Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

UK Woman Charged As Terrorist For Computer Files 470

Terror Alert Brown writes "Reuters is reporting that a UK woman has been charged as a terrorist because of computer files on her hard drive. According to the article, these files included 'the Al Qaeda Manual, The Terrorists Handbook, The Mujahideen Poisons Handbook, a manual for a Dragunov sniper rifle, and The Firearms and RPG Handbook.' She was picked up in connection with the plot stopped in August to detonate explosives in airplanes flying out of Heathrow airport. Now might be a good time to delete any copies of the Anarchist's Cookbook you once read for amusement and still have floating around on your hard drive."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

UK Woman Charged As Terrorist For Computer Files

Comments Filter:
  • by A beautiful mind ( 821714 ) on Friday November 10, 2006 @07:36PM (#16800312)
    ...that the EU rules on flight were strictened for basically no logical reason, but based on the horsecrap Blair is feeding to the UK and the world.

    Basically the overwhelming majority of experts on the field confirmed that liquid explosives and things like dirty bombs are not feasible or existant.
  • by bunions ( 970377 ) on Friday November 10, 2006 @07:41PM (#16800358)

    Police on Thursday charged a woman on terrorism-related offences for possession of a computer hard drive loaded with operating manuals for guns, poisons, mines and munitions.


    Sounds like she was arrested for possession to me. I'm sure the police have reasons to suspect her as a terrist as well, but unless I read TFA wrong, she was arrested for possession of forbidden documents.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 10, 2006 @07:59PM (#16800566)
    Better review your "experts", then. Liquid explosives are both "feasible" and "existant". (Try "extant", BTW.)

    In fact, some explosives are preferred in some applications precisely because they're liquid. That's one of the main virtues of an ANFO slurry, for example. You just pump it into the holes you drilled in the rock and set it off. (The other big virtue is that it's cheap.) Since it's a liquid, it automatically fills all the gaps, and it's a lot easier just to pour it in than to try to pack down some sort of set of solid cartridges or plastic.

    Nitroglycerin is another classic liquid explosive. In this case, it's a bit too sensitive, hence the invention of dynamite to stablize the pure liquid form. Nitromethane, on the other hand, is a liquid that generally needs to be mixed with a "sensitizer" to make it easier to detonate.

    There's a mixture called Astrolite discovered back in the 60's that's a clear liquid, twice as powerful as TNT. Ammonium nitrate plus anhydrous hydrazine, just basic chemicals.

    Binary explosives, often with one solid and one liquid component, are also commercially popular. The big advantage here is that you can transport the two components separately without special handling, since they're not an explosive until you mix them at the blasting site.

    Sometimes it's most convenient for an explosive to come in the form of a gel, rather than a liquid, powder, plastic, or solid. All of these forms exist commercially today. None of them are fantastic imaginary sci-fi conceptions generated by a conspiracy to fake terror technology, as you imply.

  • Re:RPG handbook (Score:3, Informative)

    by PayPaI ( 733999 ) on Friday November 10, 2006 @08:05PM (#16800604) Journal
    I of course misinterpreted the acronym, but they sure do look like RPG manual titles, don't they? "Dungeons and Dragunovs". Did they read them? They'd feel rather silly I bet if they said "At level five, you can learn Mujahideen Sneaky Poison Attack that does 2d6 damage if you roll..."
    Wouldn't be the first time [wikipedia.org]
  • List explained. (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 10, 2006 @08:51PM (#16801022)
    Quick google on the list goes:

    al-Qaeda Manual = http://www.disastercenter.com/terror/ [disastercenter.com]
    The Terrorists Handbook = http://www.capricorn.org/~akira/home/terror.html [capricorn.org]
    The Mujahideen Poisons Handbook = http://www.thedisease.net/arcana/nbc/chemical/Muja hideen_Poisons.pdf [thedisease.net]
    Dragunov sniper rifle = http://kalashnikov.guns.ru/manual/english/svd/ [kalashnikov.guns.ru]

    and....

    RPG = http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocket_propelled_gren ade [wikipedia.org]

    I didn't find the handbook though.

    The poisons one is quite interesting. Has a poison to make from horse excrement...
  • by LurkerXXX ( 667952 ) on Friday November 10, 2006 @09:12PM (#16801214)
    Better be careful, carrying lock picks in certain jurisdictions is a crime. Including Washington D.C.
  • Re:RPG Handbook? (Score:3, Informative)

    by a_n_d_e_r_s ( 136412 ) on Friday November 10, 2006 @09:12PM (#16801222) Homepage Journal
    Say that to Steve Jacksson Games who produced games and got raided for it:

    "The 1993 case of Steve Jackson Games, Inc. v. United States Secret Service sprung from a raid by the U.S. Secret Service on the Austin headquarters of Steve Jackson Games in 1990. This raid is often attributed to Operation Sundevil, a nation-wide crackdown on 'illegal computer hacking activities', although SJ Games and the EFF claim otherwise."

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Jackson_Games_v s._The_Secret_Service [wikipedia.org]

  • Just a thought (Score:4, Informative)

    by tkrotchko ( 124118 ) on Friday November 10, 2006 @09:18PM (#16801272) Homepage
    "so you're a cop, and this guy is bringing a night vision scope into the country"

    You realize they sell those things at Costco, right?
  • by NightHwk1 ( 172799 ) <jon.emptyflask@net> on Friday November 10, 2006 @09:33PM (#16801444) Homepage

    I'm sure a handful of other people are posting it as I'm writing this, but here's a link to the Mujahideen Poisons handbook [thedisease.net].

    Also, the Al-Qaeda Manual [disastercenter.com] (interestingly, this was distributed by the FBI)

    The Dragunov sniper rifle manual [kalashnikov.guns.ru]

    No luck searching for the RPG & Firearms handbook.

  • by udderly ( 890305 ) * on Friday November 10, 2006 @09:50PM (#16801594)
    Please try to read John Stuart Mill's treatise, On Liberty. Mill discusses a danger to democracy he refers to as "the tyranny of the majority." This is one of the strongest arguments for a Republic that has intrinsic rights at its core.
  • by IcyHando'Death ( 239387 ) on Friday November 10, 2006 @09:52PM (#16801604)
    Some reading material for you all:

    The Al Qaeda Manual: http://www.disastercenter.com/terror/ [disastercenter.com]
    The Terrorist's Handbook: http://www.totse.com/en/bad_ideas/irresponsible_ac tivities/168593.html [totse.com]
    The Mujahideen Poisons Handbook: http://www.thedisease.net/arcana/nbc/chemical/Muja hideen_Poisons.pdf [thedisease.net]
    The Dragunov Sniper Rifle Technical Description and Service Manual: http://kalashnikov.guns.ru/manual/english/svd/ [kalashnikov.guns.ru]

    Now don't go reading this stuff and getting yourself arrested.
  • Trolling? (Score:3, Informative)

    by Z34107 ( 925136 ) on Friday November 10, 2006 @11:00PM (#16802046)

    Are you trolling? I laughed so hard at your comment, but then it hit me that you might not have been.

    A "Republican" form of government has nothing to do with the "Republican" party. A "Republic" is a country with the body politic restrained by laws.

    A "Democracy" is a synonym for "mob rule."

    A "Democratic Republic" (the United States, Great Britain, et al.) is a system of government where the will of the people is restrained by laws. See the dinner analogy above involving two wolves and a sheep.

    A "democracy" is not a "framework of laws" - it simply means majority rule. Forget Bush bashing.

  • Re:Linky? (Score:4, Informative)

    by RKBA ( 622932 ) on Saturday November 11, 2006 @02:12AM (#16803070)
    who's going to provide a link to where we can all download said handbooks?
    Mujahideen Poisons Handbook [thedisease.net] (PDF)
  • by cold fjord ( 826450 ) on Saturday November 11, 2006 @04:14AM (#16803492)
    My point is that the charge against her is apparently "possession of forbidden documents."

    I think you are probably completely wrong there. I think it is most likely she has run afoul of the law for what you could call "contextual crimes", that is, having something that is innocent unless you are involved in law breaking which could involve that particular item. Some examples:

    A crowbar in your workshop or garage is a crowbar. A crowbar in your hands at 3:00 AM in another town used to help break into a house is considered a burglary tool, and in many jurisdictions will subject you to heavy penalty, possibly years in jail.

    Owning a gun in the United States is legal in most places. Using that gun in a crime makes it a "gun crime" which generally makes the penalty much more severe than if you had been unarmed, or armed with a lesser weapon.

    Having a manual on boobytraps may be perfectly legal. That is, until you get involved with a band of extremists and make plans or preparations to actually emplace boobytraps. Then, possession of that manual becomes an element of criminal planning, and a tool to accomplish what may turn into a serious or even capital crime.

    The list of manuals she had includes at least:

    - The al-Qaeda Manual,
    - The Terrorists Handbook
    - The Mujahideen Poisons Handbook
    - How To Win Hand-To-Hand Fighting
    - The Firearms and RPG Handbook
    - Dragunov sniper rifle manual
    - 9mm pistol manual
    - Anti-tank mine manual

    Her reading list isn't really what you expect from 22 year old girls, it it?

    If she was a soldier in the British Army, or even an ordinary subject of the Crown, I expect she would have been fine. Instead she allegedly got caught up with some sort of terrorist or extremist cell. At that point, those manuals became a tools, means to commit a criminal or even treasonous act, and her possession of them became a criminal act.

    you're getting close to the "don't worry about making everything illegal, the cops will only arrest people they think are criminals" argument.

    That is nonsense. There is nothing of sort implied in his statement. His statement was that the arrest of her fellow, Anjum, lead the police to her. He had some of the same documents as she did. I will also note that there were a number of other suspicious elements which lead to terrorism charges. Besides, police arrest or not, prosecutors charge or not, judges judge.

  • by MathFox ( 686808 ) on Saturday November 11, 2006 @07:58AM (#16804272)
    So I have to blame MI5 that I can not carry a bottle of water on a plane (and carry less than 100ml of toothpaste in a clear plastic resealable bag of no more than 1 liter) because of that "terrorist cell plotting to blow up planes with liquid explosives" that had no tickets, no passports, no back door onto a plane, no explosives, no explosive components and no equipment to manufacture explosives.

    Thank you paranoia.
    Traffic still kills far more people than terrorists.

    I want to make clear that I agree that terrorism should be investigated and terrorists should be arrested, but not until they actually committed their preparatory crimes like obtaining guns, poisons or explosives.

  • by cold fjord ( 826450 ) on Saturday November 11, 2006 @09:03AM (#16804554)
    No, not random computers. Computers of minorities and people whom they don't like.

    Although that is more or less right, it needs to be clarified. What you should say is that they search the computers of the minority of people who are engaged in or supporting terrorism. The police also happen to dislike it when people support or engage in terrorism, like trying to blow up the police or other fine subjects of Her Majesty's realm. Fortunately, the majority of Her Majesty's subjects, including the Muslims, are peace loving people who don't engage in terrorism, and are therefore likable.

  • by Richard_at_work ( 517087 ) on Saturday November 11, 2006 @11:27AM (#16805402)
    No formal charges?

    DONALD STEWART WHYTE, 21, OF HIGH WYCOMBE, BUCKS

    Charge under Section 5 (1) the Terrorism Act 2006 says "between 1 January and 10 August 2006, with the intention of committing acts of terrorism, [he was] preparing to smuggle parts of improvised explosive devices on to aircraft and assemble and detonate them on board".

    Mr Stewart Whyte also faces three firearms charges. The first said "on 9 August he had in his possession a Baikal 8mm pistol, contrary to section 5 (1) of the Firearms Act 1968".

    He is also charged with possessing a magazine clip with 10 rounds of ammunition and a silencer without holding a firearms certificate, contrary to section 1 (1) of the Firearms Act 1968.

    MOHAMMED SADDIQUE, 24, OF WALTHAMSTOW, EAST LONDON

    Charge under Section 5 (1) the Terrorism Act 2006 also says "between 1 January and 10 August 2006, with the intention of committing acts of terrorism, [he was] preparing to smuggle parts of improvised explosive devices on to aircraft and assemble and detonate them on board".

    AHMED ABDULLAH ALI (AKA ABDULLAH ALI AHMED KHAN), 25, OF WALTHAMSTOW, EAST LONDON

    On diverse days between 1 January 2006 and 10 August 2006 within the jurisdiction of the Central Criminal Court conspired with other persons to murder other persons (contrary to Section 1 (1) of the Criminal Law Act 1977).

    On diverse days between 1 January 2006 and 10 August 2006 within the jurisdiction of the Central Criminal Court with the intention of committing acts of terrorism engaged in conduct to give effect to their intention to smuggle the component parts of improvised explosive devices onto aircraft and assemble and detonate them on board (contrary to Section 5 (1) of the Terrorism Act 2006).

    TANVIR HUSSAIN, 25, OF NO FIXED ADDRESS

    On diverse days between 1 January 2006 and 10 August 2006 within the jurisdiction of the Central Criminal Court conspired with other persons to murder other persons (contrary to Section 1 (1) of the Criminal Law Act 1977).

    On diverse days between 1 January 2006 and 10 August 2006 within the jurisdiction of the Central Criminal Court with the intention of committing acts of terrorism engaged in conduct to give effect to their intention to smuggle the component parts of improvised explosive devices onto aircraft and assemble and detonate them on board (contrary to Section 5 (1) of the Terrorism Act 2006).

    UMAR ISLAM (AKA BRIAN YOUNG), 28, OF STRATFORD, EAST LONDON

    On diverse days between 1 January 2006 and 10 August 2006 within the jurisdiction of the Central Criminal Court conspired with other persons to murder other persons (contrary to Section 1 (1) of the Criminal Law Act 1977).

    On diverse days between 1 January 2006 and 10 August 2006 within the jurisdiction of the Central Criminal Court with the intention of committing acts of terrorism engaged in conduct to give effect to their intention to smuggle the component parts of improvised explosive devices onto aircraft and assemble and detonate them on board (contrary to Section 5 (1) of the Terrorism Act 2006).

    ARAFAT WAHEED KHAN, 25, OF WALTHAMSTOW

    On diverse days between 1 January 2006 and 10 August 2006 within the jurisdiction of the Central Criminal Court conspired with other persons to murder other persons (contrary to Section 1 (1) of the Criminal Law Act 1977).

    On diverse days between 1 January 2006 and 10 August 2006 within the jurisdiction of the Central Criminal Court with the intention of committing acts of terrorism engaged in conduct to give effect to their intention to smuggle the component parts of improvised explosive devices onto aircraft and assemble and detonate them on board (contrary to Section 5 (1) of the Terrorism Act 2006).

    ASSAD ALI SARWAR, 26, OF HIGH WYCOMBE

    On diverse days between 1 January 2006 and 10 August 2006 within the jurisdiction of the Central Criminal Court conspired with other persons to murder other persons (contrary to

  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 11, 2006 @06:10PM (#16808356)
    It never happened that way, according to the BBC [bbc.co.uk]. Good story though.

With your bare hands?!?

Working...