Quizzes & Puzzles35 mins ago
Collective Resposibility
As some will know, I've been advocating this on here for a long time, finally the penny seems to have dropped. It makes sense, wouldn't you agree?
http:// www.ind ependen t.co.uk /news/u k/home- news/te rrorist s-famil ies-fri ends-sh ould-be -jailed -failin g-alert -author ities-p olice-m ax-hill -isis-l egal-a7 924941. html
http://
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Khandro. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.From the article
'Mr Hill, who has prosecuted in cases trialling members of the IRA, al-Qaedaand Isis, highlighted section 38B of the Terrorism Act 2000.
It makes it a criminal offence for anyone who believes someone might be planning an act of terrorism to “not disclose the information as soon as reasonably practicable”.'
'He cautioned that powers to prosecute terrorists’ loved ones should be used “judiciously”, because “it because can be very difficult to prove [what they knew] and the danger is you look like a vindictive state”.'
The legislation is already available but it's difficult to prove.
'Mr Hill, who has prosecuted in cases trialling members of the IRA, al-Qaedaand Isis, highlighted section 38B of the Terrorism Act 2000.
It makes it a criminal offence for anyone who believes someone might be planning an act of terrorism to “not disclose the information as soon as reasonably practicable”.'
'He cautioned that powers to prosecute terrorists’ loved ones should be used “judiciously”, because “it because can be very difficult to prove [what they knew] and the danger is you look like a vindictive state”.'
The legislation is already available but it's difficult to prove.
"the Government’s most senior adviser on terror laws has said."
So just one person's questionable opinion then. Good luck finding proof the others in a family knew of the terrorist's plans. I think there are already laws about harbouring lawbreakers, so if the evidence was sufficient there ought not be any need for changes.
So just one person's questionable opinion then. Good luck finding proof the others in a family knew of the terrorist's plans. I think there are already laws about harbouring lawbreakers, so if the evidence was sufficient there ought not be any need for changes.
You really believe those willing to die in order to kill and maim others are gong to be that concerned about a gaol sentence for the family left behind ? I have my doubts; surely they are under the delusion that they are doing something more important than than to be stopped by threats to the family.
// It couldn't Jo, which is why this daft idea will never come to fruition.//
oh some will try
and the usual suspects on AB will clap and cry out
' no c,utting off one hand is not enough!"
collective responsibility was pioneered by ( Hi Khi!) the Germans in the last century so perhaps we should ask Khi how it was done
( camps concentration camps and gas chambers hem hem I really knew the answer)
and by the French in the ALgerian War
Pontecorvo;s film the Battle of Algiers 1966
( special adviser Gen Massu who also appears - and claims he won the battle of Algiers)
the film ends with blowing up the house ( see also chap 1 of The Silver Sword) in which Lulu le Mecque is hiding
hur hur hur good collective responsility there then
The one blown up ( lulu le mecque ) really Sidi abu cleft-beard survives and becomes the algerian minister for something in the film
but hell it IS a film
(tashi Mashi abu saoud or someone)
oh some will try
and the usual suspects on AB will clap and cry out
' no c,utting off one hand is not enough!"
collective responsibility was pioneered by ( Hi Khi!) the Germans in the last century so perhaps we should ask Khi how it was done
( camps concentration camps and gas chambers hem hem I really knew the answer)
and by the French in the ALgerian War
Pontecorvo;s film the Battle of Algiers 1966
( special adviser Gen Massu who also appears - and claims he won the battle of Algiers)
the film ends with blowing up the house ( see also chap 1 of The Silver Sword) in which Lulu le Mecque is hiding
hur hur hur good collective responsility there then
The one blown up ( lulu le mecque ) really Sidi abu cleft-beard survives and becomes the algerian minister for something in the film
but hell it IS a film
(tashi Mashi abu saoud or someone)
The sis who emailed her brozzer
"dont worry I have deleted all your embarassing emails about bombs n fings"
hadnt ( you need to erase them)
and did time forit under current law
it is rare for British law to impose a duty to act
"inform the authorities about terrorist activity"
beng made to
so insofar (! eek!) as the law is concerned it is already covered
"dont worry I have deleted all your embarassing emails about bombs n fings"
hadnt ( you need to erase them)
and did time forit under current law
it is rare for British law to impose a duty to act
"inform the authorities about terrorist activity"
beng made to
so insofar (! eek!) as the law is concerned it is already covered
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.