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."
She was linked to a group of terrorists... (Score:5, Insightful)
She wasn't arrested and charged BECAUSE of the files.
there is a difference.
It's a strange time (Score:5, Insightful)
Hell, as kids we had copies of the Anarchists cookbook and manuals that the US government printed for crafting insurgencies and survival that had all sorts of directions for creating improvised munitions and such. It makes me wonder if we would have been suspects back then. Of course the early 80's were a different time when a couple of 14-15 year olds could carry a rifle out in the Texas countryside to shoot cans without even a second glance. Now, we have bastardized Republicans (Neocons) who are out to create National IDs, document any passage in and out of the country, search our personal information including credit files and library files, and some even propose to index all of the information on personal computers in an effort to screen out "enemy combatants" not to mention revoking Constitutional rights such as Habeus Corpus. It's a strange time.
I'm as guilty as she is... (Score:4, Insightful)
My HD still has the anarchist cookbook and all sorts of shite in my home directory. Stuff I copied from friends on floppys back when I was a 13yo.
I am honestly getting worried where CCTV Blairs Britan is taking us.
No I've nothing to hide. I've nothing to share either.
RPG handbook (Score:5, Insightful)
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..."
Not to be flippant, but even the summary points out that she was arrested in connection with a bomb plot, and then these documents were found. Presumeably the prosecution's case will rely on drawing that connection, with the manuals as circumstantial evidence. Frankly if that's the best they have the case may fail, but if it's part of a larger collection of evidence (like that which lead to her arrest) then it may not. The justice system has held up fairly well as fair as maintaining standards of burden of proof even in terrorism cases, so barring something like false arrest I'm not feeling any rights violations here.
Re:She was linked to a group of terrorists... (Score:5, Insightful)
Police said the charges against the woman were connected with the arrest last month of a man caught at Heathrow airport in possession of a night vision scope and a poisons handbook.
the wouldnt have looked at her without some evidence she was linked to the man who was arrested prior who had similar documents on a hard drive.
Slashdot needs (Score:5, Insightful)
Delete? Not quite yet... (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't forget the missing intermediate steps of encrypting it, and then making a backup copy on secure, durable media.
Someone who has all these files on their hard drives is either a compulsive packrat or might be up to no good... certainly it might raise a few eyebrows. But it shouldn't be illegal to possess these things, and isn't, yet. If possessing certain types of knowledge becomes illegal in and of itself, that's when we'll need the Anarchist's Cookbook the most.
Re:Other Evidence? (Score:1, Insightful)
Scared now???? Wait for uk video tracking (Score:1, Insightful)
You do know there is a new system comng together, I'd say it's about an estimated 10 years from fruition:
A little box plugs into each CCTV camera and uploads the data to a Home office server using wireless Internet technology.
The people in each frame are identified using facial recognition technology (based on the biometric information in passports and ID cards).
And each person's movements can be tracked and queried. The information will be available to police, home office, probation service, local authorities, courts, etc., without warrants.
The only reason is it's 10 years away, is it will take about that long until everybody's biometric info is collected thru the passport and ID card system.
The only people who won't be in the database are people like MPs whose security may be at risk if their minute to minute location is published. For everybody else, it's if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.
Re:It's a strange time (Score:5, Insightful)
Say that to yourself again, really slow this time. What about writing novels, movie scripts, or what about those individuals in police agencies and federal agencies that think about planning crimes to prevent them. What you are saying is that it is illegal to think about carrying a crime out. There should be nothing illegal about that. However, if you go about carrying those plans out, then it becomes a crime. Or at least that is how it should be.
Say for just the fun of it have some blueprints for making bombs then on the same table have a postcard with the parliment buildings on it.
If you really believe this, then you are part of the problem.
The cops don't just go searching random computers hoping they'll stumble on some terrorist then they can arrest them.
But these are just the sorts of things the US and UK governments have been moving towards. Datamining through any available database available to them to search for incriminating evidence and calculate likelihood indices for incrimination.
Re:I guess it would be a good time to bring it up (Score:5, Insightful)
About dirty bombs: it spreads the radiation! This means the small pieces are not nearly enough to cause even a temporary health problem! -- that's a summary coming from a terrorism expert.
Re:HANG THE FILTHY WHORE (Score:2, Insightful)
In the meantime, if you are seeding any of those BT's maybe its time to del. =P
Looks like it was a good thought, dreadful summary (Score:5, Insightful)
You are completely correct that both liquid and binary explosives exist. Nitroglycerin has been used as an explosive in the past.
However, the restrictions on carryon luggage didn't seem to be solving any actual security problem and don't really seem intended to. (If you're really worried about binary explosives, why make them pour the containers into the same bin, in front of what could be hundreds of people?)
Re:It's a strange time (Score:3, Insightful)
There probably isn't. Recall that from the information so far the investigation is into planned attack on planes with explosives by people with no tickets, no passports, no back door onto a plane, no explosives, no explosive components and no equipment to manufacture explosives. It appears that some faulty intellience supplied by unaccountable spooks triggered arrests when there was no evidence of any crime. Considering that conspiricy to commit terrorist acts has been a crime in the UK for decades not a lot of evidence is needed - so this prolonged fishing expedition makes me wonder if it wasn't all just a collosal stuffup the "suspected terrorists" may be a bunch of harmless people that profile as criminals. Legal systems are designed to sort these things out - doing it without a legal system will probably create huge complications and precidents in the USA in the future - especially since we argue that countries without a rule of law are free game for any action we want to take.
Now as for the Anarchists cookbook: I saw a bit of that some time back and it appeared to be written by kids that had failed high school chemistry - I think it was just a bit of a wank by people that wanted to look tough. There are a lot of things out there with correct instructions that can lead to blowing things up which are not restricted and never should be if we want another generation that isn't conned by magnetic blankets and crystal power.
TrueCrypt (Score:1, Insightful)
Since when is linking a crime? (Score:5, Insightful)
I think the most terrifying aspect of this whole thing is that she was arrested not because of anything she did, but rather because of her association with others the government doesn't like.
This isn't justice; it's not even close. It's more like vigilantism with official sanction.
How long will it be before merely showing an interest in "Terrorist Causes" or "Terrorist Methods" - however defined by the government - is enough to get one arrested? Or has it happened already?
Democracy in Britain is officially dead.
Re:Is worse for those of us that bought the book. (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe this will help:
I can buy lockpicks and lockout tools legally. I can buy manuals to unlock any vehicle, also legally.
If I'm busted for conspiracy to steal (as opposed to lawfully repo) cars, that stuff becomes evidence along with the rest of the evidence supporting the charges.
Re:It's a strange time (Score:4, Insightful)
The key is intent... And it's up to a court to decide that, not police officers.
Re:Since when is linking a crime? (Score:5, Insightful)
If the people say they want a witch hunt then you have to give the people a witch hunt. If you think democracy is some magic wand where everyone does right then you're wrong. It's an excuse for the masses to hunt the minorities while feeling they have the high ground and "doing the right thing".
Re:One Word in Response (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:It's a strange time (Score:2, Insightful)
You must have a short memory. National ID cards were part of the Democratic health care initiative (aka 'Hillarycare') in 1993, and it was Hillary again in 2003 that proposed the introduction of a national ID card to monitor immigration.
It looks like the republicrats have both sides convinced that these ID cards are a conspiracy of the "other guys".
http://www.lp.org/ [lp.org]
Re:Since when is linking a crime? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:She was linked to a group of terrorists... (Score:5, Insightful)
> they wouldnt have looked at her without
you're getting close to the "don't worry about making everything illegal, the cops will only arrest people they think are criminals" argument.
Re:She was linked to a group of terrorists... (Score:4, Insightful)
The relevant section of the Terrorism Act 2000 is here - http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00011--g.htm
It's not a great law as it basically makes being a bit terroristy a crime rather than something concrete such as possession of a weapon - possess a weapon such as plastic explosive and you've committed an offence (assuming you're not special forces or in mining); planning to do a terrorist spectacular would make the offence worse, but even if the law couldn't prove terrorist intent they'd still have you. Here the law has to prove (should this ever come to court) terrorist intent, otherwise there's no offence.
But it's better than banning the books outright.
Re:She was linked to a group of terrorists... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:How was she linked? (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Since when is linking a crime? (Score:5, Insightful)
That is why most "democratic" nations are actually variations on a theme called "Republic". That is the democractic will of the masses is constrained by a set of rules, such as the Bill of Rights, Habeas Corpus, and the like. This prevents (at least in theory) tragic outcomes of the proverbial situation where 2 wolves and a sheep vote democratically on "what's for dinner?".
And that is precisely why the recent abolishment of Habeas Corpus by the "conservative" fear mongerers is such a devastating (and maybe fatal) blow to the integrity of system of government of the US.
Re:Since when is linking a crime? (Score:4, Insightful)
You act as if this is a new thing - but its not. She could just as easily been implicated in a group plotting a murder, or a bank heist, or an insurance fraud scheme - and still be picked up questioning and possible charged if she was found in possesion of circumstantial evidence linked to that type of crime. Its pretty much routine.
Nah. Nothing much has changed (at least in this particular case) except it made the media. (If she was implicated in a child pornography ring, and found with lolikon on her PC - I bet you'd be among the first frothing at the mouth to hang her high.)
Re:One Word in Response (Score:5, Insightful)
I am in full agreement. If reading this article scares you into deleting your text files, then the tyrants running our governments have won, and the citizens have lost.
Now is the time to download and collect as much information on these subjects as you can. Voice your opinion through your actions. If "We the People" believe, in our so-called democracies, that holding such information shouldn't be a criminal offense, then our governments do not have the right to tell us that it is.
Unless, of course, you all disagree...
Re:How was she linked? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:It's a strange time (Score:5, Insightful)
This is a case of MI5 doing a damn good job, not a big brother issue; infiltrate the terrorist organization, collect information, bring everyone involved in before the plot takes shape.
The mind boggles at the idea that terrorists, who plan to blow up/irradiate/poison civilians and don't plan to get away with it, shouldn't have any action taken against them until they've committed their crime.
Re:Since when is linking a crime? (Score:3, Insightful)
Oh...and I ought to point out that 'democracy' defines how the government is elected and not how much evidence is needed for an arrest.
Don't assume you know us (Score:2, Insightful)
Do you know the parent poster personally? Who are you to imply that the parents morals are so easily compromised that they would forget their stand on due process and hard evidence just because some hypothetical woman wanted to touch little boys (or girls or monkeys for that matter) in the hoo ha and make them put their mouth in her fish bowl?
For all you know, the parent poster will still demand that due process be followed and that we avoid arresting people for perfectly legal things on their computer.
NB: as far as I know it is perfectly legal to have the documents listed in TFA on your computer.
Re:One Word in Response (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:umm... (Score:1, Insightful)
Howls of indignation do not imply that we think it is easy. If you choose to become an officer of the law then you must expect the public to treat your actions with the utmost scrutiny. Sometimes you will find yourself in an impossible situation, where the public will react badly no matter what you do. And you know what? Tough shit. It comes with the territory. We gave you powers that most of us don't have, and there's a price to that. You will be watched, you will be second-guessed, and you will find yourself in impossible situations, and that's just how it goes. If you don't like it, don't be a cop.
Re:Since when is linking a crime? (Score:3, Insightful)
Unless it's posted on Slashdot, in which case it's condsidered spying and intrusive.
If I have a long dinner conversation with a known money launderer and I run a business, and he's under investigation, don'tcha think the police are going to take a little bit longer look at my business practices?
Common sense.
Good for them.
Re:It's a strange time (Score:4, Insightful)
No, not random computers. Computers of minorities and people whom they don't like.
Re:Looks like it was a good thought, dreadful summ (Score:3, Insightful)
Calling a chemistry student [interesting-people.org] who admits to working off from second hand reports, and then guessing as to the process involved, and who doesn't have any stated expertise in binary explosives or especially the formulations or processes that may have been developed by real chemists with a background in explosives working for Al Qaeda, an expert is a bit much:
Given the history of peroxide based explosives used in terrorism [time.com], I wouldn't want to assume that he was right about the chemical process, the inteded use, and the practicalities of it without a lot more evidence from someone with direct knowledge of all three.
This doesn't even get into the question of his status as a neutral commentator.
Re:One Word in Response (Score:5, Insightful)
But who does that?
When you protest you do your best to make sure you are visible. In this case you would do things like distributing fliers and CDs with the forbidden documents. You would let everyone know that you have these things. You would make sure that either the government has to persecute you (and thousands like you) too, or admit their hypocrisy.
Re:Slashdot needs (Score:3, Insightful)
If there is going to be a terrorism icon, it should be one that stands on its own and captures the essence of the subject, like maybe this explosion [istockphoto.com]. If that is a little too "spot on", then maybe some dynamite [nasa.gov]. It should not be something used to represent another subject area, including:
Censorship
Privacy
Big Brother
Republicans
Democrats
The particular flavor of extremists providing most of fodder for discussion on Slashdot have goals independent of the often petty political squabbles here.
Re:Since when is linking a crime? (Score:2, Insightful)
I haven't seen one. Nobody tried to do anything.
There MIGHT have been a conspiracy to undertake the action of blowing up several airplanes. There is a critical distinction there.
Re:It's a strange time (Score:3, Insightful)
This is simply daft. I will tell you exactly what is illegal (at least in the US): It is illegal to agree to commit a crime. That's it. Doesn't matter if you have a plan or not. If you and your buddies get together one Friday and decide you're gonna blow up the mayor's mailbox, you have broken the law regardless of whether or not you carry out your plan.
Now, in point of fact prosecutors in the US usually don't charge people with conspiracy unless they've done something in furtherance of the conspiracy, since the conspirators can always claim (with some justification) that they were just talking shit. Now, if they actually do something to move the conspiracy along, like, oh, I don't know, buy night-vision equipment or books with the technical details they need to carry out the plot, then the police will certainly charge them.
You would not get charged with conspiracy for writing a movie script or anything like that - that's just paranoia. Crime novels and scripts are a dime a dozen, and nobody ever gets charged with a crime for writing one.
Conspiracy isn't a new crime, either. It's been a crime since God was a kid.
Re:How was she linked? (Score:3, Insightful)
That's the world we're walking into.
Re:HANG THE FILTHY WHORE (Score:5, Insightful)
Let me give you a hint: the woman is a human being first and foremost. Whether she claims to be a Muslim or Christian (or other religion), she must first reconcile her normal human 'vices.'
I know it is politically correct nowadays to compensate for negative biases against Muslims by providing positive ones. This counteracts the reality in most Muslim countries where most Muslims are no more virtuous than most Christians are in Christian countries. The negative biases aren't generally true nor are the positive biases. This also applies to Buddhists, Jews, etc.
Re:Don't assume you know us (Score:2, Insightful)
It seems probable. When it's something like pedophilia, people will be demanding the electric chair in a heartbeat. When it's terrorism, the reaction is the opposite. Terrorism is totally hip and cool, because it's a bit like sticking it to The Man (Bush etc.), but much more exciting (alternatively, terrorism does not even exist, and it's just an excuse by the government to go after people with dark skin and beards, despite the ultra-hysterical PC-fascism of today).
Re:It's a strange time (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Slashdot needs (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:One Word in Response (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:She was linked to a group of terrorists... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:She was linked to a group of terrorists... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:She was linked to a group of terrorists... (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, yes [bbc.co.uk], actually. In fact, more than one. They are trying to prevent a repeat.
And where, I ask, has our precious "innocent until proven guilty" gone?
It is still there, but it applies at trial, not in investigations. Investigations don't involve questions of legal guilt or innocence. You investigate based on leads or suspicion, not based on presumption of guilt.
Then let the police keep their fat noses in their coffee and donuts.
I think you are confusing the police and intelligence services with undertakers. It really is better when terrorists are stopped before an attack instead of cleaning up bodies after an attack.
Re:Don't assume you know us (Score:3, Insightful)
Having watched the growing hysteria and general witch hunt mentality, both on Slashdot and elsewhere, it's a reasonably safe way to bet. Given the original posters utter ignorance of what the law is in the fist place, I'd just about bet the rent money on it.
And there is zero evidence (WRT to this article) that people are ebeing picked up for the 'crime' of having perfectly legal things on their computer. The person in question (in TFA) was picked up because she was connected to a terrorist plot - and in that context the 'perfectly legal' material is valuable circumstantial evidence. This is perfectly standard and happens on a daily basis in connection with all manner of crimes. (I.E. like the OP, you whine about the law and due process - but you are utterly clueless as to what the law actually allows. The woman in the article wasn't picked up sans warrant, or under some 'war on terror' act, or randomly - but using a perfectly method thats been on the books for decades.)
Nobody ever claimed otherwise - but even completely legal items can serve as circumstantial evidence of participation in planning a criminal act.
Re:One Word in Response (Score:5, Insightful)
I think it is safe to say you missed the essential elements of what happened, so lets recap what we know from the news:
The arrested was Samina Malik, 22, an Asian woman who allegedly was working or had worked at Heathrow airport as a shop assistant. (Could she have been an insider at a juicy target for terrorists?) She has been charged with four offences under the Terrorism Act 2000.
Malik was allegedly associated with Sohail Anjum Qureshi, previously charged as part of the same investigation. How was he nabbed? It is alleged that on 18 October he was plotting to go to Pakistan (well known as home to various terrorist organizations, training camps, and the gateway to Afghanistan)(groups in Pakistan have been tied to a number of attacks planned against the UK) taking with him, among other things:
-Camping equipment
-£9,000 cash
-A night vision scope
-The Mujahideen Poisons Handbook
-Two metal batons
-Combat manuals
It is alleged that was taking terrorist materials to Islamabad..
Investigators then followed the trail from Anjum, back to Malik. Allegedly, she had a number of publications on her computer from what look to be a narrow range of interests:
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
(Fascinating reading for a 22 year old woman, isn't it? Do you think her goal was to be the life of the party?)
She was allegedly filling a writing pad full of handwritten notes, which led to one of the charges against her. (Any bets about what those notes were about? Hmmmm... Heathrow... Pakistan... Al Qaeda....)
No doubt there are other aspects of this that we don't know about. As it is, you have to scour several news reports to get this much.
Woman charged in terror investigation [inthenews.co.uk]
Female terror book suspect in the dock [scotsman.com]
Airport worker on terror handbook charges is remanded [scotsman.com]
Woman charged under UK terrorism act [theage.com.au]
Too many terrorist plots to name, say MI5 [scotsman.com]
Woman charged under anti-terror laws [reuters.co.uk]
Now, I very much doubt that she is in trouble simply for having those document in and of themselves. What is likely the case is that it is the combination of what she was doing, involving herself with some sort of terrorist cell, AND having those documents. That is trouble in the same sense that having a crowbar in the garage means you have a crowbar in your garage, whereas having a crowbar in your hands at 3:00 AM in back of somebody's house in the next town over means you have a burglar tool, which will make you subject to heavy penalties.
I doubt that the authorities have much interest in trying to arrest people for simply having those publications. Everything I've seen seems to indicate that their hands are more than full simply trying to cope with the small percentage of people that both have those publications and are trying to use them in attempts to kill large numbers of people. You may also want to keep in mind that the more false signals you generate, the less effective the police will be in tracking down those who are trying to kill you for being, take your pick: an infidel, British
Re:"linking" should be considered very carefully (Score:2, Insightful)
Bye
Re:One Word in Response (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
No, that's what they want you to do. This is manipulation through fear - a hallmark of 'terrorism'.
They better arrest me for rape... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Slashdot needs (Score:3, Insightful)
Or it could just represent the rest of us screaming at the sheer inanity of some of the new laws coming out. Whichever.
Re:Guilty of toughtcrime? (Score:3, Insightful)
This is why every country makes conspiracy a crime. You don't have to take any action to commit the crime yourself to be guilty; facilitating the act is enough. These laws are centuries old, not recent developments. And yes, attempting the crime is illegal--you don't get off a robbery charge if there is no money in the till. Incompetence is not proof of innocence.
With terrorism, the weapon is not just the explosive, or the knife, or the gun. The weapon is the gullible young man or woman primed to commit the act. These are human bullets, and the people who recruit, indoctrinate, train, and equip them--the puppet masters--are the real terrorists, serial killers who can count these recruits, along with the targets of those recruits, as their victims. Don't confuse this with freedom of expression, which restricts itself to civil discourse. This is not even civil disobedience, it is cold blooded murder. There are plenty of radical islamists in England who shout "Death to England" at rallies, and they aren't arrested (although many people think they should be.) But once they take concrete steps to bring that about, they are committing a crime. This woman was working with the puppet masters. They only investigated her because of her connection to a known terrorist cell.
There will always be more marginal youths to recruit, no matter how many prisons you build to house them. Perhaps the hottest debate in Europe today is whether you can tolerate an ideology which is inherently intolerant, and which refuses to present itself in free and open debate, but instead deals in threats and attempts to squelch all voices outside itself. Where does freedom of speech stand when encountering an ideology which wants to end freedom of speech, for everyone, forever? Britain asserts too much control on both sides. On the one hand, they have cameras everywhere, and near complete Orwellian surveillance. On the other hand, they've passed a hate speech bill which protects religion, which means that you can't challenge radical Imams who run madrassas to indoctrinate that next generation of terrorists. There are a lot of things happening over there that deserve criticism. Arresting this woman isn't one of them.
Re:She was linked to a group of terrorists... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:HANG THE FILTHY WHORE (Score:3, Insightful)
I myself have downloaded and partially read some of these books and similar books out of sheer interest.
I'm sure there is more to this story than we are getting, and that the official that arrested her probably have a half way decent reason for arresting her. If they were in the habit of arresting anyone who had downloaded or shared those books via a peer to peer network then they would seriously have their hands full arresting thousands of people.