Britain convicts its first online-terror culprits

[Peter Dow]

MSNBC: Self-proclaimed 'jihadist James Bond' slapped with 10-year prison sentence

By David Stringer

Updated: 2:15 p.m. ET July 5, 2007

LONDON - An al-Qaida inspired computer expert who dubbed himself "the jihadist James Bond" was ordered imprisoned for 10 years Thursday for running a network of Web sites and hoarding videos of the murders of Americans Nick Berg and Daniel Pearl.

ABC World News. Terror On-line. View on YouTube

My comment:

Terror On-line. Years too late, the UK finally acts.
The FIRST UK convictions for inciting Jihadi terrorism on the internet in July 2007. That's two years after the 52 people killed in the London bombings and nearly 6 years after the thousands killed in the US 9/11 terrorist attacks.

So, the UK is not taking prompt action to save lives. Like the HMS Titanic, the UK is a disaster waiting to happen.

So why was Queen Elizabeth invited to the White House recently?

 

[Happy Days]

So, the UK is not taking prompt action to save lives. Like the HMS Titanic, the UK is a disaster waiting to happen.

So why was Queen Elizabeth invited to the White House recently?

The UK takes prompt action on terrorists allowing for these new goalposts which are constantly moving. They have an excellent success rate in stopping terrorism and catching terrorists. You talk like a traitor about your country. Lay off the Queen. She does a lot of good for tourism ($$$) for the UK. :roll:

 

[wonder cow]

This alleged "guy" looked very odd to me. Almost goth.

 

[Peter Dow]

The UK takes prompt action on terrorists allowing for these new goalposts which are constantly moving. They have an excellent success rate in stopping terrorism and catching terrorists.

Rubbish. The UK, like all monarchies, breeds terrorists like a sewer breeds rats.

By imposing its royalist, fascist police state rule, the UK creates terrorism in the UK (as the Saudi Kingdom creates terrorists in the Saudi Arabia) and then these monarchies try to start fights between its own enemies and America - because the monarchies cannot fight their own battles.

If left to their own devices, the monarchies would have been swept away by republican revolutions ages ago. So America should stop propping up the monarchies and start helping republican revolutionaries like myself who are America's true friends.

The monarchies will do anything to stop Americans waking up to the obvious fact that is the monarchies themselves who are the true enemies of the American republic.

The monarchies are deceitful, backstabbing enemies of the American people. So get wise to them.

The stupidity of the UK is a fact of history. Learn it.

A bit more on the royal connections with the Titanic disaster.

The ship was named The RMS Titanic. See RMS = Royal Mail Ship. (With a royal warrant to carry UK mail, to the bottom of the ocean, in this case.)

The Captain of the Titanic when it sunk on its maiden voyage was Captain Edward John Smith, RD , RNR

who was a Commander in the Royal Naval Reserve. Presumably, it was his experience as a Royal Naval Reserve Commander which rubber-stamped his incompetence to steam the Titanic full speed ahead blindly at night into a massive iceberg and sink the ship.

Because of his position as a Commander in the Royal Naval Reserve, Smith had the distinction of being able to fly the Blue Duster of the R.N.R.; most ships flew the Red Duster of the merchant marine.

So the flag the Titanic flew was

Blue Ensign flown by merchant vessels commanded by officers in the RNR.

This flag is also known as The Government Ensign of the United Kingdom

King George V. (Admiral of the Fleet, from 1910) - and therefore the most senior officer in charge of the Royal Naval Reserve, Captain Edward Smith was a commander in.

However you want to look at it, the Titanic disaster was a very royal affair, with the seal of approval of the monarchy and the kingdom all over it.

The monarchy of The United Kingdom:

• incompetence then - sinking a ship with our American friends on board;
  
• incompetence now - allowing terrorists to knock buildings down with our American friends inside.

With friends like the monarchists of the United Kingdom, the USA doesn't need any enemies.

America's true friends - Scottish, English, Irish, Welsh, British REPUBLICANS!

You talk like a traitor about your country. Lay off the Queen. She does a lot of good for tourism ($$$) for the UK.

Scotland is my country. Britain is my country. The United Kingdom is NOT my country. I am a republican. I am at war with any Kingdom which decides to rule and enslave me. I will lay off Queen Elizabeth if and when she leaves my country for ever. Otherwise, I want her, Prince Charles and the rest, assassinated. I will only agree to an elected head of state.

Republics have thriving tourist industries too. "Queen=tourism" is a flat lie told by monarchists to prop themselves up.

Check out this page on my web-site -

Attention Americans! Who are your true friends? Not the Windsors!

 

[Happy Days]

I will lay off Queen Elizabeth if and when she leaves my country for ever. Otherwise, I want her, Prince Charles and the rest, assassinated. I will only agree to an elected head of state.

This is just :screwy

 

[RightinNYC]

This is just :screwy

I think he also forgets the fact that he does have an elected leader.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

I don't really grasp the concept of someone claiming to to be for a republican (small r) form of government then asserting that he supports the tyranny of the masses found under any socialist system.

 

[Peter Dow]

This is just :screwy

I will note that a person of your sort of prejudice and stupidity is well qualified to be employed as a psychiatrist in any of the UK royal mental hospitals, or as a judge in the UK courts.

Arrogant and tyrannical judges. Beware of perverted judges and psychiatrists

Sheriff Colin Harris refused me bail.
...
I mean I had always been an intellectual republican, but really it was after the humiliation of me crying in terror on the prison phone to my mum about the prospect that I was to be forcibly put in a mental hospital that I felt a true visceral hatred against the Queen and the royalist UK state.

Of course after the way I was mistreated, I do want the Queen dead.

Let me assure you that if the UK state intends to lobotomise me, or destroy my mental faculties by compulsory ECT or drugs, I intend to go down fighting. :sword: I am at war, even if no-one else is.

I will hope to attract support to my stand from as many remaining honourable Scots, Britons and republicans from anywhere in the world as I can appeal to.

Assassinating the Queen is simply a good strategy to get the head of state before her state gets those of us who dare to resist the UK tyranny.

So try to get the order of events correct.

First, the state said I was (or might be) screwy. Then I said I wanted the Queen dead.

Whereas, you seem to be saying that because I want the Queen dead, therefore I must be screwy.

Which came first, the chicken or the egg?

 

[Peter Dow]

I think he also forgets the fact that he does have an elected leader.

I didn't say I would agree to any old elected leader. I do not.

I will oppose any Scottish or British elected leader who does not defend my constitutional rights and who instead sides with the right of the UK state to do anything to anyone that they like (so long as they SAY it is legal, whether or not it actually IS legal). That means I opposed Prime Minister Blair and now I oppose Prime Minister Brown.

That is the state of affairs in the UK - the UK has a constitution from hell.

The freedom denied to the Scots by this Queen. The Constitution from Hell. The Constitutional Monarchy of Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth

However, I would be prepared to support an elected leader who really defended democratic constitutional rights - and I point to Condoleezza Rice, as someone setting a good standard of political leadership - even if she is not available and willing to lead a republican revolution in Britain or Scotland and then stand for election to become president of Scotland or Britain.

I am not exactly sure WHO to support as an elected President of Scotland or Briton.

I would propose myself as president of Scotland but I am too modest and so I settle merely for attempting to assert my democratic constitutional right to be a "Scottish National Standard Bearer".

 

[Peter Dow]

I don't really grasp the concept of someone claiming to to be for a republican (small r) form of government then asserting that he supports the tyranny of the masses found under any socialist system.

So you, in the style of a Roman Emperor, are decreeing that "any socialist system" implies "the tyranny of the masses".

You cannot decree that "1 plus 1 equals 3", or you could try but no-one will take you seriously.

Likewise you cannot decree that a word "socialist" whose linguistic root means "that which is social" (good for society, in other words) implies tyranny.

Tyranny - cruel, unjust rule - is not good for society, therefore, no true socialist system can be a tyranny. If a system IS a tyranny then it cannot be socialist.

I have debated these questions at length and I will give the link rather than re-hash all that.

Peter's vision of "socialism" - debated

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

So you, in the style of a Roman Emperor, are decreeing that "any socialist system" implies "the tyranny of the masses".

You cannot decree that "1 plus 1 equals 3", or you could try but no-one will take you seriously.

Likewise you cannot decree that a word "socialist" whose linguistic root means "that which is social" (good for society, in other words) implies tyranny.

Tyranny - cruel, unjust rule - is not good for society, therefore, no true socialist system can be a tyranny. If a system IS a tyranny then it cannot be socialist.

I have debated these questions at length and I will give the link rather than re-hash all that.

Peter's vision of "socialism" - debated

Socialism is nothing more than a tyranny of the masses wherein the majority rules but the rights of the individual are fuc/ked over and out in the name of the "common good" (read the state) that is the antithesis to republicanism wherein the will of the majority is respected but the inalienable rights of the minority (such as property) are guaranteed and unassailable.

Just a question to determine if you are a welfare capitalist or a socialist, how do you feel about Hugo Chavez?

 

[wonder cow]

The more compulsory, the more tyrannical.

Socialism is nothing more than a tyranny of the masses

I have always heard this as a criticism of direct democracy, rather than socialism.

Socialists systems could just as well be authoritarian, whereas direct democracy, by definition can't be.

But as you point out, the result is about the same.

The majority of people sway back and forth with the wind. Very unstable system of governance.

The US government as a particular kind of Republic, a representative democracy, is in contrast a very stable system, giving the people the ability to make changes, but not too quickly.

Madison is very underrated as a political figure in world history, IMO.

And the monarchy is hilarious to me. 2007 folks, get a life for crying out loud.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

The more compulsory, the more tyrannical.



I have always heard this as a criticism of direct democracy, rather than socialism.

Socialists systems could just as well be authoritarian, whereas direct democracy, by definition can't be.

But as you point out, the result is about the same.

The majority of people sway back and forth with the wind. Very unstable system of governance.

The US government as a particular kind of Republic, a representative democracy, is in contrast a very stable system, giving the people the ability to make changes, but not too quickly.

Madison is very underrated as a political figure in world history, IMO.

And the monarchy is hilarious to me. 2007 folks, get a life for crying out loud.

A Representative CONSTITUTIONAL Democratic Republic, wherin our leaders are but temporary occupants chosen by the people to lead by the rule of our Constitutional law which is eternal and inalianable.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

I will note that a person of your sort of prejudice and stupidity is well qualified to be employed as a psychiatrist in any of the UK royal mental hospitals, or as a judge in the UK courts.

Moderator's Warning:

Please do not insult other posters. Keep things civil.

 

[wonder cow]

Representative CONSTITUTIONAL Democratic Republic

Well that too. I'm just in the habit of pointing out, when on the subject, that a representative democracy is a form of a republic, to avoid the old democracy versus republic argument, whereas people confuse the classic definition of democracy with what we practice today in the US and also believe that all republics are the same, which of course is equally false.

 

[Peter Dow]

What is civil and what is an insult?

I will lay off Queen Elizabeth if and when she leaves my country for ever. Otherwise, I want her, Prince Charles and the rest, assassinated. I will only agree to an elected head of state.

This is just :screwy

I will note that a person of your sort of prejudice and stupidity is well qualified to be employed as a psychiatrist in any of the UK royal mental hospitals, or as a judge in the UK courts.

Moderator's Warning:

Please do not insult other posters. Keep things civil.

So mod, should I have used a smilie like the initial insult to me (which you seem to ignore)? Would this have been OK?

I will note that a person of your sort of :ws is well qualified to be employed as a psychiatrist in any of the UK royal mental hospitals, or as a judge in the UK courts.

Or is it OK to insult me, and only a crime when I reply in defence of myself?

Am I a second-class citizen here?

I don't agree that my reply was any more insulting or less civil than the initial comment.

I can't win a fight with you in your own forum, but I don't agree with the mod giving me a warning, but no warning to Happy Days.

 

[wonder cow]

Hi Peter. I'm sure the mods can defend themselves, but just a quick question.

Do you not see the difference in this:

This is just :screwy

Which is in reference to your comment or opinion

and this:

I will note that a person of your sort of prejudice and stupidity

Which is a direct insult of the person?

In other words, I could say something like "That is crazy".

But I should not say "You are crazy".

And on a side note, I think it is odd that you and I and TOT all joined in August 2005.

But what can I say, I’m easily amused.

Captain Courtesy is on the other hand a n00b. May 2006 :lol: