Man arrested under Terrorism Act in Birmingham

[maddezmom]

Source: Reuters

LONDON (Reuters) - A 30-year-old man was arrested by counter-terrorism police in the West Midlands on Tuesday.
Police said the suspect was detained under the Terrorism Act on suspicion of "possessing material likely to be of use to a terrorist and of distributing terrorist publications."

The man's home in the Sparkhill area of Birmingham and one other property in the suburb of Kings Heath were being searched. Police took away computer equipment for forensic analysis.

"This arrest comes as a result of a long, detailed and ongoing enquiry," said Detective Superintendent Kenny Bell, head of West Midlands Police Counter Terrorism Unit.


Read more: http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKTRE60P1P920100126

[Syrinx]

1. oh, THAT Birmingham!

whew!

[trof]

2. Yeah, me too.

;-)

[trof]

3. THAT one is BUHR-mingum.

[The Stranger]

4. Arrested for "DISTRIBUTING 'TERRORIST' PUBLICATIONS"

Criminalizing publications. Anyone else see this?

[Xithras]

5. The UK doesn't have an equivalent to the 1st Amendment.

There are, for example, laws prohibiting the distribution or public discussion of materials that stoke religious or racial hatred. Their laws also permit the regulation of everything from video games to obscenity, and their national security act gives the government all sort of power to restrict the publication of information seen as damaging to state security. One of these restrictions prohibits the distribution of material that "glorifies" terrorism.

The concept of "you can say anything you want, anywhere you want, and the government can't stop you" thing is almost uniquely American. There are some other nations that have similar laws, but I think the U.S. may be the only western nation that does. Pretty much all of the other European and North American nations permit restrictions on speech for various reasons.

Even here in the U.S., the concept is eroding. "Free Speech Zones" come to mind...

[The Stranger]

6. The answer to hateful speech is more speech, not less speech.

I'm aware of European and other nations' approach. But free speech seems to have worked in the U.S. for a couple of centuries.

Someone can say something hideous and hateful, but it is widely recognized as hideous and hateful. Instead of being driven underground and having black market appeal, it is neutralized by its being appropriately exposed.