitimately for being involved. The problem is that instead of just simple conspiracy to commit terrorism charges they have criminalized a non-criminal act. THAT is a problem, because now they can criminalize everything by connecting it to terrorism in whatever tenuous fashion they please. Give a friend a ride not knowing he's meeting up with some buddies to plan some bad shit? Ooooh, now you're in jail for transporting terrorists.
Yeah, this will end well for some poor bastards. I was going to say "I'll just go be a hermit now" but that will tag me for possible McVeigh (?) profiling; or whoever the guy was that lived in the middle of nowhere and blew some shit up.
Hello black boot my old friend,
You've come to stomp my face again
Because an agent softly creeping
Planting evidence while I was sleeping
And the agent who then crept close
Whispered quiet
Do another ... nine eleven
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 13 2016, @12:33PM
Those laws are there to fight terrorists, so arguing against those laws means hindering the fight against terrorist, thus helping terrorists, which obviously is a crime.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Thursday October 13 2016, @02:20PM
I was going to say "I'll just go be a hermit now" but that will tag me for possible McVeigh (?) profiling; or whoever the guy was that lived in the middle of nowhere and blew some shit up.
You're thinking of Ted Kaczynski, A.K.A. The Unabomber.
etc.
An unjust law is no law at all. [wikipedia.org]
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 2, Interesting) by tftp on Thursday October 13 2016, @05:46AM
and a public school science teacher giving instructions to someone on a SECRET terror watch list.
FTFY.
(Score: 3, Touché) by Max Hyre on Friday October 14 2016, @10:38PM