23 ms·

I face investigation for terrorism

479 points by jstanley 3y ago

Synaesthesia 3y ago
Facing charges which are unnamed, mysterious interrogations. This is very Kafakesque and disturbing.
diggan 3y ago
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 detailed reports of each day's proceedings on his website. Seems absolutely bananas that law enforcement can cite anti-terrorism laws in order to confiscate and detain an individual with absolutely zero ties to anything violent. What terrorism are they stopping here?
- 8organicbits 3y ago
  > I volunteered that I thought I understood the tweet that worried them and agreed it could have been more nuanced. This was the limitation of twitter. It was intended to refer only to the current situation within Gaza and the Palestinian people’s right of self-defence from genocide. The only clue I see is the reference to a tweet. Anyone know which tweet this could refer to? Sounds like advocating violence, with a poorly stated context of self-defense.
  - diggan 3y ago
    Seems he has tweeted a lot about Israel/Palestine as of late, hard to know exactly which one is being referred to. https://twitter.com/CraigMurrayOrg https://twitter.com/CraigMurrayOrg But I couldn't find any tweet that openly calls for violence either way. Mostly seems to be reactions and criticism about Israel's ongoing killing of civilians in Gaza, which would hardly count as terrorism (edit: well, at least shouldn't).
    - mathieuh 3y ago
      UK Home Secretary Suella Braverman is on the very-far-right-authoritarian side of the government, and she's been very vocal in her support for Israel. It wouldn't surprise me at all to learn that detentions like these are at her direct instruction. Perhaps not at a "lift this guy" level, but certainly at the level of directing the authorities to step up their harassment of people.
  - TheDong 3y ago
    It is likely the following tweet: https://twitter.com/CraigMurrayOrg/status/1713335006121140511 https://twitter.com/CraigMurrayOrg/status/171333500612114051... > 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.
    - dgfitz 3y ago
      What I don’t understand, how is it considered resistance? I was under the impression they were the aggressor, no? Why would the aggressor be in a position of resistance? Would this be akin to claiming Russia is in “armed resistance” after throwing the first punch? Aren’t those two things at odds with each other? Edit: typo
      - Kudos 3y ago
        Are you unfamiliar with the oppression Palestinians experience? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_and_apartheid https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_and_apartheid
        xdennis 3y ago
        18% of Israelis are Muslim. How many Jews are allowed in Gaza?
        Kudos 3y ago
        Are you trying to suggest that it's the Jews who are oppressed?
        xdennis 3y ago
        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.
- semanticist 3y ago
  In the UK there's the concept of a 'proscribed organisation', that is an organisation which is illegal and the promotion of that organisation is illegal. Hamas is on the proscribed organisation list. Here's the relevant legislation: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/11/section/12 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/11/section/12 And the list of proscribed organisations and a more accessible explanation of the law: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/proscribed-terror-groups-or-organisations--2/proscribed-terrorist-groups-or-organisations-accessible-version https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/proscribed-terror... I think most people in the UK think of this law as being about the Troubles and banning the IRA, etc, but it looks like the list is mostly Islamic extremist groups now. This law is very clearly being selectively enforced, as lots of people have "express[ed] an opinion or belief that is supportive of" Hamas in recent days, but the police aren't knocking at their doors. (Yet.)
  - Arch-TK 3y ago
    >This law is very clearly being selectively enforced, as lots of people have "express[ed] an opinion or belief that is supportive of" Hamas in recent days, but the police aren't knocking at their doors. (Yet.) Every law in the UK is selectively enforced. Except maybe laws regarding speeding if they have evidence. The laws in this country are so vague that I am certain that every adult has broken some of them. If the Police don't like you, they just pick something vaguely relevant which you have probably broken and hassle you for it.
    - ignoramous 3y ago
      > The laws in this country are so vague that I am certain that every adult has broken some of them. Sounds like India learnt a thing or two from the British, here.
      - toyg 3y ago
        It's just always been the case, everywhere. The history of Law is effectively about the powerless (or rather the less-powerful) slowly carving out all circumstances in which they cannot be thrown in prison on a whim.
- marcus_holmes 3y ago
  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's what they were always intended to do. The whole "terrorist" thing was a way of getting popular support for them, just like the popular fears of child abuse have been used to pass yet more police state surveillance laws.
  - dash2 3y ago
    I'm from the UK, and my instant reaction is that this is an evidence-free conspiracy-theory. If you have anything to back it up, other than vibes, feel free to say so.
    - matthewdgreen 3y ago
      Well, it's also possible they read his Tweet and looked at his background and said "this dangerous person really is going to conduct violent acts in this country, we have no choice but to thwart him by seizing all his electronic devices using the most powerful law in the land, even if it de-legitimizes our use of this law for more serious matters." But since that hypothesis is so obviously cartoonish, it's hard to blame folks who look for more rational explanations like "the government is harassing a political opponent" (whether they're right or wrong.)
      - xdennis 3y ago
        > it's hard to blame folks who look for more rational explanations like "the government is harassing a political opponent" (whether they're right or wrong.) No, it's not, because he's clearly being investigated for supporting Hamas' actions (which classified as a terrorist organization by the UK).
        matthewdgreen 3y ago
- gadders 3y ago
  Take this however you will - I'm pretty far from Craig Murray politically but he seems sincere in his beliefs and doesn't seem to care who he upsets. And in terms of who he has upset, he has lots of recent run-ins with the SNP in Scotland. He is currently appealing a sentence he got for "jigsaw-identifying" the woman/women that accused Alex Salmond (previous head of SNP) of rape/sexual assault, on the basis that he believed that Alex Salmond was falsely accused on the basis of some SNP in-fighting. Outside of what Craig is alleging, SNP the party seems to see themselves as synonymous with the Scottish government and several senior legal positions seem to be in their gift with constitutional implications.
- smsm42 3y ago
  He cites "support for Palestine" in his first paragraph. It's not "zero ties to anything violent" if you didn't sleep through the last month. I mean, he probably isn't a member of Hamas or anything like that, but he very well may have donated to Hamas-affiliated NGO, either knowingly or unknowingly. It'd be not a huge link but also not zero link. He also publicly endorsed Hamas and Hezbolah in his tweets and dared the security services to arrest him. Also not zero. Well, now he got his wish as if seems.
- Zisko 3y ago
  He explicitly and unambiguously expressed his support for Hamas and Hezbollah here: https://twitter.com/CraigMurrayOrg/status/1713335006121140511 https://twitter.com/CraigMurrayOrg/status/171333500612114051...
kypro 3y ago
> 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 terrifying about the terrorism act. I cannot understand how this is legal. The right to silence and privacy should be a human right.
- fullarr 3y ago
  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
  - jasonjayr 3y ago
    Is the "detained without a lawyer" thing actually true in the UK? It was my understanding in the US, that's a pretty concrete feature, and law enforcement can't actually compel you to do anything without a trip through the courts.
    - gerikson 3y ago
      My understanding is that Schedule 7 applies at points of entry to the UK, where you have limited rights even as a citizen. Edit more info from the Scottish police (the institution in question): https://www.scotland.police.uk/about-us/how-we-do-it/schedule-7-of-the-terrorism-act-2000-data/ https://www.scotland.police.uk/about-us/how-we-do-it/schedul...
    - lucozade 3y ago
      Under Section 7 of the Terrorism Act you can be detained for up to an hour without access to legal advice. That's very likely why they were so diligent in keeping it to an hour.
dangerface 3y ago
Every one in the uk is a Terrorist according to the Terrorism Act. We really do live in a police state here. This isn't anything new ither this has been going on for nearly 20 years now since they first implemented it with the promise they wouldn't use it to harrass protestors it was the first thing they did. The voting public have no interest in freedom.
- bboygravity 3y ago
  The voting public also doesn't have any way of doing anything against this in any meaningful or efficient way. Last I checked UK wasn't a direct democracy.
  - sideshowb 3y ago
    TBF it's not supposed to be a direct democracy. You can start a campaign. They can bring about change, in the long run. If a think tank was campaigning for something you didn't like, I bet you'd be first to complain about it...
    - Joker_vD 3y ago
      Of course, for all of that you need money, and quite a lot of money, and where are you going to get it in such large amounts? Eh, I dunno, I am not a politician myself and lobbying and corporate donations probably have nothing to do with that.
      - sideshowb 3y ago
        From others who support your campaign. Yeah, it does suck that money == power. IMO representative democracy isn't a problem, but corporate lobbying is.
  - flatpakhuman 3y ago
    [dead]
  - jwestbury 3y ago
Podgajski 3y ago
[flagged]
fakedang 3y ago
[flagged]
gambiting 3y ago
I'd love to donate money to him and help but I live in the UK and don't want to be accused of supporting terrorism or some other nonsense. It's an idiotic situation to be in as a society.
- swader999 3y ago
  And keep voting the same way year after year.
  - bilvar 3y ago
    This is not a problem of who is in power. All parties have an extremely authoritarian bend in this country.
    - gambiting 3y ago
      I agree - I feel like voting for other parties will change the economic and social outcomes for this country, but overall the British society as a whole seems pretty content with a "strong" rule of the law where the authority is to be respected and anyone going against norms should be at minimum arrested. The recent changes that basically made protesting unlawful in this country are the best example - even though it would be chilling in many other places of the world, in UK the public seems to be either welcoming to these changes or is at least indifferent to them. Maybe we can blame the relentless campaigning by right wing media for making sure that the average British person thinks that few people sitting on the road and blocking traffic are #1 public enemy, but I don't know.....I feel like Britain always valued "order" above all else, so it's only natural that anyone braking said order has to be punished. Voting differently won't change that.
- anonymouszx 3y ago
  He has a bitcoin and ethereum address. Unfortunately no monero, but you can swap in and out of monero without KYC or login using one of the services listed on kycnot.me. Alternatively, there are zero-knowledge mixers on ethereum such as tornado cash (still legal in the UK to the best of my knowledge).
refaelv 3y ago
Well, if you support Hamas after they butchered civilians, yes you'r supporting terrorism.
- logicchains 3y ago
  >Well, if you support Hamas after they butchered civilians Numerically speaking the IDF have killed a lot more civilians than Hamas. As have the US for that matter, literally hundreds of thousands of civilians killed in Iraq.
  - hef19898 3y ago
    And pointing out the dire straights of Palestinians is different from supporting Hamas. The same way critizing Israel as a nation not the same thing as being anti-semitic. The whole Western media and political landscape somewhat fails to appreciate that small, but incredibly important difference lately. Heck, I am even getting Youtube propagan... I mean ads from the Israeli ministry of defence. But as the saying goes "One death is a tragedy, thousands are a statistic".
    - Belopolye 3y ago
      In this situation he tweeted something about supporting any of the actions that Hamas makes. > But in the coming Gaza genocide, every act of armed resistance by Hamas and Hezbollah will have my support.
      - hef19898 3y ago
        Any action obviously goes to far. The situation is already bad enough as it is, a ground assault cpuld easily turn very, very ugly. And blow up thie whole powder cake that is the middle east. I just hope cooler heads prevail, but given the rather fragile political landscape in Israel, well we will see.
        bdsa 3y ago
Condition1952 3y ago
>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
- spydum 3y ago
  the only software I recall doing this was TrueCrypt?
  - jeroenhd 3y ago
    You can get sort of a hidden volume by messing with the alignment of a LUKS partition as well. However, it may not be very smart to do this. Law enforcement aren't dumb, they'll see the signs of your hidden partition, and you can end up in prison for up to two years for your little stunt. Unless you're hiding something much more incriminating, cooperation is probably your best bet.
    - dmantis 3y ago
      I think the most self-respectful and secure way is to have some encrypted cloud in a jurisdiction which doesn't cooperate with the country you afraid of. Wiping all data from the device and restoring it back after border control. Hidden partition are definitely more dangerous. Also if these people took your device out of your view point, you need to sell the device and buy a new one before restoring anything.
      - dudefeliciano 3y ago
        but this still requires trusting a third party to not change their policies, or to not be hacked or coerced into releasing the data and a myriad other options that a state-backed actor has at their disposal
  - Condition1952 3y ago
    GrapheneOS has profiles, maybe that's the key. Google refuses to sell me a Pixel, though and I got tired
bilekas 3y ago
> 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. This is the one that bothers me the most to be honest, how is this possible ? Couldn't one just claim they don't remember constantly, as it seems there is no 'probable cause' or even any traditional 'evidence'.
- gambiting 3y ago
  Like many other things in world - it's not a binary yes or no. It's about what the judge or jury will believe. If you say you don't remember your password but they pull up logs and show that you have just used that password 3 hours earlier, then jury will almost certainly find you guilty, even if yes, there is absolutely no way to prove what the objective "truth" is.
- mardifoufs 3y ago
  Even for the UK that's a bit insane.
- Cthulhu_ 3y ago
  You could, but they can then choose to detain you further, do a full court case, and if they uncover evidence (or evidence that you did not, in fact, forget), you're screwed anyway.
- Tao3300 3y ago
  They'll find ways to make you remember.
swader999 3y ago
If you travel a lot it makes sense to have a basic virgin phone and laptop hooked up to minimal accounts.
- Cthulhu_ 3y ago
  Especially if you're "politically active" in whatever form that may take. And don't travel to Europe, the US or Israel if you've openly supported a terrorist organization.
Throw83940 3y ago
[flagged]
Laforet 3y ago
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 never happened before. I would not be surprised at all if my name is on a list somewhere, despite me being very much inactive on social media and does not subscribe to any remotely radical ideology. Perhaps as a unmarried millennial male I just had that Unabomber vibe and must be stopped before I turn. I do sympathize with Mr Murray , however there is really no need to act like it was a brand new development when similar stuff has been going on for pretty much my entire adult life and his recent career.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- lilsoso 3y ago
  While scanning your comment history looking for unusual interests, I found an intriguing comment that's unrelated to this topic: "Cash is already heavily monitored and most petty criminals have already moved on to Amazon gift cards." Can you describe what you mean when you say cash is heavily monitored?
  - Laforet 3y ago
    Before computerization of the finance industry, banks used to keep stashes of "ransom money" with all serial numbers already recorded so they could be tracked to some extent. This is no longer necessary as modern money handling equipment makes it trivial to keep a detailed log of every single bill they receive or give out. And what if you forgo banks entirely? Well, governments have also been legislating to slowly stigmatize cash use. Google "civil forfeiture" and you will find countless examples of the police taking people's money away without due process, as if carrying large amounts of cash itself is a crime.
- csomar 3y ago
  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.
jongjong 3y ago
The most logical way I an explain such events and the general decline of our societies is that a some people in power are criminals and in their paranoia are silencing all moral individuals who may pose a threat to them. To find out who the criminals are in our system, we just need to identify those who are giving the commands. Unfortunately, a lot of people in high positions up the chain are likely compromised individuals (higher ups have dirt on them) so they will not reveal their source. It seems like society is held up by a hierarchy of blackmail. We need to obtain info on compromised individuals and use them to spill the beans on their superiors via plea bargains. What governments did to Julian Assange and what they're doing to Craig Murray is criminal. Those who are responsible should be prosecuted and the victims should be compensated.
Arch-TK 3y ago
>This is an enormous abuse of human rights. The abuse of process in refusing both a lawyer and the right to remain silent, the inquiry into perfectly legal campaigning which is in no way terrorism-associated, the political questioning, the financial snooping and the seizure of material related to my private life, were all based on an utterly fake claim that I am associated with terrorism. It's not explicitly stated anywhere, but when you enter the UK you give up your human rights. Easy mistake to make assuming you had those here.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- aembleton 3y ago
  The UK is still a member of the ECHR, so there are human rights.
  - boffinAudio 3y ago
    It is a wholesale violator of human rights at massive scale and therefore the precedent for protection of rights under that state is simply non-existent. Magna Carta, Habeus Corpus - irrelevant given the massive, immense scale of the UK's wholesale abrogation of billions of human beings' rights.
kossTKR 3y ago
As 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 palestinians" like everyone forgot the enormous plights they have gone through, the hundreds of thousands dead over decades, the property stolen by settlers and that they were mostly moderate farmers before they were annexed and carpet bombed (There's countless of videos of this). It's like living in a Black Mirror episode. The worlds largest military carpet bombing a tiny strip of land and a downtrodden people, and i have never seen politicians this bloodthirsty. At the same time i see very, very few public figures, colleagues included having the courage to call out the atrocities done by Israel continuously, for fear of "something" while there's never ending stories from the opposite side. Can anyone tell me what that something is - and if this is some extreme geopolitical importance of Israel to the west that the idea of the western "free society" has finally come to some screeching halt? How can there be such an enormous difference between "the man on the street" and the media landscape? My grandparents fled war, and the way the west talking and behaving is so incredibly shameful to me, but i don't recognise this war hunger when i turn off the TV.
- howmayiannoyyou 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - logicchains 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - howmayiannoyyou 3y ago
      Wrong. https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/israel-shows-raw-footage-hamas-162925865.html https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/israel-shows-raw-footage...
octopoc 3y ago
Israel is an ethnostate[1], resolutions of Congress notwithstanding[2]. Imagine if Biden said "The US is a Nation-State Of The White People And Them Alone" the way a leading Israeli spoke about Israel[3]. But instead all major western governments are busy sucking up to Israel (this article is just one example) and declaring that Israel will always be our best ally. [1] https://www.npr.org/2018/07/19/630368973/israel-passes-controversial-law-reserving-national-self-determination-for-jews https://www.npr.org/2018/07/19/630368973/israel-passes-contr... [2] https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/house-vote-resolution-israel-racist-apartheid-state/story?id=101410569 https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/house-vote-resolution-israel... [3] https://www.npr.org/2019/03/11/702264118/netanyahu-says-israel-is-nation-state-of-the-jewish-people-and-them-alone https://www.npr.org/2019/03/11/702264118/netanyahu-says-isra...
- ImaCake 3y ago
  Lots of states are ethnostates to varying degrees. Japan and South Korea are arguably much more restrictive about who is considered a member than Israel. But there are many more; Finland, Iran, and Hungary come to mind. The New World has few ethnostates, but in Eurasia they are more the norm than the exception.
  - Condition1952 3y ago
    and none of those were funded by Britain in 1948 on foreign soil
  - octopoc 3y ago
    True, but I think that's more due to the age of the state than the geographic location. Israel is very young and was founded on land that already had a lot of people living there. Now they're mostly gone and Israel is declaring that it exists solely for the non-native inhabitants. Let's translate that into American terms so it's more understandable. What if the entire history of US settlement and expansion, from 1600s to present, was compressed to 70 years, then our government declared that it existed solely for white people regardless of Democracy and laid siege to all remaining Indian reservations? Yet the same major news organizations and politicians that supposedly stand against racism cannot find any backbone to stand up for their principles when it comes to Israel. We were supposed to be better than this.
daVe23hu 3y ago
anytime gov'ts are "legally" given special powers under the purpose of eliminating some evil and aspects of said implementation are allowed to be secret, this power WILL be abused. Look at FISA courts for an example (Patriot Act) in the US. No secrets, FIOA requests should allow all to be viewed unredacted etc....
ddmf 3y ago
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 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/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/266038/List_of_Proscribed_organisations.pdf https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/...
- burnerokoknook 3y ago
  [flagged]
- bhouston 3y ago
  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 morally wrong and also going to get you on watch lists, and probably rightly so. To make the situation better you should have compassion and also strive towards compromise and not just pick your side and root for them to dominate the other - it doesn’t have to be zero sum.
  - golemiprague 3y ago
    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 country owned it before 1967. The settlements themselves don't displace any Arabs from their home, they were built either on Jewish land (Jews lived in Judea and Samaria until 1948) or on a land which didn't have a specific ownership. Usually if an Arab can show that they have ownership for a parcel of land they will get it in court. In any case, Gaza is not occupied and except from the hostages there are no Jews in Gaza. They could live peacefully side by side near Israel without any "siege" if only they accepted that Israel should have a right to exist.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
dash2 3y ago
[flagged]
- logicchains 3y ago
  >Israel tries not to kill civilians And yet they've killed way more civilians then Hamas has. But that doesn't matter, because it's okay when our side does it?
- jules-jules 3y ago
  Curious if you have historical understanding of who created and propped up Hamas? Some relevant links and quotes from officials: https://www.vox.com/23910085/netanyahu-israel-right-hamas-gaza-war-history https://www.vox.com/23910085/netanyahu-israel-right-hamas-ga... https://theintercept.com/2018/02/19/hamas-israel-palestine-conflict/ https://theintercept.com/2018/02/19/hamas-israel-palestine-c... https://www.timesofisrael.com/for-years-netanyahu-propped-up-hamas-now-its-blown-up-in-our-faces/ https://www.timesofisrael.com/for-years-netanyahu-propped-up... Here’s Avner Cohen, Israel's former Religious Affairs Official: “Hamas, to my great regret, is Israel’s creation” Here’s US Physician and Congressman Ron Paul: "Hamas was encouraged and started by Israel, because they wanted Hamas to counteract Yasser Arafat" Here’s Charles Freeman, former US ambassador to Saudi Arabia: "Israel started Hamas. It was a project of Shin Bet [Israeli Intelligence Agency], which had a feeling that they could use it to hem in the PLO." Here’s Robert Dreyfuss in his book, Devil's Game: "And beginning in 1967 through the late 1980s, Israel helped the Muslim Brotherhood establish itself in the occupied territories. It assisted Ahmed Yassin, the leader of the Brotherhood, in creating Hamas, betting that its Islamist character would weaken the PLO." Plus, Suheib Yousef, son of Hamas co-founder, secretly worked as an Israeli spy under Shin Bet. All of the above have reputable sources, let me know if I should link anything.
IYasha 3y ago
While I'm overall feeling very sorry for the author, I can't help but note the color of the article text which I'm really struggling to see. My vision is not the best, and my display is just terrible, but I don't think it's so bad for just me. So if, after this terrible problem is hopefully resolved, I would humbly suggest fixing this issue.
- aembleton 3y ago
  Just click on reader mode in Firefox. Makes it much easier.
  - IYasha 3y ago
    Unfortunately, I don't have such option.
- jujube3 3y ago
  Truly, the font colors on his website are the real injustice here.
qingcharles 3y ago
I was once investigated for terrorism by Special Branch in the UK in about 1996. They came to my parent's house at a weekend to question me. I'd just happened to have gone home for the weekend to see my folks. I was running perhaps the largest warez site on the Internet at the time, so I thought I was super busted. The detective sat me down and said to me, "What do you know about a plot to kill the President?" and I burst out laughing, mostly out of relief. He stares daggers at me and says "You're not taking me very seriously, are you Mr Charles?" Luckily he did not detain me. We came to the conclusion that one of the hundreds of people I'd given an account to on one of my Linux servers had sent a death threat to president@whitehouse.gov. Apparently it contained information about the president's movements that was "not well known." I never saw the email, but the detective called me on the day they were going out to pick Kushil up. I'd given him an account a few months previously so he could play MUDs and download porn. Seemed like a really nice guy. The detective read the end of the email to me over the phone, "Come get my ass you bastards," it said, and then had his address and map co-ordinates to his house. Nobody ever saw Kushil again after that.
- ClassyJacket 3y ago
  Sounds like he was obviously framed.
  - remram 3y ago
    You mean GP was framed?
- jl2718 3y ago
  Back then you could send an email “from” any address without verification, and I’d bet they weren’t sophisticated enough to detect that. There were many open and/or hacked SMTP gateways. I went to a federal military school and showed people how to do this on our own .mil servers. This would be deadly serious today, but email was 95% jokes and flame wars anyway, so it just made things more hilarious. Even Stanford CS’s SMTP in the 2010s allowed unauthenticated “from” addresses, and someone was using it to impersonate the Google founder emails for promoting and funding their startup.
kamranjon 3y ago
While I think this could be an overstep, I think the author is quite obviously withholding some important context here. Why would they not show the tweet referenced here? “I volunteered that I thought I understood the tweet that worried them and agreed it could have been more nuanced. This was the limitation of twitter. It was intended to refer only to the current situation within Gaza and the Palestinian people’s right of self-defence from genocide.”
- smsm42 3y ago
  The guy also seems to be industrial-grade nutcase: > Murray questioned the official UK government account of the Skripal poisoning in Salisbury, March 2018, writing on his blog that Israeli security services were more likely to be behind the poisoning than Russia and that, while Russia lacked a motive, "Israel has a clear motivation for damaging the Russian reputation". He also served 8 months in jail for disclosing the identities of women testifying in sexual harassment and rape case, which the court explicitly prohibited to disclose. All-around nice person, as it seems.
Kim_Bruning 3y ago
I get the impression that the way the law was being interpreted was that there is a window of one hour in which: a) in which one does not have the right to remain silent AND b) one doesn't have the right to a lawyer. I could imagine a potential world in which one or the other might briefly apply, but both together would be a complete license for abuse of course. So that can't be entirely right. Reading the actual text of the law [1] I can't quite see how that would be the intended interpretation. I hope someone with more knowledge of British Law can clarify. [1] https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/11/schedule/7 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/11/schedule/7 (edited for clarity)
- grecy 3y ago
  > there is a window of one hour in which: It could be interesting to simply waste time for that hour, while still being co-operative. Answer extraordinarily slowly, be as verbose as possible, go on as many tangents as possible and go into as much detail on your first answer as you possibly can imagine, so the first answer takes the entire hour. You're still being co operative and answering questions, they just run out of time before you get a lawyer or they cut you loose.
jjgreen 3y ago
Boys and girls: if traveling to or from the UK, don't take a phone. If you really must, make it a burner phone.
credit_guy 3y ago
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 laws are not absurd. What is the extend of this exception? Can the information they get from you be used in a court of law to incriminate you?
- foobarian 3y ago
  That's probably very US centric given how much TV comes from there. Does the UK even have a constitution or does the buck stop with the monarch?
  - extraduder_ire 3y ago
    The "UK constitution" is a wide set of documents, both laws (some really old) and legal precedent that determine how the country's supposed to operate. The main concept is "parliamentary supremacy", which means that the parliament (house of commons/lords) can pass any law except one that would bind their action in future. Basically, they can pass whatever law they want, and pass a law repealing it later. The expectation is that they wouldn't do anything too heinous because reasons. The idea that the monarch can forcibly disband parliament doesn't really exist anymore. (although, some laws occasionally do get blocked by that apparatus) I learned way too much about this while their high court was deciding on the constitutionality of the process of leaving the EU. I wonder how much of it is baby-duck syndrome, but I love living in a republic.
- boffinAudio 3y ago
  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.
  - credit_guy 3y ago
tamimio 3y ago
> I had to give up any passwords to my devices. It was a criminal offence not to do this. Veracrypt hidden partition, plausible deniability, use it. > They asked how considered my tweets were That’s exactly the reason why, he definitely made a tweet that put him in some arbitrary list that feeds into an official “anti-terrorism” list, believe it or not, there’s a whole business and scheme on adding people on these lists and cancel them just because they tweet something, and sometimes, even taking an out-of-context and make an article about it somewhere, and use that as a “reference” to cancel you and put you in many hidden lists. Besides what some are mentioning here about privacy act and what not, I would go in a different approach, these lists should be searchable online just like any public records, and you have the right to challenge it in court if someone put your name in there and sue for it, but keeping it secret meaning there’s a hidden entity actively blackmailing individuals for their thoughts, the “CI/CD” for these lists goes like this: article about you (fake or real won’t matter) => some unknown list maintained by shady organization => feeding into an official country anti-terrorism list => feeding into a regional one like EU or similar, leading to travel ban, banks ban, etc. and none of them will question the source of such list.
fdschoeneman 3y ago
If you believe it was an abuse of human rights, you should have refused to comply.
Horffupolde 3y ago
[flagged]
voz_ 3y ago
Ahhh the find out part of fuck around and find out. Sounds like their unequivocal support for a terrorist organization didn't go so well.
croes 3y ago
>I had to give up any passwords to my devices. It was a criminal offence not to do this. You can forget passwords but you can't forget passkeys.
abdellah123 3y ago
This is just crazy. So this can happen basically to ANYONE for any/no reason !!
southernplaces7 3y ago
The modern government of the UK has, as far as I can tell, become a raging pseudo-fascist nanny state of grotesque proportions. It combines the worst aspects of old fashioned authoritarianism with smothering feel-good nannyism to repress individual freedoms in all sorts of creative ways that serve every side of the bureaucratic spectrum while persistently moving the ratchet forward on fundamental state power. That a country which for centuries was considered a bastion of fundamental individual freedoms should pass hideous deformities of the rule of law like the Terrorism Act (among the other things they've been doing) is sad.
herbst 3y ago
I hope some of you realize that this is not normal, and not common in all the western world as some of you suggest. There are several countries where the right of any individual is valued much higher than whatever that terror bullshit is. Any EU citizen has more personality rights. This is really disturbing and would this be my government I would try to change whatever I can or flee.
biolurker1 3y ago
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?
- IAmGraydon 3y ago
  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.
darksoulpants 3y ago
What 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.
sixhobbits 3y ago
I hope that stories like this make people realise the rights that they have given up and start campaigning and voting to get them back again. Terrorism laws are so obviously hugely disproportionate to what they allegedly protect against at this point. Governments should balance two kinds of freedom. "freedom to (do as we please)" and "freedom from (others harming us)". If these terrorism laws were really about protecting "freedom from" then they would also have a blanket ban on cars, guns, knives, alcohol and tobacco, all of which cause orders of magnitude more harm. Of course bans like that have been historically attempted and populations very clearly told Governments attempting to enforce them in which direction to fuck off to. But these kind of abuses are a lot easier for people to ignore when they always happen to "someone else" but "probably will never happen to me".
dadjoker 3y ago
Welcome to life in the UK, where they obviously have been taking Orwell as a user manual, not a warning.
nikolay 3y ago
Shame on these mean and undemocratic means to silence inconvenient voices! I think authorities are dumb - they are actually doing quite the opposite!
magwa101 3y ago
[dead]

479 points by jstanley 3y ago

Facing charges which are unnamed, mysterious interrogations. This is very Kafakesque and disturbing.

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 detailed reports of each day's proceedings on his website. Seems absolutely bananas that law enforcement can cite anti-terrorism laws in order to confiscate and detain an individual with absolutely zero ties to anything violent. What terrorism are they stopping here?

8organicbits 3y ago
> I volunteered that I thought I understood the tweet that worried them and agreed it could have been more nuanced. This was the limitation of twitter. It was intended to refer only to the current situation within Gaza and the Palestinian people’s right of self-defence from genocide. The only clue I see is the reference to a tweet. Anyone know which tweet this could refer to? Sounds like advocating violence, with a poorly stated context of self-defense.
- diggan 3y ago
  Seems he has tweeted a lot about Israel/Palestine as of late, hard to know exactly which one is being referred to. https://twitter.com/CraigMurrayOrg https://twitter.com/CraigMurrayOrg But I couldn't find any tweet that openly calls for violence either way. Mostly seems to be reactions and criticism about Israel's ongoing killing of civilians in Gaza, which would hardly count as terrorism (edit: well, at least shouldn't).
  - mathieuh 3y ago
    UK Home Secretary Suella Braverman is on the very-far-right-authoritarian side of the government, and she's been very vocal in her support for Israel. It wouldn't surprise me at all to learn that detentions like these are at her direct instruction. Perhaps not at a "lift this guy" level, but certainly at the level of directing the authorities to step up their harassment of people.
- TheDong 3y ago
  It is likely the following tweet: https://twitter.com/CraigMurrayOrg/status/1713335006121140511 https://twitter.com/CraigMurrayOrg/status/171333500612114051... > 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.
  - dgfitz 3y ago
    What I don’t understand, how is it considered resistance? I was under the impression they were the aggressor, no? Why would the aggressor be in a position of resistance? Would this be akin to claiming Russia is in “armed resistance” after throwing the first punch? Aren’t those two things at odds with each other? Edit: typo
    - Kudos 3y ago
      Are you unfamiliar with the oppression Palestinians experience? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_and_apartheid https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_and_apartheid
      - xdennis 3y ago
        18% of Israelis are Muslim. How many Jews are allowed in Gaza?
        Kudos 3y ago
        Are you trying to suggest that it's the Jews who are oppressed?
        xdennis 3y ago
        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.
semanticist 3y ago
In the UK there's the concept of a 'proscribed organisation', that is an organisation which is illegal and the promotion of that organisation is illegal. Hamas is on the proscribed organisation list. Here's the relevant legislation: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/11/section/12 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/11/section/12 And the list of proscribed organisations and a more accessible explanation of the law: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/proscribed-terror-groups-or-organisations--2/proscribed-terrorist-groups-or-organisations-accessible-version https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/proscribed-terror... I think most people in the UK think of this law as being about the Troubles and banning the IRA, etc, but it looks like the list is mostly Islamic extremist groups now. This law is very clearly being selectively enforced, as lots of people have "express[ed] an opinion or belief that is supportive of" Hamas in recent days, but the police aren't knocking at their doors. (Yet.)
- Arch-TK 3y ago
  >This law is very clearly being selectively enforced, as lots of people have "express[ed] an opinion or belief that is supportive of" Hamas in recent days, but the police aren't knocking at their doors. (Yet.) Every law in the UK is selectively enforced. Except maybe laws regarding speeding if they have evidence. The laws in this country are so vague that I am certain that every adult has broken some of them. If the Police don't like you, they just pick something vaguely relevant which you have probably broken and hassle you for it.
  - ignoramous 3y ago
    > The laws in this country are so vague that I am certain that every adult has broken some of them. Sounds like India learnt a thing or two from the British, here.
    - toyg 3y ago
      It's just always been the case, everywhere. The history of Law is effectively about the powerless (or rather the less-powerful) slowly carving out all circumstances in which they cannot be thrown in prison on a whim.
marcus_holmes 3y ago
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's what they were always intended to do. The whole "terrorist" thing was a way of getting popular support for them, just like the popular fears of child abuse have been used to pass yet more police state surveillance laws.
- dash2 3y ago
  I'm from the UK, and my instant reaction is that this is an evidence-free conspiracy-theory. If you have anything to back it up, other than vibes, feel free to say so.
  - matthewdgreen 3y ago
    Well, it's also possible they read his Tweet and looked at his background and said "this dangerous person really is going to conduct violent acts in this country, we have no choice but to thwart him by seizing all his electronic devices using the most powerful law in the land, even if it de-legitimizes our use of this law for more serious matters." But since that hypothesis is so obviously cartoonish, it's hard to blame folks who look for more rational explanations like "the government is harassing a political opponent" (whether they're right or wrong.)
    - xdennis 3y ago
      > it's hard to blame folks who look for more rational explanations like "the government is harassing a political opponent" (whether they're right or wrong.) No, it's not, because he's clearly being investigated for supporting Hamas' actions (which classified as a terrorist organization by the UK).
      - matthewdgreen 3y ago
gadders 3y ago
Take this however you will - I'm pretty far from Craig Murray politically but he seems sincere in his beliefs and doesn't seem to care who he upsets. And in terms of who he has upset, he has lots of recent run-ins with the SNP in Scotland. He is currently appealing a sentence he got for "jigsaw-identifying" the woman/women that accused Alex Salmond (previous head of SNP) of rape/sexual assault, on the basis that he believed that Alex Salmond was falsely accused on the basis of some SNP in-fighting. Outside of what Craig is alleging, SNP the party seems to see themselves as synonymous with the Scottish government and several senior legal positions seem to be in their gift with constitutional implications.
smsm42 3y ago
He cites "support for Palestine" in his first paragraph. It's not "zero ties to anything violent" if you didn't sleep through the last month. I mean, he probably isn't a member of Hamas or anything like that, but he very well may have donated to Hamas-affiliated NGO, either knowingly or unknowingly. It'd be not a huge link but also not zero link. He also publicly endorsed Hamas and Hezbolah in his tweets and dared the security services to arrest him. Also not zero. Well, now he got his wish as if seems.
Zisko 3y ago
He explicitly and unambiguously expressed his support for Hamas and Hezbollah here: https://twitter.com/CraigMurrayOrg/status/1713335006121140511 https://twitter.com/CraigMurrayOrg/status/171333500612114051...

kypro 3y ago

> 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 terrifying about the terrorism act. I cannot understand how this is legal. The right to silence and privacy should be a human right.

fullarr 3y ago
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
- jasonjayr 3y ago
  Is the "detained without a lawyer" thing actually true in the UK? It was my understanding in the US, that's a pretty concrete feature, and law enforcement can't actually compel you to do anything without a trip through the courts.
  - gerikson 3y ago
    My understanding is that Schedule 7 applies at points of entry to the UK, where you have limited rights even as a citizen. Edit more info from the Scottish police (the institution in question): https://www.scotland.police.uk/about-us/how-we-do-it/schedule-7-of-the-terrorism-act-2000-data/ https://www.scotland.police.uk/about-us/how-we-do-it/schedul...
  - lucozade 3y ago
    Under Section 7 of the Terrorism Act you can be detained for up to an hour without access to legal advice. That's very likely why they were so diligent in keeping it to an hour.

dangerface 3y ago

Every one in the uk is a Terrorist according to the Terrorism Act. We really do live in a police state here. This isn't anything new ither this has been going on for nearly 20 years now since they first implemented it with the promise they wouldn't use it to harrass protestors it was the first thing they did. The voting public have no interest in freedom.

bboygravity 3y ago
The voting public also doesn't have any way of doing anything against this in any meaningful or efficient way. Last I checked UK wasn't a direct democracy.
- sideshowb 3y ago
  TBF it's not supposed to be a direct democracy. You can start a campaign. They can bring about change, in the long run. If a think tank was campaigning for something you didn't like, I bet you'd be first to complain about it...
  - Joker_vD 3y ago
    Of course, for all of that you need money, and quite a lot of money, and where are you going to get it in such large amounts? Eh, I dunno, I am not a politician myself and lobbying and corporate donations probably have nothing to do with that.
    - sideshowb 3y ago
      From others who support your campaign. Yeah, it does suck that money == power. IMO representative democracy isn't a problem, but corporate lobbying is.
- flatpakhuman 3y ago
  [dead]
- jwestbury 3y ago

Podgajski 3y ago

[flagged]

fakedang 3y ago

[flagged]

gambiting 3y ago

I'd love to donate money to him and help but I live in the UK and don't want to be accused of supporting terrorism or some other nonsense. It's an idiotic situation to be in as a society.

swader999 3y ago
And keep voting the same way year after year.
- bilvar 3y ago
  This is not a problem of who is in power. All parties have an extremely authoritarian bend in this country.
  - gambiting 3y ago
    I agree - I feel like voting for other parties will change the economic and social outcomes for this country, but overall the British society as a whole seems pretty content with a "strong" rule of the law where the authority is to be respected and anyone going against norms should be at minimum arrested. The recent changes that basically made protesting unlawful in this country are the best example - even though it would be chilling in many other places of the world, in UK the public seems to be either welcoming to these changes or is at least indifferent to them. Maybe we can blame the relentless campaigning by right wing media for making sure that the average British person thinks that few people sitting on the road and blocking traffic are #1 public enemy, but I don't know.....I feel like Britain always valued "order" above all else, so it's only natural that anyone braking said order has to be punished. Voting differently won't change that.
anonymouszx 3y ago
He has a bitcoin and ethereum address. Unfortunately no monero, but you can swap in and out of monero without KYC or login using one of the services listed on kycnot.me. Alternatively, there are zero-knowledge mixers on ethereum such as tornado cash (still legal in the UK to the best of my knowledge).

refaelv 3y ago

Well, if you support Hamas after they butchered civilians, yes you'r supporting terrorism.

logicchains 3y ago
>Well, if you support Hamas after they butchered civilians Numerically speaking the IDF have killed a lot more civilians than Hamas. As have the US for that matter, literally hundreds of thousands of civilians killed in Iraq.
- hef19898 3y ago
  And pointing out the dire straights of Palestinians is different from supporting Hamas. The same way critizing Israel as a nation not the same thing as being anti-semitic. The whole Western media and political landscape somewhat fails to appreciate that small, but incredibly important difference lately. Heck, I am even getting Youtube propagan... I mean ads from the Israeli ministry of defence. But as the saying goes "One death is a tragedy, thousands are a statistic".
  - Belopolye 3y ago
    In this situation he tweeted something about supporting any of the actions that Hamas makes. > But in the coming Gaza genocide, every act of armed resistance by Hamas and Hezbollah will have my support.
    - hef19898 3y ago
      Any action obviously goes to far. The situation is already bad enough as it is, a ground assault cpuld easily turn very, very ugly. And blow up thie whole powder cake that is the middle east. I just hope cooler heads prevail, but given the rather fragile political landscape in Israel, well we will see.
      - bdsa 3y ago

Condition1952 3y ago

>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

spydum 3y ago
the only software I recall doing this was TrueCrypt?
- jeroenhd 3y ago
  You can get sort of a hidden volume by messing with the alignment of a LUKS partition as well. However, it may not be very smart to do this. Law enforcement aren't dumb, they'll see the signs of your hidden partition, and you can end up in prison for up to two years for your little stunt. Unless you're hiding something much more incriminating, cooperation is probably your best bet.
  - dmantis 3y ago
    I think the most self-respectful and secure way is to have some encrypted cloud in a jurisdiction which doesn't cooperate with the country you afraid of. Wiping all data from the device and restoring it back after border control. Hidden partition are definitely more dangerous. Also if these people took your device out of your view point, you need to sell the device and buy a new one before restoring anything.
    - dudefeliciano 3y ago
      but this still requires trusting a third party to not change their policies, or to not be hacked or coerced into releasing the data and a myriad other options that a state-backed actor has at their disposal
- Condition1952 3y ago
  GrapheneOS has profiles, maybe that's the key. Google refuses to sell me a Pixel, though and I got tired

bilekas 3y ago

> 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. This is the one that bothers me the most to be honest, how is this possible ? Couldn't one just claim they don't remember constantly, as it seems there is no 'probable cause' or even any traditional 'evidence'.

gambiting 3y ago
Like many other things in world - it's not a binary yes or no. It's about what the judge or jury will believe. If you say you don't remember your password but they pull up logs and show that you have just used that password 3 hours earlier, then jury will almost certainly find you guilty, even if yes, there is absolutely no way to prove what the objective "truth" is.
mardifoufs 3y ago
Even for the UK that's a bit insane.
Cthulhu_ 3y ago
You could, but they can then choose to detain you further, do a full court case, and if they uncover evidence (or evidence that you did not, in fact, forget), you're screwed anyway.
Tao3300 3y ago
They'll find ways to make you remember.

swader999 3y ago

If you travel a lot it makes sense to have a basic virgin phone and laptop hooked up to minimal accounts.

Cthulhu_ 3y ago
Especially if you're "politically active" in whatever form that may take. And don't travel to Europe, the US or Israel if you've openly supported a terrorist organization.

Throw83940 3y ago

[flagged]

Laforet 3y ago

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 never happened before. I would not be surprised at all if my name is on a list somewhere, despite me being very much inactive on social media and does not subscribe to any remotely radical ideology. Perhaps as a unmarried millennial male I just had that Unabomber vibe and must be stopped before I turn. I do sympathize with Mr Murray , however there is really no need to act like it was a brand new development when similar stuff has been going on for pretty much my entire adult life and his recent career.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
lilsoso 3y ago
While scanning your comment history looking for unusual interests, I found an intriguing comment that's unrelated to this topic: "Cash is already heavily monitored and most petty criminals have already moved on to Amazon gift cards." Can you describe what you mean when you say cash is heavily monitored?
- Laforet 3y ago
  Before computerization of the finance industry, banks used to keep stashes of "ransom money" with all serial numbers already recorded so they could be tracked to some extent. This is no longer necessary as modern money handling equipment makes it trivial to keep a detailed log of every single bill they receive or give out. And what if you forgo banks entirely? Well, governments have also been legislating to slowly stigmatize cash use. Google "civil forfeiture" and you will find countless examples of the police taking people's money away without due process, as if carrying large amounts of cash itself is a crime.
csomar 3y ago
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.

jongjong 3y ago

The most logical way I an explain such events and the general decline of our societies is that a some people in power are criminals and in their paranoia are silencing all moral individuals who may pose a threat to them. To find out who the criminals are in our system, we just need to identify those who are giving the commands. Unfortunately, a lot of people in high positions up the chain are likely compromised individuals (higher ups have dirt on them) so they will not reveal their source. It seems like society is held up by a hierarchy of blackmail. We need to obtain info on compromised individuals and use them to spill the beans on their superiors via plea bargains. What governments did to Julian Assange and what they're doing to Craig Murray is criminal. Those who are responsible should be prosecuted and the victims should be compensated.

Arch-TK 3y ago

>This is an enormous abuse of human rights. The abuse of process in refusing both a lawyer and the right to remain silent, the inquiry into perfectly legal campaigning which is in no way terrorism-associated, the political questioning, the financial snooping and the seizure of material related to my private life, were all based on an utterly fake claim that I am associated with terrorism. It's not explicitly stated anywhere, but when you enter the UK you give up your human rights. Easy mistake to make assuming you had those here.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
aembleton 3y ago
The UK is still a member of the ECHR, so there are human rights.
- boffinAudio 3y ago
  It is a wholesale violator of human rights at massive scale and therefore the precedent for protection of rights under that state is simply non-existent. Magna Carta, Habeus Corpus - irrelevant given the massive, immense scale of the UK's wholesale abrogation of billions of human beings' rights.

kossTKR 3y ago

As 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 palestinians" like everyone forgot the enormous plights they have gone through, the hundreds of thousands dead over decades, the property stolen by settlers and that they were mostly moderate farmers before they were annexed and carpet bombed (There's countless of videos of this). It's like living in a Black Mirror episode. The worlds largest military carpet bombing a tiny strip of land and a downtrodden people, and i have never seen politicians this bloodthirsty. At the same time i see very, very few public figures, colleagues included having the courage to call out the atrocities done by Israel continuously, for fear of "something" while there's never ending stories from the opposite side. Can anyone tell me what that something is - and if this is some extreme geopolitical importance of Israel to the west that the idea of the western "free society" has finally come to some screeching halt? How can there be such an enormous difference between "the man on the street" and the media landscape? My grandparents fled war, and the way the west talking and behaving is so incredibly shameful to me, but i don't recognise this war hunger when i turn off the TV.

howmayiannoyyou 3y ago
[flagged]
- logicchains 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - howmayiannoyyou 3y ago
    Wrong. https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/israel-shows-raw-footage-hamas-162925865.html https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/israel-shows-raw-footage...

octopoc 3y ago

Israel is an ethnostate[1], resolutions of Congress notwithstanding[2]. Imagine if Biden said "The US is a Nation-State Of The White People And Them Alone" the way a leading Israeli spoke about Israel[3]. But instead all major western governments are busy sucking up to Israel (this article is just one example) and declaring that Israel will always be our best ally. [1] https://www.npr.org/2018/07/19/630368973/israel-passes-controversial-law-reserving-national-self-determination-for-jews https://www.npr.org/2018/07/19/630368973/israel-passes-contr... [2] https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/house-vote-resolution-israel-racist-apartheid-state/story?id=101410569 https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/house-vote-resolution-israel... [3] https://www.npr.org/2019/03/11/702264118/netanyahu-says-israel-is-nation-state-of-the-jewish-people-and-them-alone https://www.npr.org/2019/03/11/702264118/netanyahu-says-isra...

ImaCake 3y ago
Lots of states are ethnostates to varying degrees. Japan and South Korea are arguably much more restrictive about who is considered a member than Israel. But there are many more; Finland, Iran, and Hungary come to mind. The New World has few ethnostates, but in Eurasia they are more the norm than the exception.
- Condition1952 3y ago
  and none of those were funded by Britain in 1948 on foreign soil
- octopoc 3y ago
  True, but I think that's more due to the age of the state than the geographic location. Israel is very young and was founded on land that already had a lot of people living there. Now they're mostly gone and Israel is declaring that it exists solely for the non-native inhabitants. Let's translate that into American terms so it's more understandable. What if the entire history of US settlement and expansion, from 1600s to present, was compressed to 70 years, then our government declared that it existed solely for white people regardless of Democracy and laid siege to all remaining Indian reservations? Yet the same major news organizations and politicians that supposedly stand against racism cannot find any backbone to stand up for their principles when it comes to Israel. We were supposed to be better than this.

daVe23hu 3y ago

anytime gov'ts are "legally" given special powers under the purpose of eliminating some evil and aspects of said implementation are allowed to be secret, this power WILL be abused. Look at FISA courts for an example (Patriot Act) in the US. No secrets, FIOA requests should allow all to be viewed unredacted etc....

ddmf 3y ago

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 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/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/266038/List_of_Proscribed_organisations.pdf https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/...

burnerokoknook 3y ago
[flagged]
bhouston 3y ago
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 morally wrong and also going to get you on watch lists, and probably rightly so. To make the situation better you should have compassion and also strive towards compromise and not just pick your side and root for them to dominate the other - it doesn’t have to be zero sum.
- golemiprague 3y ago
  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 country owned it before 1967. The settlements themselves don't displace any Arabs from their home, they were built either on Jewish land (Jews lived in Judea and Samaria until 1948) or on a land which didn't have a specific ownership. Usually if an Arab can show that they have ownership for a parcel of land they will get it in court. In any case, Gaza is not occupied and except from the hostages there are no Jews in Gaza. They could live peacefully side by side near Israel without any "siege" if only they accepted that Israel should have a right to exist.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

dash2 3y ago

[flagged]

logicchains 3y ago
>Israel tries not to kill civilians And yet they've killed way more civilians then Hamas has. But that doesn't matter, because it's okay when our side does it?
jules-jules 3y ago
Curious if you have historical understanding of who created and propped up Hamas? Some relevant links and quotes from officials: https://www.vox.com/23910085/netanyahu-israel-right-hamas-gaza-war-history https://www.vox.com/23910085/netanyahu-israel-right-hamas-ga... https://theintercept.com/2018/02/19/hamas-israel-palestine-conflict/ https://theintercept.com/2018/02/19/hamas-israel-palestine-c... https://www.timesofisrael.com/for-years-netanyahu-propped-up-hamas-now-its-blown-up-in-our-faces/ https://www.timesofisrael.com/for-years-netanyahu-propped-up... Here’s Avner Cohen, Israel's former Religious Affairs Official: “Hamas, to my great regret, is Israel’s creation” Here’s US Physician and Congressman Ron Paul: "Hamas was encouraged and started by Israel, because they wanted Hamas to counteract Yasser Arafat" Here’s Charles Freeman, former US ambassador to Saudi Arabia: "Israel started Hamas. It was a project of Shin Bet [Israeli Intelligence Agency], which had a feeling that they could use it to hem in the PLO." Here’s Robert Dreyfuss in his book, Devil's Game: "And beginning in 1967 through the late 1980s, Israel helped the Muslim Brotherhood establish itself in the occupied territories. It assisted Ahmed Yassin, the leader of the Brotherhood, in creating Hamas, betting that its Islamist character would weaken the PLO." Plus, Suheib Yousef, son of Hamas co-founder, secretly worked as an Israeli spy under Shin Bet. All of the above have reputable sources, let me know if I should link anything.

IYasha 3y ago

While I'm overall feeling very sorry for the author, I can't help but note the color of the article text which I'm really struggling to see. My vision is not the best, and my display is just terrible, but I don't think it's so bad for just me. So if, after this terrible problem is hopefully resolved, I would humbly suggest fixing this issue.

aembleton 3y ago
Just click on reader mode in Firefox. Makes it much easier.
- IYasha 3y ago
  Unfortunately, I don't have such option.
jujube3 3y ago
Truly, the font colors on his website are the real injustice here.

qingcharles 3y ago

I was once investigated for terrorism by Special Branch in the UK in about 1996. They came to my parent's house at a weekend to question me. I'd just happened to have gone home for the weekend to see my folks. I was running perhaps the largest warez site on the Internet at the time, so I thought I was super busted. The detective sat me down and said to me, "What do you know about a plot to kill the President?" and I burst out laughing, mostly out of relief. He stares daggers at me and says "You're not taking me very seriously, are you Mr Charles?" Luckily he did not detain me. We came to the conclusion that one of the hundreds of people I'd given an account to on one of my Linux servers had sent a death threat to president@whitehouse.gov. Apparently it contained information about the president's movements that was "not well known." I never saw the email, but the detective called me on the day they were going out to pick Kushil up. I'd given him an account a few months previously so he could play MUDs and download porn. Seemed like a really nice guy. The detective read the end of the email to me over the phone, "Come get my ass you bastards," it said, and then had his address and map co-ordinates to his house. Nobody ever saw Kushil again after that.

ClassyJacket 3y ago
Sounds like he was obviously framed.
- remram 3y ago
  You mean GP was framed?
jl2718 3y ago
Back then you could send an email “from” any address without verification, and I’d bet they weren’t sophisticated enough to detect that. There were many open and/or hacked SMTP gateways. I went to a federal military school and showed people how to do this on our own .mil servers. This would be deadly serious today, but email was 95% jokes and flame wars anyway, so it just made things more hilarious. Even Stanford CS’s SMTP in the 2010s allowed unauthenticated “from” addresses, and someone was using it to impersonate the Google founder emails for promoting and funding their startup.

kamranjon 3y ago

While I think this could be an overstep, I think the author is quite obviously withholding some important context here. Why would they not show the tweet referenced here? “I volunteered that I thought I understood the tweet that worried them and agreed it could have been more nuanced. This was the limitation of twitter. It was intended to refer only to the current situation within Gaza and the Palestinian people’s right of self-defence from genocide.”

smsm42 3y ago
The guy also seems to be industrial-grade nutcase: > Murray questioned the official UK government account of the Skripal poisoning in Salisbury, March 2018, writing on his blog that Israeli security services were more likely to be behind the poisoning than Russia and that, while Russia lacked a motive, "Israel has a clear motivation for damaging the Russian reputation". He also served 8 months in jail for disclosing the identities of women testifying in sexual harassment and rape case, which the court explicitly prohibited to disclose. All-around nice person, as it seems.

Kim_Bruning 3y ago

I get the impression that the way the law was being interpreted was that there is a window of one hour in which: a) in which one does not have the right to remain silent AND b) one doesn't have the right to a lawyer. I could imagine a potential world in which one or the other might briefly apply, but both together would be a complete license for abuse of course. So that can't be entirely right. Reading the actual text of the law [1] I can't quite see how that would be the intended interpretation. I hope someone with more knowledge of British Law can clarify. [1] https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/11/schedule/7 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/11/schedule/7 (edited for clarity)

grecy 3y ago
> there is a window of one hour in which: It could be interesting to simply waste time for that hour, while still being co-operative. Answer extraordinarily slowly, be as verbose as possible, go on as many tangents as possible and go into as much detail on your first answer as you possibly can imagine, so the first answer takes the entire hour. You're still being co operative and answering questions, they just run out of time before you get a lawyer or they cut you loose.

jjgreen 3y ago

Boys and girls: if traveling to or from the UK, don't take a phone. If you really must, make it a burner phone.

credit_guy 3y ago

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 laws are not absurd. What is the extend of this exception? Can the information they get from you be used in a court of law to incriminate you?

foobarian 3y ago
That's probably very US centric given how much TV comes from there. Does the UK even have a constitution or does the buck stop with the monarch?
- extraduder_ire 3y ago
  The "UK constitution" is a wide set of documents, both laws (some really old) and legal precedent that determine how the country's supposed to operate. The main concept is "parliamentary supremacy", which means that the parliament (house of commons/lords) can pass any law except one that would bind their action in future. Basically, they can pass whatever law they want, and pass a law repealing it later. The expectation is that they wouldn't do anything too heinous because reasons. The idea that the monarch can forcibly disband parliament doesn't really exist anymore. (although, some laws occasionally do get blocked by that apparatus) I learned way too much about this while their high court was deciding on the constitutionality of the process of leaving the EU. I wonder how much of it is baby-duck syndrome, but I love living in a republic.
boffinAudio 3y ago
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.
- credit_guy 3y ago

tamimio 3y ago

> I had to give up any passwords to my devices. It was a criminal offence not to do this. Veracrypt hidden partition, plausible deniability, use it. > They asked how considered my tweets were That’s exactly the reason why, he definitely made a tweet that put him in some arbitrary list that feeds into an official “anti-terrorism” list, believe it or not, there’s a whole business and scheme on adding people on these lists and cancel them just because they tweet something, and sometimes, even taking an out-of-context and make an article about it somewhere, and use that as a “reference” to cancel you and put you in many hidden lists. Besides what some are mentioning here about privacy act and what not, I would go in a different approach, these lists should be searchable online just like any public records, and you have the right to challenge it in court if someone put your name in there and sue for it, but keeping it secret meaning there’s a hidden entity actively blackmailing individuals for their thoughts, the “CI/CD” for these lists goes like this: article about you (fake or real won’t matter) => some unknown list maintained by shady organization => feeding into an official country anti-terrorism list => feeding into a regional one like EU or similar, leading to travel ban, banks ban, etc. and none of them will question the source of such list.

fdschoeneman 3y ago

If you believe it was an abuse of human rights, you should have refused to comply.

Horffupolde 3y ago

[flagged]

voz_ 3y ago

Ahhh the find out part of fuck around and find out. Sounds like their unequivocal support for a terrorist organization didn't go so well.

croes 3y ago

>I had to give up any passwords to my devices. It was a criminal offence not to do this. You can forget passwords but you can't forget passkeys.

abdellah123 3y ago

This is just crazy. So this can happen basically to ANYONE for any/no reason !!

southernplaces7 3y ago

The modern government of the UK has, as far as I can tell, become a raging pseudo-fascist nanny state of grotesque proportions. It combines the worst aspects of old fashioned authoritarianism with smothering feel-good nannyism to repress individual freedoms in all sorts of creative ways that serve every side of the bureaucratic spectrum while persistently moving the ratchet forward on fundamental state power. That a country which for centuries was considered a bastion of fundamental individual freedoms should pass hideous deformities of the rule of law like the Terrorism Act (among the other things they've been doing) is sad.

herbst 3y ago

I hope some of you realize that this is not normal, and not common in all the western world as some of you suggest. There are several countries where the right of any individual is valued much higher than whatever that terror bullshit is. Any EU citizen has more personality rights. This is really disturbing and would this be my government I would try to change whatever I can or flee.

biolurker1 3y ago

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?

IAmGraydon 3y ago
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.

darksoulpants 3y ago

What 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.

sixhobbits 3y ago

I hope that stories like this make people realise the rights that they have given up and start campaigning and voting to get them back again. Terrorism laws are so obviously hugely disproportionate to what they allegedly protect against at this point. Governments should balance two kinds of freedom. "freedom to (do as we please)" and "freedom from (others harming us)". If these terrorism laws were really about protecting "freedom from" then they would also have a blanket ban on cars, guns, knives, alcohol and tobacco, all of which cause orders of magnitude more harm. Of course bans like that have been historically attempted and populations very clearly told Governments attempting to enforce them in which direction to fuck off to. But these kind of abuses are a lot easier for people to ignore when they always happen to "someone else" but "probably will never happen to me".

dadjoker 3y ago

Welcome to life in the UK, where they obviously have been taking Orwell as a user manual, not a warning.

nikolay 3y ago

Shame on these mean and undemocratic means to silence inconvenient voices! I think authorities are dumb - they are actually doing quite the opposite!

magwa101 3y ago

[dead]