BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Glorification of Terrorism

 
 
johngault22
17:15 / 16.02.06
I was listening to "Today In Parliament" last night which had the highlights of the debate about the re-inserting of the word "Glorification" into the new anti-terror bill.

Anyway I got to thinking what cultural icons could be considered Glorification Of Terror, aside from the obvious ones Guy Fawkes Night, Allo Allo, The Secret Army, Michael Collins and all the films about The American War Of Independence. I wondered if films like The Matrix & Star Wars series' would fall foul of the law.

The Matrix series for mainly the second film where they take out the power grid and various buildings.

Star Wars because the blow up the Death-star.
 
 
Mistoffelees
18:52 / 16.02.06
If the law passes, will it be illegal to consider people as heroes, who tried to change history by blowing up other people with bombs?

In Munich a man once planned his bombing one year in advance. He had no accomplices. First, he got a job at a quarry, where he got the explosives. He then moved to munich, told his new neighbours, that he´s an inventor, and started building the timing device. About a month before the attempted assassination, he secretly let himself be locked in the hall, where he built the bomb into a column. That took him thirty nights. The bomb exploded at 09.20 pm, exactly the time he had planned. Eight people died.

The assassination attempt failed only because of bad weather. It was raining, so Hitler took the train instead of a plane back to Berlin and left 13 minutes early. Had the sun been shining that day, he would have died november 8th 1939.

Today Georg Elser is considered a hero. So to me it makes no sense passing such a law. Is it too much an effort to condemn each individual terrorist attack? As my example should show, there´ll always be exceptions to the rule. It smells of lazy legislation.
 
 
Dead Megatron
18:57 / 16.02.06
Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't you brits "flail" Guy Fawkes lifesized dolls in november the 5th? If that's correct, then it's not glorification of terror, it's just a way to mock catholics for, well, losing the "war" (no offense taken on my part, btw)

But, on the other hand. the upcoming Alan Moore-inspired movie, V for Vendetta, certainly fall in that category. Can't wait to see it.
 
 
ShadowSax
19:21 / 16.02.06
as soon as we use words like "glorification" and "terror" in actual laws, we're really in bad shape. and it looks like we're really in bad shape.

couldnt one then read into that law that having a picture of muhammed on their car bumper is a glorification of terror? i remember islamic taxicab drivers in nyc on 9/12/01 with as many american flags on their cars as would fit.

...

train of thoughts...

if i toast to the liver of ted kennedy, i'd be glorifying terror by association, no? all those boston irish funds going back to the homeland to fund the insurgency, what words to use...

i guess putting up a purple flag at my house might also be that there glorification too.

this gets scary.

definitely blowing up the death star, especially the second one, remembering the kevin smith notion that all those poor union workers were blown to smithereens for just doing their jobs.

et tu brute?
 
 
Dead Megatron
20:41 / 16.02.06
It's not terrorism when they win. It's revolution
 
 
invisible_al
20:56 / 16.02.06
Judge's still have to enforce the law, despite what you might hear a large number of judges have their heads screwed o right. Something to do with a daily diet of reality that parades through their court room. They have a tendency not to enforce stupid laws until they're repealed.
 
 
Supaglue
08:25 / 17.02.06
Although, Invisible-al, the problem with judges is that (a) they become case hardened, (b) they never have to retire and many are of an older generation and (c) they're unelected.
 
 
Supaglue
08:25 / 17.02.06
Oh, and predominantly white.
 
 
Mistoffelees
08:57 / 17.02.06
Could you explain that last comment, please?

What´s wrong with UK judges being "predominantly white"? Aren´t most British people white? In Britain 92 % of the population are Caucasians [source wikipedia], so why would you disagree, if 92 % of the judges in Britain were Caucasians?
 
 
Supaglue
09:05 / 17.02.06
Well let me find some statistics, but in the meantime, by way of example: the proportion of black, young males going through the courts far outstrips the proportion of black judges.

More later....
 
 
Dead Megatron
10:18 / 17.02.06
What´s wrong with UK judges being "predominantly white"? Aren´t most British people white? In Britain 92 % of the population are Caucasians [source wikipedia], so why would you disagree, if 92 % of the judges in Britain were Caucasians?

That's an excellent point, but, since we're talking statistics, is there 8% of non-caucasian judges in the UK?
 
 
Supaglue
10:22 / 17.02.06
I'm on it!
 
 
Evil Scientist
10:32 / 17.02.06
the proportion of black, young males going through the courts far outstrips the proportion of black judges.

Sorry for continuing the threadrot, but are you (Supaglue) suggesting that the judge for a specific person should be of their ethnic group? It just sounds like you're accusing every white judge in the UK of out-and-out racism.
 
 
Evil Scientist
10:39 / 17.02.06
Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't you brits "flail" Guy Fawkes lifesized dolls in november the 5th?

The tradition of burning Guys on Bonfire Night, whilst not that common in my area still goes on in England. In some places it's not just effigies of Guy Fawlkes, but also the Pope (whacky Protestant/Catholic tensions).

I wouldn't call it glorification of terrorism as, arguably, Fawlkes was percieved as a terrorist and Bonfire Night celebrates the fact that the Gunpowder Plot failed.

It's still a bit dodgy though. But I have fond memories of watching the Guys burn on the fire (in a scary Wicker Man way).
 
 
Mistoffelees
10:41 / 17.02.06
That's an excellent point, but, since we're talking statistics, is there 8% of non-caucasian judges in the UK?

Found it:

 
 
All Acting Regiment
10:47 / 17.02.06
Regarding the white judges, I think white is here being used as a shorthand for "white, upper middle class with comfortable lifestyles"- and likely to have a certain set of values because of that which clouds their judgement of people in the opposite position.

I think the word "Glorification" is absolutely too vague to be at all useful. I mean, students with banners saying "Support the Palestinian struggle" could be read as glorification- I doubt they're intended this way, but still.

I think it's an unfortunate fact that sometimes, in some places, there needs to be bombs and paramillitary groups- generally when the existing authority is entirely abusive (though feel free to disagree). Is there a law in place banning "glorification of totalitarianism"?
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
10:51 / 17.02.06
No, there isn't, and perhaps more tellingly, there will never be a law in place that outlaws glorification of state terror when committed by ourselves or our allies.
 
 
Supaglue
10:54 / 17.02.06
First point, if we take Wikipedia's proportion of 'non-caucasians' to be correct at 8% of the UK's population (I'm sure I've seen estimates at a lot higher - somewhere around 13%), one might imagine a judiciary at a similar level.

However the proportion of ethnic judges is grossly under represented, in an institution that is traditionally reactionary and slow to change.

In 2000, the level of ethnic minorities who were judges was put to parliament by Lord Woolf, during questioning of his Access to Justice papers. At that time, he found the proportion of judges from ethnic minorities to be around the 0.7% mark of the judiciary. [not got a link for this, sorry].

Although there has been an attempt to address this, the figures have not greatly increased since:

(UK gets first High Court Judge) – Sept 2004


"In England and Wales there are just nine black circuit judges amongst the 623, or 1.4%.
Ms Dobbs is the first person from a non-white ethnic minority to join the High Court. "


Progress indeed.
Further light is shed in this study by the Dept of Constitutional Affairs:

‘Increasing Diversity in the Judiciary – Oct 2004’


"Less than 7% of the judiciary are ethnic minorities"

However a closer look reveals

"In courts (as opposed to tribunals) … less than 4% of judges are from ethnic minorities "

Obviously, this doesn’t necessarily mean that the few judges that are from ethnic backgrounds are Muslim, or that the white majority of judges aren’t, but I think the principal Islamic community in the UK are formed by ethnic monorities (I can look for statistics if this is disputed)
Couple to this,
If these laws, being made in the current climate, are primarily aimed at Islamic ‘glorifiers of terrorism’, there is an unbalanced judiciary presiding on these cases. That is not to say justice isn’t being done, but that justice isn’t seen to be done and an element of confidence is therefore lost.

Especially when you read Commission for Race equality reports like this…


”Asian (11%) and black (13%) people were more likely to be arrested as a result of a stop-and-search than white people (7%)…..
The proportion of black people arrested in 2002 was on average five times higher than that of white people….
Plea-bargaining was less likely in cases where the defendant was African-Caribbean….
Proportion of ethnic minority staff in CJS agencies' workforces Courts: District judges 4, Circuit Judges 1, High Court Judges 0”


It seems that the people most likely to be those that will experience the court process as a defendant, are the least likely to have a counterpart from their own ethnicity on the tribunal of law adjudging them.

It seems empathy is a quality that has never been held highly in the judiciary.
 
 
Supaglue
10:56 / 17.02.06
No, there isn't, and perhaps more tellingly, there will never be a law in place that outlaws glorification of state terror when committed by ourselves or our allies.

Word.
 
 
Supaglue
11:06 / 17.02.06
Weevil: Sorry for continuing the threadrot, but are you (Supaglue) suggesting that the judge for a specific person should be of their ethnic group? It just sounds like you're accusing every white judge in the UK of out-and-out racism.

I don't think it's necessarily threadrot.

If you're introducing laws that, however applicable to all they seem, are in practice going to be targetted at ethnic minorities (and the police WILL target minorities), it must follow that to avoid a lack of confidence in the judiciary, ethnic minorities must at least be proportionatley reperesented - perhaps (and I mean perhaps) not just in accordance with the proportion of that minority in society but also incremented in some way with the likelihood that minortiy group has of being arrested, and its proportion of prison population.

I'm not saying that a judge should always mirror a defendant's ethnicity, more that the chances that it may, be increased.

I'm in no way suggesting racism of anyone individually. More an institutional thing.
 
 
Malarki
14:24 / 19.02.06
I did start a thread on this topic some time ago - Terrorism Bill.

The interesting recent development of course is that we now have a "perscribed organisation" as the democratically elected government of a middle eastern state. The US/UK reaction tell's you alot about their programme of regime change and democratisation.
 
 
enrieb
22:29 / 19.02.06
definitely blowing up the death star, especially the second one, remembering the kevin smith notion that all those poor union workers were blown to smithereens for just doing their jobs

Those poor union worker knew the risks when they signed up to help construct a space station/wepon named 'The Death Star'
 
 
enrieb
22:45 / 19.02.06
I suppose 'glorification of terrorism' depends on what your definition of a terrorist is, in the first place.

One mans terrorist is, another mans freedom fighter

So, terrorism - what's that, then?
 
 
Malarki
19:34 / 21.02.06
Well I think the news story about the actors from Michael Winterbottom's The Road To Guantamano being detaineed at Luton airport under anti-terrorist legislation may give us some insight into the power-that-bes intent with the new act. BBC

Does remind me of that classic scene in Father Ted where he has to explain to Father Dougal the difference between fantasy and reality.

It'd be hilarious if it wasn't so scarey.
 
 
Scrambled Password Bogus Email
23:35 / 23.02.06
couldnt one then read into that law that having a picture of muhammed on their car bumper is a glorification of terror?

Sorry to dredge right back, but...this is just so...wrong. A picture of muhammed on your car bumper? Do you, in fact, read the news at all?

See, I generally don't, but even I can spot the glaring nonsense of this example.

Sorry, please continue.
 
 
All Acting Regiment
08:06 / 24.02.06
Yes, you should read the news.
 
 
PlanetNiles
22:07 / 25.02.06
Uh oh I might be in trouble. More than once I've been hear to declare, with a chuckle and wink, that in regards to politicians my sympathies are with Guy Fawlkes. I won't be able to get away with that any more.

What's the proposed definitions of "glorification" and "terrorism" I wonder.

HyperDictionary.Com gives me:
Glorification

1. [n] the act of glorifying (as in worship); "the glorification of God"
2. [n] a portrayal of something as ideal; "the idealization of rural life was very misleading"
3. [n] a state of high honor; "he valued glory above life itself"

\Ter"ror*ism\, n. [Cf. F. terrorisme.]
The act of terrorizing, or state of being terrorized; a mode
of government by terror or intimidation. --Jefferson.


By which telling people that they're threatened by invisible enemies is a form of terrorism and glorifying someone who does that is glorification of terrorism. Hmm... Who do we know like that?

"Anthony Blair you have been found guilty of flagrently glorifying the terrorism of one George Walker Bush..."

Sorry, daydreaming again.

What really worries me is the parallels I find myself drawing between the statements regarding the invisible terrorists who apparently want to murder me and my family in our beds and another invisble enemy that was alleged to haunt Europe early last century.

When will we be presented with the Protocols of the Elders of Islam, hmmm?
 
 
Char Aina
09:12 / 26.02.06
my sympathies are with Guy Fawkes.

i was under the impression that only recent terror counts as Terror. talking about ireland(as long as its 1916 and not 1969) or 5/11 is fine, isnt it?
 
  
Add Your Reply