This
is a question from my Christmas quiz. What's the difference between a
'terrorist group' and a 'liberation movement'?
The proscribed terrorist group, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), have just deposed the Syrian leader Bashir al-Assad in Syria. Both the Labour Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister, have welcomed the overthrow of Assad by Syrian rebels and terrorists.
John Sawyer, a former head of MI6, recently told Sky News that the government should review its proscription of HTS because it had cut ties with al-Qaida over the past decade. Sawyer argued that it would be "rather ridiculous" not to be able to engage with the rebels who had taken control of Syria because of the group's proscription. Sawyer said:
"I think Abu Mohammed al-Jolani, the leader, has made great efforts over the last ten years to distance himself from those terrorist groups and certainly the actions we've seen of HTS over the last two weeks have been those of a liberation movement, not a terrorist organisation."
A person commits an offence under s.12(1) A of the Terrorism Act 2000, if they express an opinion or belief that is supportive of a proscribed organisation and in doing so is reckless as to whether a person to whom the expression is directed will be encouraged to support a proscribed organisation.
I know of a number of people, journalists and political activists, who have been charged and arrested under section 12 for comments and opinions they have expressed on social media in relation to the Israeli bombardment of Gaza.
The British government have designated HTS a proscribed organisation and its leader, Abu Mohammed al-Jolani, is considered a terrorist with a price on his head. In expressing support for HTS and al-Jolani, is John Sawyer committing an offence under s.12 of the Terrorism Act 2000?
Posts
2 comments:
Spot on. It's the same point I made in my recent blog.
Can you source it in terms of a URL as I'd like to record it. I will then send an innocent query to the SE Anti-Terror Squad asking if they have plans to arrest Sawyer! And if u can dig up any more I'd be grateful
many thanks
Tony Greenstein
As we both know the political establishment doesn't apply a consistent moral foundation to such questions. They always conduct themselves on the basis of political expediency. In order to facilitate their principle objective of maintaining the status quo of capitalist hegemony. What constitutes a terrorist or liberation fighter is not determined by an objective moral evaluation, rather, on a distorted reading of a situation that holds no account of historical events or democratic accountability.
Post a Comment