back to article New UK counter-terror laws come into force today – watch those clicks, people. You see, terrorist propag... NOOO! Alexa ignore us!

New laws came into force today that make it an offence in the UK to view terrorist material online just once. woman clicks the wrong thing on laptop, covers mouth from shock One click and you're out: UK makes it an offence to view terrorist propaganda even once READ MORE The Counter-Terrorism and Border Security Act, which …

  1. Dan 55 Silver badge
    Flame

    Oh Christchurch

    Just as well it came into effect now and not a few weeks ago because if you went to the front page of the Mirror or the Daily Heil you had the video shoved in your face on the front page.

    So there we have it, social media serving up auroplaying terrorist videos, MSM following it just for clicks, and a bunch of clueless idiots making laws which go after the wrong people.

    1. Rich 11 Silver badge

      Re: Oh Christchurch

      Situation normal.

      1. MiguelC Silver badge

        Re: Oh Christchurch

        SNAFU

        1. Esme

          Re: Oh Christchurch

          Nah, I reckon it's gone beyond SNAFU to FUBAR.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Video recordings of many terror attacks including 9/11 were played repeatedly on mainstream news. Video clips of a terror attack alone aren't propaganda, only a message (verbal/ written) advocating terrorism is propaganda. Provided any such message is obscured (bleeped / pixellated) then the recording wont be in violation of this law. This is not to say the video isn't offensive, obscene or distressing, but then so are videos of other disasters / terror attacks / assasinations.

      Recordings of these events are also legal / historical evidence, and censoring them could imply a motive to cover up the event. To uphold the public's ability to check / oversee the actions of their government, in particular if they are used to justify changes to law / declare war etc., it's important that the public have access to this evidence.

      1. Ian Emery Silver badge

        Belsan (spl?) school massacre, all the networks repeatedly showed the same clip of semi naked teenage girls running out of the building, many wearing only their knickers.

        On a live stream, you could get away with this, but recording and rebroadcasting it every 15 minutes for hours?

        Under UK law, that footage is classed as child pornography, but not a word was officially said to any of the networks.

        One law for the rich.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          I like correcting people

          "Under UK law, that footage is classed as child pornography"

          No, they could even be completely nude nudists on a beach with their families and it still wouldn't be classed as that.

          UK law is very specific as to when any image is classed as pornographic. It has to have a sexual content. I dont think those teens rushing out of the school were in a sexual position. I think they were running for their lives.

          By your definition, you see that famous picture of Phan Thi Kim Phuc as porn?

          Wow, how do you handle walking around a church with cherubs on the wall?

          If you are going to make a statement like this, do your research first.

    3. Dave 15

      Re: Oh Christchurch

      Clueless idiots... sums up our MPs very well.

      Apart from the obvious... they know exactly how to play any system to pocket as much money as possible, pass blame for everything stupid to someone else, award themselves payrises while getting rid of responsibility and power to the EU and generally to stick two fingers up at the hard workers of the UK who are the ones who end up paying through the nose for all of this.

      Why the hell do we vote any of the ****'s in ever???

      I reckon we should just stay at home next election and not bother, they do what the hell they want anyway so they can sort their own selves out. Not worth payign tax to them either

  2. Smody

    No doubt coming to the USA

    When this law is passed in the US (if it hasn't been passed already, without any public notice), I'll be sure to stay away from any Pentagon web sites, or the CIA, or ICE, or Fox News.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Be careful. . . .

      Watch out!

      That sort of lippy smartarsedness is clearly meant to terrorise those who want to rule you absolutely, and you know what that means, don't you?!

    2. n10cities

      Re: No doubt coming to the USA

      If that happens, I pray that the ACLU can stop it in its tracks....

      Sounds like Great Britain needs a similar organization over there.

    3. fidodogbreath Silver badge

      Re: No doubt coming to the USA

      I'll be sure to stay away from any Pentagon web sites, or the CIA, or ICE, or Fox News.

      Probably good advice in any case.

    4. Christoph Silver badge

      Re: No doubt coming to the USA

      Certainly don't watch anything promoting the multiple bombings of civilians carried out by the USA and its allies.

      What do you mean, "It's not terrorism if it's us doing it!"?

      1. Christoph Silver badge

        Re: No doubt coming to the USA

        Oh, and don't mention anything containing the phrase "Dread Pirate Roberts" because that obviously refers to the terrorist supporting Silk Road site. Any other explanation would be Inconceivable.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: No doubt coming to the USA

          That word that you keep using...

    5. LucreLout Silver badge

      Re: No doubt coming to the USA

      When this law is passed....

      I'm not sure it'll matter where you visit. Unless I'm missing something, just one link once can see you in breach of the law.... it's almost like they've never heard of Rick-rolling......

      How is anyone supposed to know what's on the other end of a link without clicking it?

  3. My-Handle

    To paraphrase Terry Pratchett's Night Watch: the law is supposed to take criminals and, through some rough and ready means, turn them into honest men. Instead, these guys seem to be making laws designed to turn honest men into criminals.

    1. Eddy Ito Silver badge

      It's kinda what laws do, something that was once legal suddenly isn't albeit most of them are at least avoidable but here even a DNS hijack or website defacement can get you.

  4. Brian Miller

    Guy Fawkes Day

    But this would include all of the Gunpowder Plot of 1605, right? And wouldn't all content addressing it now be illegal?

    1. Eddy Ito Silver badge

      Re: Guy Fawkes Day

      Potentially the reach of this bill is terrifying since it could apply to much of history including the Troubles and the American Revolution. Hang on, if the law itself induces terror then wouldn't even looking up the law online be considered to have violated it?

      1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        Re: Guy Fawkes Day

        "it could apply to much of history including the Troubles"

        It's a good job I'm retired. My CV, along with that of my old colleagues and numerous police officers and military would fall foul of it. And those of our ministerial overlords of the time.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Guy Fawkes Day

        Do you think that being able to look up the laws of your land is something that wannabe despots want you doing, or not?

  5. Wellyboot Silver badge
    Big Brother

    Online train time table

    does that count?

    It might be a shorter list thinking of things not covered by this inane law.

    1. Nick Kew Silver badge

      Re: Online train time table

      A well-planned act of terrorism might very well include travel plans. And back in the days when we had a real terrorist problem, the trains themselves were sometimes targets.

      So yes, don't ever view an online train timetable. No matter how innocent your intention, it's material that could be of use to someone planning a terrorist attack.

      1. Mike 16 Silver badge

        Re: Online train time table

        Lucky you, apparently living in a place distinct from the U.S., where an online train time table would be almost perfectly unsuited to planning a terrorist attack (or, really, any sort of travel by train, tram, bus...)

      2. Pete4000uk

        Re: Online train time table

        No more https://traksy.uk or Flight Radar 24?

        Oh dear, I'm feeding a aircraft tracking site too :s

      3. Walter Bishop Silver badge
        Big Brother

        Re: Online train time table

        > .. And back in the days when we had a real terrorist problem ..

        And not only that, some of the ‘terrorists’ were working for the government. ref

        Caution clicking on the above may be in violation of the “Counter-Terrorism and Border Security Act.”

    2. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

      Re: Online train time table

      "does that count?"

      Dunno. Is fiction included?

  6. EricM
    Alert

    What are they trying to prevent - instant brainwash?

    Is such law based on the assumption that terrorist propaganda, in a way, _creates_ more terrorists? So that a normal, law-abiding citizen just reads through some BS posted online and thinks: "Hey, killing people and using $DEITY or $IDEOLOGY as a pretense might be a great idea after all"?

    Is it instant brainwash that should be prevented by this law?

    Looks like someone watched too much Sci-Fi...

    This is an interesting interpretation of "free will" and free speak that seems to form the rationale of this law.

    Also note that the definition of what might be regarded as terror OR propaganda is rather foggy ...

    1. Intractable Potsherd Silver badge

      Re: What are they trying to prevent - instant brainwash?

      Three downvotes at the time of posting? Why?? There is nothing particularly controversial, let alone wrong, about what EricM posted...

  7. Gene Cash Silver badge
    FAIL

    It's funny

    The US ignores the notion of privacy rights.

    Europe ignores the notion of freedom of speech.

    Can I get off this stinking mudball?

    1. Rich 11 Silver badge

      Re: It's funny

      Neither the US nor the EU reject the principles of privacy and freedom of speech; they just implement them in different ways. In both jurisdictions the courts can refine or reject the implementation and its working in practice, and in both jurisdictions elected representatives can change those implementations. All you have to do is get enough people up off their arses to be interested in educating themselves and doing something about it, and that's where your problem lies.

      1. Dave 15

        Re: It's funny

        Educating themselves???? Wow, that would mean avoiding day time tv and checking some facts. However the SAME governments have presided over an education system that is determined to provide obedient citizens (even as the BBC reported if that means putting kids into solitary confinement without even access to help from their parents.... https://www.bbc.com/news/education-47898657)

        And further the SAME governments who are now censoring the internet (in case its child porn or terrorism)

        And the SAME governments who broadcast propoganda via the likes of the BBC

        And the SAME governments who dont want to educated kids on using the internet but rathre ban them from using certain features (https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-47933521) in case it might possibly in an extraordinary circumstance be 'dangerous'.

        These same governments are getting very rich from the backhanders that go with letting the CEO of Centrica get a 44% pay rise for sacking a pile of workers, falling profits on indifferent revenue while not even doign what the electorate asked them (whether or not you think leaving was right they certainly havent done it have they????)

        In short democracy has failed dismally and I guess the real issue they are now worrying about is the plebs rising up against them, nothing to do with Islam, far right or any such thing, just that the oppressed masses are a dangerously large number to the point 0.01% that are benefitting from HMG and similar governments behaviours.

    2. Daniel von Asmuth Bronze badge
      Stop

      It's not funny

      I don't know about your freedom of speech, but if I read your posting that would make me guilty.

      Wait a second.... Does the EU have extradition treaties for terror suspects with the UK?

      1. Rich 11 Silver badge

        Re: It's not funny

        No UK-EU extradition treaty is needed at the moment, but many MPs are working hard to make one necessary. Of course they won't actually realise that such a treaty needs to be finalised until well after one is first needed, but that's Brexit for you. Got to get the priority issue of fucking up the country done first before attempting to patch the gaping holes just created.

        1. not.known@this.address

          Re: It's not funny

          Rich 11, I think you'll find you mean *FEW* MPs are working hard to make one necessary - in fact, you don't really need anything from "hard" onwards.

          But at least we would still *be* a country after the Lisbon Treaty takes effect and everybody else is reduced to being part of one of the Administrative Regions of the Federated States of Europe or whatever they end up calling it. Brussels uber alles, and all that.

  8. A.P. Veening Silver badge

    "reasonable excuse defence"

    A government impact assessment for the Act said the law still provides for the existing "reasonable excuse defence", which includes circumstances where a person "did not know, and had no reason to believe" the material contained terrorist propaganda. ®

    How are we going to name the terrorism-equivalent of rick-rolling somebody?

    1. Rich 11 Silver badge

      Re: "reasonable excuse defence"

      How about "20 to life"?

      1. mark l 2 Silver badge

        Re: "reasonable excuse defence"

        The problem with 'reasonable excuse defence' is that by the time you can appear in court to give your reasonable excuse, you will have been arrested, possibly remanded in custody or given strict bail conditions. This could result in the loss of your job, relationship breakdowns, children put in to care, financial burdens etc. And the ways the courts work this could be 12 - 18 months before you get your day in court to give your reasonable excuse defence.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: "reasonable excuse defence"

          You don't say. You think that was accidental?!?

        2. A.P. Veening Silver badge

          Re: "reasonable excuse defence"

          About that long time, what is the personal email address of Theresa May? Just asking for a friend. He considers the way Brexit is (not) being handled an act of terrorism.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: "reasonable excuse defence"

            Her official Parliment email address is listed at https://www.tmay.co.uk/contact but only for use by her constituents. Otherwise your are directed to a Web Form on the number 10 website..

        3. Grikath

          Re: "reasonable excuse defence"

          You forgot the way the lovely tabloid-style UK newspapers will print your face, name, and almost-but-not-just address along with some added suggestive speculation, just to make a catchy front page.....

        4. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

          Re: "reasonable excuse defence"

          "this could be 12 - 18 months before you get your day in court to give your reasonable excuse defence."

          And not forgetting that if you can't afford a lawyer, it's far more difficult to get Legal Aid nowadays.

          1. Rich 11 Silver badge

            Re: "reasonable excuse defence"

            In my more depressed moments I wonder if the changes to legal aid were introduced as a deliberate disincentive to counter the risk of anti-austerity riots, but then I remember that these last nine years of Coalition/Tory governments have been from year to year so utterly hapless that the more probable explanation is cock-up rather than conspiracy. But once I get out of my depression I start to think more rationally and conclude that it's all been motivated by petty greed and callousness: cut the social safety net, cut the libraries, cut school funding and sod the harm it causes, just as long as it cuts my taxes.

        5. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: "reasonable excuse defence"

          It was never about terrorism, it was always about suppression of dissent. Put your head above the parapet and it will be easy to find something to shut you up.

          That bit an earlier post mentioned about gathering up enough people to change the law - best of luck, the system is against you. Check out laws controlling when and where you can protest, especially near Parliament.

        6. Dave 15

          Re: "reasonable excuse defence"

          er... and this is a terrorism related offence, so you will be taken away, held without charge for as long as they want, out of communication with anyone including lawyers and family. You expect a fair trial... not on your life.

    2. n10cities

      Re: "reasonable excuse defence"

      Bin-Laden Rolling? Doesn't roll off the tongue quite right.

      Osama Rolling? A little better..

      <shrug>

      1. Mark 65

        Re: "reasonable excuse defence"

        Bin-rolling

    3. This post has been deleted by its author

    4. User McUser

      Re: "reasonable excuse defence"

      Terrorick-rolling obviously...

  9. Crisp Silver badge

    Iinformation "likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism"

    Information like Google Maps?

    1. phuzz Silver badge
      Facepalm

      Re: Iinformation "likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism"

      Someone might be able to argue that perhaps they had a non-terrorism related reason for looking at a map. Maybe.

      On the other hand, what about these interactive maps showing oil and gas, pipelines and storage, in the UK? Surely of interest to terrorists right?

      And all of this published by those notorious enablers of terrorism, erm, the Oil and Gas Authority, a UK government agency...

      1. Hans 1 Silver badge
        Facepalm

        Re: Iinformation "likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism"

        Watch your words,sir, you might get caught by the fuzz for giving idiots some stupid ideas.

  10. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Always Guilty

    "Likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism"

    Read it carefully.

    It doesn't say "Information obtained in preparation for or commission of an act of terrorism."

    Timetables and maps are mentioned by others above, quite rightly, and that means that just about everyone is guilty.

    Which is very convenient if you want to implement a police state.

    What next? Night and Fog? I'm not joking here people, though I wish to god I was.

    1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

      Re: Always Guilty

      "What next?"

      Obvious. Get out from under the adult supervision of the ECJ and ECHR. Why do you think the Home Sec in No 10 wants that?

  11. Drew Scriver

    Best excuse ever to not do your homework...

    Maybe I'm reading it all wrong, and I didn't find a link to the actual law on uk.gov. But it seems that the following could in fact ensue.

    "I sincerely apologize, Mr. Teacher, but I couldn't do my homework because virtually all the information you wanted me to look up is "likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism".

    However, you should be happy that I'm not turning in any work, as I would have to report you to the authorities if you had read any of it...

    Oh - and can you delete/destroy that paper I handed in on the IRA? I included photos that include images relating to it. If you don't, I'll have to report you..."

    1. DuncanLarge Silver badge

      Re: Best excuse ever to not do your homework...

      "I sincerely apologize, Mr. Teacher, but I couldn't do my homework because virtually all the information you wanted me to look up is "likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism".

      Teacher: But all I asked you was to take a photo of the local fire station and the local library for your presentation on local services and amenities.

      Pupil: Yes but the terrorist would need to know the details of the fire station as it would be a target for maximising damage done by fire and the library has books in it that can describe any number of subjects that can assist. It even has maps that coupled with a basic GPS or even a magnetic compass allow distances and ranges to be calculated!

      Teacher: ...

  12. Jeffrey Nonken Silver badge

    I was thinking that I could get the entire country into prison with a few well-crafted anonymous e-mails and well-placed links, but...

    'A government impact assessment for the Act said the law still provides for the existing "reasonable excuse defence", which includes circumstances where a person "did not know, and had no reason to believe" the material contained terrorist propaganda.'

    ... apparently all I'll be able to do is fill the jails and tie your court system in knots for a few decades.

    Of course, it still leaves the alleged perpetrators trying to prove a negative.

    I suppose this will leave many of your top politicians and leaders intact, but good luck running the country with all the staff awaiting trial.

  13. volatile.memory

    "...information 'likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism'..."

    Looking into lorry rental could be useful to a terrorist. Can't do that, I guess.

  14. Jerrycan

    Entrapment ?

    Secret police wants to frame you... pulls you over.. "Please sit in the back of my car and look at something". "Right ! You're nicked!!"

    Please say that this is not possible in the scope of this law.

    1. tfewster Silver badge
      Facepalm

      Re: Entrapment ?

      Why bother, when crafting an email from someone you trust (e.g. your electricity supplier) is much less manpower intensive, and leaves evidence on your computer?

  15. DougS Silver badge

    Viewing once is probably OK if you are white

    Its just if you have the wrong skin color that they will assume your one viewing was because you had terrorist intentions, rather than being a mistake or just idle curiousity following a link on a dodgy site.

    1. Nick Kew Silver badge

      Re: Viewing once is probably OK if you are white

      Viewing once is *probably* OK even if you have a big beard and speak Urdu and Arabic. Just as you *probably* won't be arrested on your way home after buying that new kitchen knife to chop vegetables. Not to mention *probably* won't be run down by a car mounting the pavement, or attacked by some crazed junkie.

      It's situations that are improbable but possible we should worry about. This is one of them, and since the state is directly responsible, it's one we can campaign against - at least in principle.

  16. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Ah...."terrorist"....another weasel word used to frighten the citizenry....

    Let's see now....what about all the "terrorists" who graduated to being "elder statesmen"....

    - Martin McGuiness (IRA)

    - Eamon de Valera (IRA)

    - Yasser Arafat (PLO)

    - Nelson Mandela

    - Menachim Begin (Stern Gang)

    I suppose that researching the early history of these individuals is now illegal? I suppose that suggesting that their early life activities were useful or virtuous is now a crime?

    *

    Then there's CURRENT history to consider. I'm sure that there are "freedom fighters" working today -- who are labeled "terrorists" by various governments -- people who in future years will be thought of as "elder statesmen". I suppose that supporting these people today is seen as fundamentally criminal by Sajid Javid?

    *

    Who said "The law is an ass"?

  17. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Boom!

    I remember, back in the early days of the Internet, coming across a download of the Anarchist Cookbook. (That's right, isn't it? Best not Google it now!) But being a bit of a digital pack-rat, there's a possibility it's still hanging around buried in a backup of a backup of an old drive somewhere. The fact I've neither looked at it for 20+ years, nor run off blowing things up, should be OK, though, surely?

    1. Mike 16 Silver badge

      Re: Anarchist Cookbook

      Not seen the online version, but various mimeographed equivalents I (may or may not) have seen contained enough wildly inaccurate information to make me wonder if they were essentially attempts by The Powers That Be to troll wannabe revolutionaries into blowing themselves up, or being arrested for intent while planting totally ineffectual WMD.

      But stay away from the (1950s/60s) Encyclopaedia Britannica articles on pyrotechnics if you value your freedom.

      And... now I'm pretty curious why I just got asked to re-authenticate my Register username and password, after posting another comment only a few minutes ago.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Anarchist Cookbook

        My father (ex-forces) asked me to get hold of a copy of it for him back in the early 90's when t'internet were just a wee nipper - apparently most of the stuff in that version was valid, if a bit lethal (to yourself) if you weren't careful - it didn't exactly contain a lot of health and safety warnings.

      2. Nick Kew Silver badge
  18. Caltharian

    Definition of a terrorist

    Who defines what is classed as a terrorist organisation, does it include terrorist organisations that have "gone legitimate", would you fall foul of the law for reading the Sinn Fein website or DUP website as both of these were classed as terrorist organisations or at least the "political wing" of terrorist organisations.

    Where is the line drawn is the pertinent question here

    1. Pete4000uk

      Re: Definition of a terrorist

      The line will be drawn wherever the police seem fit.

      1. Hans 1 Silver badge
        Holmes

        Re: Definition of a terrorist

        And that is the whole point of the law.

  19. Long John Silver
    Pirate

    Damnable presumption of little people giving orders to their betters

    I shall not bend to the will of upstarts claiming entitlement to tell me what I may, and may not, read; this regardless of whether material is sourced from the Internet or elsewhere.

    If people are intent upon causing harm to the UK I wish to know about it: from their direct utterances rather than a pre-digested account issued by the government to compliant MSM.

    ISIS produced a series of online English magazines. These were made to a technically high standard visually and in terms of English language usage. Clearly, they were aimed at dissident Muslims (presumably the Wahhabi cult) but also meant to be of some interest to other readers.

    The propagandising parts, doubtless meant as 'educational', bore all the hallmarks of fanatical belief in a cause. Setting aside the strong religious angle these were in keeping with fringe political tracts from both ends of the supposed Left/Right spectrum. One feature common to all 'true believers' in anything, particularly converts, is tedious repetition of their faith lest their readers doubt it. Thus, in this instance, the Prophet Mohammed receives mention scattered liberally throughout the text.

    The interesting part was exhortation to action and recommended means by which an amateur terrorist could participate. This consisted mainly of methods of sabotage, e.g. derailing trains, and basic instruction in explosives manufacture and use. Presumably ricin manufacture (simple to do) and anthrax spore production (definitely tricky in a domestic setting) were regarded as 'advanced level' and not discussed. Also, given the ease with which mass panic is induced these days there was surprising absence of mention of simple techniques a bright amateur terrorist could deploy; I won't spell these out but any imaginative person could devise some.

    The irony is that the Internet is awash with guides for anarchists and suchlike. Much of this is either the original documents, or reworking thereof, promulgated to civilians by the US military when threat of Japanese invasion was plausible. Much of it remains sound advice for would-be trouble makers.

    Doubtless, individuals and small groups can use easily come by information to do mischief. Yet, their actions are localised. Of course, they get great mention in the media. However, acts attributed to terrorism are small beer compared to death and injury from mundane, yet reducible causes, such as road traffic accidents.

    Obviously, security agencies must follow up every suspected threat but amateur terrorists offer pinpricks compared to what dedicated professionals can accomplish. Moreover, professionals almost invariable act in or are backed by teams. Their behaviour is a conspiracy. All large conspiracies are vulnerable. Mistakes may be made and individuals may be suborned. That, seemingly, is where security work and general surveillance is best directed.

    Cynics, perhaps with good reason, suggest that governments thrive upon supposed terrorist threats. Fear is easily instilled, this with connivance of MSM. Fear is a vehicle for justifying draconian measures allowing tighter general control over citizenry for matters unconnected with terrorism. Perhaps 'thought crime' is on the agenda.

    I shall ignore this legislation. GCHQ knows where I can be found. Their masters would be unwise to tangle with such as I.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Damnable presumption of little people giving orders to their betters

      I will write to you in jail, I promise.

      AC, even though it wont save me.

  20. Dr Scrum Master

    What if...

    What if you click but have your eyes closed? Then you're not viewing the content!

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: What if...

      What if it's wasn't me but the cat playing with the keyboard again?

      1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        Re: What if...

        Julian, is that you?

  21. Boris the Cockroach Silver badge
    Unhappy

    What about those

    of us viewing the material inside our own heads? will we be able to use the defence that the government paid us to put it there.

    1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

      Re: What about those

      I'd rather the material inside my own head stayed there, out of sight.

  22. tiggity Silver badge

    Will it be a return to voiceovers?

    By dubbing over "terrorist propganda" you could argue it was now a disapssionate recitation of waht that group believes, rather than the original terrorist propoganda.

    I'm not in favour of such excessive censorship as it's always useful to actually know what people / organisations are saying directkly ather than what is fikltered through media reports.

    I'm also old enough to remember how the bad guys can become the good guys (and vise versa)

    Somewhere (unless its being incinerated by now) are files and photos taken of me attending anti apartheid demonstartions where representatives of the (then white SA) government were present. UK govt of the time denounced the ANC as terrorists. Fast forward to the present day and Mandela went to his grave a hero / sainted figure to many and was praised by the majority of UK politicians.

  23. DuncanLarge Silver badge

    Tor

    Ok now I have a reason to put up with the latency of using Tor. Use it to protect me from an accidental click or a intentionally mis-titled video. Or even a news website in another country that has published a map of a location considered a bit more sensitive in the UK so is seen as useful for use by a terrorist in the UK only...

    Perhaps we should switch back to Gopher.

  24. Electronics'R'Us
    FAIL

    Science at risk?

    So let's see; reading about:

    Theory of nuclear fission?

    Polonium used as an initiator for nuclear weapons (see The fourth protocol)

    Perhaps just visiting the CDC might be illegal.

    I could go on, but I think I have made my point.

  25. Avatar of They
    Pint

    Where are my emigration papers?

    The definition of a terrorist (from memory, I can't actually look it up anymore) is someone that uses fear, violence or threats to coerce and get what they want, usually political ends.

    I declare UKIP a terrorist organisation.

    Since they started with Brexit - The economy has tanked, business are fleeing these shores, the political stability of NI, Gibraltar and the Union are in jeopardy, various emergency powers have been put in place (No deal, emergency stock piling, 10000 police on stand by) because they want some dodgy agenda of keeping Farage in the press. And they do it by spreading spurious rumours and (Now proven) lies with no come back against them, threatening our very existence if we don't do what they say (Kick out foreigners, people of a different faith, break trade agreements etc) to get what they want. (Assuming they know anymore)

    So anyone that reads their rubbish should be arrested and sent down immediately.

    So it can be used in our favour. Just saying.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019