|
|
A British woman who called herself the “lyrical terrorist” and wrote a poem about beheading a hostage, has won her appeal against a criminal conviction.
Samina Malik, 23, had been convicted last year of possessing documents useful to terrorists and was given a nine month suspended sentence. A former employee at a newspaper kiosk at Heathrow airport, she had written poetry which prosecutors said advocated violent extremism, and also downloaded Islamist literature from the Internet.
The Court of Appeal threw out her conviction on Tuesday under a ruling from February that concluded documents need to actually be helpful to a terrorist, rather than merely encouraging terrorism, for possession to count as a crime.
The Crown Prosecution Service said it would not seek a retrial after Malik’s successful appeal.
You do realize, I hope, there’s a significant amount of fiction, poetry, videogames whose authors would be liable for prosecution on comparable grounds?
Words are not the same as criminal acts – no matter how spooky and screwed-up the ideology, analysis and conclusions.
And then there’s MacGyver.
Gee, I thought we all recognized that “the pen is mightier than the sword?”
So–encouraging people to become terrorists benefits society in what way?
And why shouldn’t all similar speech, video games, songs be treated exactly the same way==whatever way we decide that should be?
No matter what rules you have, some innocent party will get trapped by them. A second level analysis can be “if we error, in what direction should it be? — the free speech rights of a few individuals, or the safety of the entire society?”
It never matters, until it matters.
#3 bobbo
Something is wrong… very wrong. Why you ask? Because I find myself in complete agreement with bobbo.
At some point we must decide if tolerance is the road to enlightenment or the road to destruction.
Yup, yup. Let’s get rid of all that Bill of Rights crap.
It’s old-fashioned and has no place in a modern nation. Bobbo and Doddo have no problem trusting the State to assign monitors for what people write. No concern about where the Rules and Rulers will take their power.
After all, there never has been a shortage of willing puppets.
The USA has a tradition of tolerance of hate speech, which is really a positive thing.
Europe has a tradition of muzzling hate speech and anti-establishment speech, i.e. Bridget Bardot, banning of Nazi ebay sales, jailing Holocaust deniers and so forth.
If Muslims want to live in Europe, they will have to get used to the European tradition of playing nicely with others.
Europe has a tradition of appeasement, but they also have a tradition of coerced conforming.
Muslims can’t like the appeasement part, but not accept the coerced conforming part.
That’s Europe!
#3 “if we error, in what direction should it be? — the free speech rights of a few individuals, or the safety of the entire society?”
When you protect the free speech rights of a few individuals, you protect the safety of the entire society.
Clue for the clueless: The world did not change after September 11th, regardless of unending propaganda to the contrary.
#5 – Bobo.
This story is in the UK. Please bear in mind that we, in the UK, do NOT have a bill of rights to get rid of.
Yes, this stuff does cut both ways…and do you know what? You can’t tell which way in advance. That’s why it needs to be protected.
Are you going to go off and start beheading people over a poem you read? Not likely. Do you suspect that she and her friends might end up on various lists that one day may prove useful..and point to some who might otherwise have been missed? Personally, I just don’t trust anyone else to make the decision of what I should be able to read for me.
Chains of events fan out in all directions. The last thing I want to do is silence those who’s views are diametrically opposed to mine (well..silence as far as censoring what they write..I don’t care if they all drop dead..that would be a good silence..^_^). I’d like to know where they are at all times. (If only to get an idea in which direction to aim…^_^)
What I am trying to say, I think, is that if you are the type of person who’s political and social views are going to be controlled by the musings of a kiosk newspaper salesperson, sooner or later something is going to set you off anyway. I don’t think silencing the twisted meanderings of a second class citizen in the culture she is glorifying does any less harm, and leads..as in this case, to publicity for her vitriol that she otherwise would never have received. Note that we don’t see her rushing off to the culture that she seems enamored of…one where she wouldn’t have had an appeal, and her showing this kind of initiative and creativity would have been nipped in the bud a long time ago…^_^
#4–Dr D==don’t be surprised. Just as you can’t be wrong all the time, I can’t be right all the time. This issue of agreement will have to be analyzed.
To the ignorant: advocating the violent overflow of the USA (Britain?) has never been legal and is not a constitutional right.
The question we don’t have enough facts on is how closely the lyrics in question came to advocating violent overthrow (aka “treason”) with a robust political analysis of the faults at hand the the legislative revolution needed to remedy them?
BUT–Dr Dodd, you are being downright lyrical yourself when you say: “At some point we must decide if tolerance is the road to enlightenment or the road to destruction.”
and indeed we will.
So this is her magnum opus? Jeez. I don’t think Emily Dickinson has to worry about being displaced in the pantheon of women poets by this nut:
http://tinyurl.com/ynlkzg [edit: the tinyurl is adequate]
Mr. Mustard!! How could you!! I..I…feel this sudden urge to find MikeN….^_^
Yep, if this is as good as it gets for her talents…Wait a minute! Why can we see her face???
Hatred of this kind usually progresses into more desperate actions. Therefore, I have this strange feeling that we will be seeing this face again. Probably on a video right after she takes out a bus load of British commuters.
#15 Yep, this has the ring of what the Columbine kids were thinking prior to their rampage.
But I’m sure she’s now on watch lists over there. MI5 knows who she is, and will be keeping tabs.
hmmm… I guess the concept and notion about “sedition” eludes everyone nowadays. Generally speaking, even in a Bill of Rights sort of environment, it’s considered a bad thing. But Civics isn’t taught in school anymore and Freedom of Speech absolutists seem clueless. SO this will just get worse.
Ho-hum. #10 – advocating the overthrow of the US has been legal a number of times. It was even part of the constitution of Connecticut, one of the original 13 states.
The Smith Act trials – later overturned – were the closest thing to JCD’s laws on sedition. They convicted people for “conspiring to advocate”. The McCarran-Walter Act – also overturned – provided for concentration camps for sedition. Should we bring that back?
Again – who do you trust to define the differences between free speech and sedition? We aren’t even doing well at maintaining checks and balances within our tricameral government.
#8 – but, you’re working really hard – at this very moment – to copy our Patriot (sic) Act.
Thanks John,
I looked up “sedition” on Wikipedia (The #1 source for mostly/partially correct information)for a quick read. We could have a great discussion just on that. How it intersects with free speech and such.
This lady will find herself on the wrong end of something someday if she keeps this up. Or maybe she’s just a misaffected kid who hasn’t grown up.
Here’s the link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sedition
Yes, yes, advocating the overthrowing of government has NEVER been condoned in the United States. Anyone who adheres to such a philosophy should be jailed and the Bill of Rights need not apply to them. Dissenters to government are not welcome in this country. In fact, the writers of our own Declaration of Independence ought to have been hanged for treason. Just look at this seditious material:
“That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”
I hope everyone realizes I was being facetious. I would hope speech such as this would be equally protected in the USA.
Yes..from the time our “sedition” laws were pushed into effect by an already despotic government, any of our founders would have been hung for using the same language the laws were written to “protect”. Welcome to nationalism. Rah rah rah be true to your school. No thought or dissent allowed, no matter what POS are running things.
Personally, I hate having to even vaguely defend a-wipes like the subject here…but let’s face it…the words of our founders have cost more lives than her sleazy poetry ever will..and I hope the fight for those ideals continues..no matter what the nationalist “patriots” say. When the government subverts the constitution, they need to be called on it..long and loud.
[edit: the tinyurl is adequate]
As Scottie has pointed out, people rarely click on the links. I thought it was important that people see exactly what the “lyrics” of the Lyrical Terrorist were. I mean, come on:
“And continuously scream like an eedyat
And jiggle like a jelly
I think we’re talking Nobel Prize in Literature for this lady!
She’s hot. Move over Beyoncé.
This chick needs the full face burqa with a bag over it.
She’s a scumtard plain and simple.
#26 Come on…look at those lips. The LIPS! She could put the Honey Dolls to shame
http://tinyurl.com/67s6vu
And no pesky cleansing required. Glug glug, GULP!
Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969)
… the constitutional guarantees of free speech and free press do not permit a State to forbid or proscribe advocacy of the use of force or of law violation except where such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action.
The last serious discussion of freedom of speech by the Supreme Court. It appears the British Court of Appeals is following a similar track.
And what is with all this trash talk about this woman? Have you people degenerated into Fox Spews Clones?
If they put her in jail for spreading hate speech and stories, then they have to put just about every rapper in jail too.