Darn you maggot I was planning Nelie as after dinner mint. The main course:Maggot said:You forgot this one:
![]()
Darn you maggot I was planning Nelie as after dinner mint. The main course:Maggot said:You forgot this one:
![]()
No, no, no. Terrorism is like alcoholism; it's what other people do. Never oneself.Valve said:![]()
wait a minute...
There should be supportive meetings for terrorists who want to give up.pilchardman said:Terrorism is like alcoholism
I think the Boadican rebellion is on the approved list. Choose again.Donna Ferentes said:Are they still proposing to punish people who glorify historical acts of terrorism? If so, could I express my support for the heroic struggle of the Iceni under their tribal leader Queen Boadicea against the oppressive regime of the Romans?
Donna Ferentes said:Ket's Rebellion?
That must be the British love of standing up for the plucky underdog!Brainaddict said:Those failed suicide bombers were cool cos they were shit![]()
National Front twat, more like...

revol68 said:![]()
Map marking liberated zones...
![]()
British stooge!
![]()
Death to imperialist fish mongers!
fanta said:![]()
Careful revol68, you'll upset Pickmans Model
![]()
![]()

There's nothing special about having to prove intent. That's a normal part of criminal law.Brainaddict said:According to the grauniad:
"somebody will only be guilty of glorifying terrorism if it is proved they also intended to incite further acts of terror"
How do you prove 'intention' I wonder? It's always tough to come up with the evidence for a thought crime...
to fuck over people who fall into the rather broad definition of terrorism in the terrorism act 2000.JHE said:There's nothing special about having to prove intent. That's a normal part of criminal law.
I think the interesting thing is that the proposers are now saying that there must be intent to incite terrorism. Incitement to murder (and, indeed, incitement to commit other crimes) is already a crime! So why do we need the new law?
Because once suspected of anything related to terrorism (as distinct from murder) the person loses all rights and can be locked up without trial. Presumably.JHE said:There's nothing special about having to prove intent. That's a normal part of criminal law.
I think the interesting thing is that the proposers are now saying that there must be intent to incite terrorism. Incitement to murder (and, indeed, incitement to commit other crimes) is already a crime! So why do we need the new law?
well I don't know if you're allowed to say that. are you intending to incite further terrorism? be honest nowbluestreak said:i don't want to join the debate. am i allowed to just say that i think terrorism is really cool and i want to be a terrorist when i grow up cos they get cool hats and all the chicks.
Brainaddict said:well I don't know if you're allowed to say that. are you intending to incite further terrorism? be honest now
cemertyone said:Ah how we miss those days so sos much....now why don`t you turn your attention to the hero`s of Ulster loyalism in your home town of Larne who seem to be engaged in a campaign to burn O.A.P. out of their homes in the middle of the night...God their comradres from the UVF and the Ulster rifles who died at the Somme must be proud of their actions.....and all in the name of queen and country....
bluestreak said:i don't want to join the debate. am i allowed to just say that i think terrorism is really cool and i want to be a terrorist when i grow up cos they get cool hats and all the chicks.

