- Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Reply to: And theyre off. Hamza going on holiday
Collapse
You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:
- You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
- You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
- If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.
Logging in...
Previously on "And theyre off. Hamza going on holiday"
Collapse
-
Originally posted by Gentile View PostIf true, I'd have liked to have seen any evidence on that tested in a UK court. It seems crazy to me, since the UK authorities have actually got more relevant powers to compel accused people to decrypt files than the Americans do. (It's a separately-indictable offence to refuse to decrypt files here, but I don't think it is in the US.)
If any person with the appropriate permission under Schedule 2 believes, on reasonable grounds—
That means you need to be able to stand up in front of a Judge and have a pretty good story as to why you want the password to that laptop. The fact you're in possession of that laptop means it's been seized under some powers anyway, much that you might like to think it, the Police can't just turn up and take your laptop away for no reason.
As for the USA, the reason the authorities can't order disclosure is because those 'kangaroo courts' of yours will actually respect a defendant's rights under the fifth amendment, however I believe that if the authorities already have evidence that you are in possession of 'something' then a Court will disregard the fifth amendment (as there is no self incrimination) and will order the defendant to provide the above.
Originally posted by Gentile View PostYou're right about Richard O'Dwyer. Christopher Tappin is in the same boat. I doubt either of their cases would have stood up had they been properly tested in a UK Court.Last edited by Incognito; 6 October 2012, 22:01.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Gentile View PostIt's amazing to me that a UK citizen can have their rights so badly abused, and most of us do nothing about it. And for what? Running a website in the UK? (wherever the server is alleged to have been located without his knowledge.)
"....providing material support of terrorism, conspiring to kill U.S. nationals, and money laundering. It is alleged that Ahmad and Ahsan, through an entity known as "Azzam Publications", were members of a group that provided material support to the Taliban and the Chechen Mujahideen through various means, including the administration and operation of various web sites promoting violent jihad. The Azzam Publications websites, including, e.g., Azzam.com and Qoqaz.net, were hosted for a period of time through the services of a web-hosting company located in Connecticut. The indictment alleges that the defendants, using both cyberspace and real-world efforts, assisted the Taliban and the Chechen Mujahideen through money laundering, as well as by providing funds, military equipment, communication equipment, lodging, training, expert advice and assistance, facilities, personnel, transportation and other supplies, with the knowledge and intent that such conduct would support the military activities of these and associated groups. The indictment also alleges that, during a search of Ahmad's residence in the United Kingdom in December 2003, Ahmad was found in the possession of an electronic document containing what were previously classified plans regarding the makeup, advance movements and mission of a United States Naval battle group as it was transiting from California to its deployment in the Middle East. The document discussed the battle group's perceived vulnerability to terrorist attack."Originally posted by Gentile View PostHe's already spent longer in custody than those US soldiers that were actually convicted of torturing Iraqi civilians to death in Abu Ghraib.
Originally posted by Gentile View PostHe should have been released with an apology, not sent to face the kangaroo courts that constitute the US Federal Justice system.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Gentile View PostIf true, I'd have liked to have seen any evidence on that tested in a UK court. It seems crazy to me, since the UK authorities have actually got more relevant powers to compel accused people to decrypt files than the Americans do. (It's a separately-indictable offence to refuse to decrypt files here, but I don't think it is in the US.)
You're right about Richard O'Dwyer. Christopher Tappin is in the same boat. I doubt either of their cases would have stood up had they been properly tested in a UK Court.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by centurian View PostIsn't he also accused of having sensitive information in his possession pertaining to one of the US naval fleets and where and how they would be most vulnerable to attack - all heavily encrypted.
If proven, that's a lot more than just running a website.
Richard O'Dwyer - now he's got something to whine about. Had a website which he knocked up at university (website was not based in US), which had links to other websites which had pirate material on them. Now being extradicted on criminal charges.
You're right about Richard O'Dwyer. Christopher Tappin is in the same boat. I doubt either of their cases would have stood up had they been properly tested in a UK Court.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Gentile View PostAnd for what? Running a website in the UK? (wherever the server is alleged to have been located without his knowledge.)
If proven, that's a lot more than just running a website.
Richard O'Dwyer - now he's got something to whine about. Had a website which he knocked up at university (website was not based in US), which had links to other websites which had pirate material on them. Now being extradicted on criminal charges.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Gentile View PostThere are no such allegations about Babar Ahmad (who is the only person I was referring to above). It'd also be impossible to remove Babar Ahmad's citizenship, since he was born here. Are you instead referring to Abu Hamza? Because I agree there's a case for extraditing him.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Paddy View PostGenerally I do not agree with extradition but in this case there are genuine allegations that he was involved 'killings'. Moreover, his UK citizenship should have been removed years ago and he should have been sent back to Egypt along with his wives.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Gentile View PostIt's amazing to me that a UK citizen can have their rights so badly abused, and most of us do nothing about it. And for what? Running a website in the UK? (wherever the server is alleged to have been located without his knowledge.) He's already spent longer in custody than those US soldiers that were actually convicted of torturing Iraqi civilians to death in Abu Ghraib. He should have been released with an apology, not sent to face the kangaroo courts that constitute the US Federal Justice system.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Gentile View PostIt's amazing to me that a UK citizen can have their rights so badly abused, and most of us do nothing about it. And for what? Running a website in the UK? (wherever the server is alleged to have been located without his knowledge.) He's already spent longer in custody than those US soldiers that were actually convicted of torturing Iraqi civilians to death in Abu Ghraib. He should have been released with an apology, not sent to face the kangaroo courts that constitute the US Federal Justice system.
There are laws on our statute books that while they may not have been used for decades would fit.
For example if the website was at least partially in English then it would be targeted at UK citizens as well and so we could have tried him for treason.
Then we would have been able to keep tabs on him for his whole life by putting him legally in prison and then letting him out on license with restrictions that prevent him using the internet etc.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by lilelvis2000 View PostI believe the point with Mr. Ahmad's case is that he's been in detention for 8 years without charge! All of that so that the Brit PM can win a anal delight from whichever loon become Pres. over the pond. It must really take a lot to maintain that 'special' relationship.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Gentile View PostI think there's a clear case for Abu Hamza to be extradited, but to be honest I think Babar Ahmad has been treated very badly by his country. Being extradited to the US merely for running a website that the Americans didn't like? If the content of that UK-managed site wasn't sufficient for him to have been prosecuted in UK Courts, then it shouldn't have been strong enough for him to be extradited to face poor parody of a justice system that exists in the US.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Paddy View PostWhy and how the **** was he allowed to get into the UK in the first place?
Now the more interesting question is, will there be a terrorist attack in the UK as an act of vengeance?
Leave a comment:
-
Why and how the **** was he allowed to get into the UK in the first place? He was a well known jihadist who had actively been fighting in various countries.
Leave a comment:
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Streamline Your Retirement with iSIPP: A Solution for Contractor Pensions Sep 1 09:13
- Making the most of pension lump sums: overview for contractors Sep 1 08:36
- Umbrella company tribunal cases are opening up; are your wages subject to unlawful deductions, too? Aug 31 08:38
- Contractors, relabelling 'labour' as 'services' to appear 'fully contracted out' won't dupe IR35 inspectors Aug 31 08:30
- How often does HMRC check tax returns? Aug 30 08:27
- Work-life balance as an IT contractor: 5 top tips from a tech recruiter Aug 30 08:20
- Autumn Statement 2023 tipped to prioritise mental health, in a boost for UK workplaces Aug 29 08:33
- Final reminder for contractors to respond to the umbrella consultation (closing today) Aug 29 08:09
- Top 5 most in demand cyber security contract roles Aug 25 08:38
- Changes to the right to request flexible working are incoming, but how will contractors be affected? Aug 24 08:25
Leave a comment: