Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×

577 comments

Nobody in here make any cracks (5, Funny)

fotoguzzi (230256) | more than 4 years ago | (#30805870)

We don't want to get slashdot in trouble.

Re:Nobody in here make any cracks (3, Interesting)

michelcolman (1208008) | more than 4 years ago | (#30805878)

What if some hypothetical person was to threaten he would blow Slashdot sky high? Just a second, there's someone at the door...

Re:Nobody in here make any cracks (4, Interesting)

The FBI (1717712) | more than 4 years ago | (#30805914)

What if some hypothetical person was to threaten he would blow Slashdot sky high?

Just a second, there's someone at the door...

Who was it?

Re:Nobody in here make any cracks (4, Funny)

RotateLeftByte (797477) | more than 4 years ago | (#30805918)

Naturally, it was 'The Spanish Inquisition' whom nobody expects....

Re:Nobody in here make any cracks (1)

isama (1537121) | more than 4 years ago | (#30805966)

You did!

Re:Nobody in here make any cracks (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30806070)

I'll come in again.

Re:Nobody in here make any cracks (4, Interesting)

dimeglio (456244) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806258)

Twitter is the megaphone of social networks. I'm surprise this is the first such arrest being reported. He's gonna get a background check and will probably need to take some anger management courses. Airports do not like being intimidated.

I see another headline . . . (5, Insightful)

saisuman (1041662) | more than 4 years ago | (#30805882)

"Police in arrest man for Joke on Bomb-Thread Joke on Twitter."

Re:I see another headline . . . (1)

saisuman (1041662) | more than 4 years ago | (#30805888)

"Police in YOUR_COUNTRY_HERE arrest man for Joke on Bomb-Thread Joke on Twitter."

What part of "use a proxy" can't he understand? (1)

heretic108 (454817) | more than 4 years ago | (#30805896)

Tor, I2P, and thousands of anonymising proxies all over the web. The guy totally has no excuse.

If you're going to say stuff that could bring down unwanted consequences, then do it in a way that's extremely difficult to trace back to you personally.

Re:What part of "use a proxy" can't he understand? (4, Insightful)

xyph0r (1153429) | more than 4 years ago | (#30805926)

I think you're missing the point. If he knew this would happen, he probably wouldn't've done it at all. It was just him venting in a moment of frustration. How the police responded so quickly is beyond me, though...

Re:What part of "use a proxy" can't he understand? (1)

X-Power (1009277) | more than 4 years ago | (#30805952)

Someone who didn't like his rant decided to drop a dime probably.

Re:What part of "use a proxy" can't he understand? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30805932)

Not only would have have probably dozens of personally identifying twitters already written in the past, he didn't think his comment would warrant such a response to begin with.

Re:What part of "use a proxy" can't he understand? (4, Insightful)

Twisted Willie (1035374) | more than 4 years ago | (#30805934)

I don't think the most troubling part of what happened is that this guy didn't try to ensure his anonimity.

He didn't intend to make a bombthreat, hell, he didn't even make one. The fact that all hell breaks loose over something silly as this shows that the terrorists have won. Western society lives in fear, whether you like it or not.

Re:What part of "use a proxy" can't he understand? (2, Insightful)

Xiph1980 (944189) | more than 4 years ago | (#30805964)

Ehmm, no offense, but what happened to the Burden of Proof [wikipedia.org] , which the D.A. should present to within certainty show that you were about to commit a felony?
I mean, I'm sure you once shouted something akin to "I'm gonna kill you" to some drunk idiot on a Saturday night. Not a nice thing to say, granted but that doesn't make you immediately want to kill that person. Frustration has a tendency to make you say things you don't mean and/or would never do, that's why in most western countries it's very rare for someone to be trialled for something they did not (yet) commit.

Re:What part of "use a proxy" can't he understand? (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30806164)

Offense taken!

We're not the USofA so we don't have a D.A. or felonies, and he was arrested and questioned - he has not yet been trialled and indeed has not yet even been charged with anything.

He *may* be charged with "conspiring to create a bomb hoax" - that he did not intend to actually bomb the place is irrelevant.

Of course it is all a bit of an overreaction, but we might at least get the facts/terms right or it cheapens us all. It might also prevent him being a douche in future :-)

Re:What part of "use a proxy" can't he understand? (4, Insightful)

Xiph1980 (944189) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806244)

Well, don't be so lightly touched man, I'm from the Netherlands, we don't have a D.A. here either, but I can't be arsed to look up how exactly law is upheld in every country I make a comment on, and how court is ran. I sometimes watch Law & Order, so I know the term D.A. to be someone working for "the people" aka, the government, and is the one responsible to provide the proof that suspect John Doe is the actual person to have committed the crime. You probably have something similar over there, perhaps a person, perhaps a committee, or whatever, I don't care, but something or someone has to present the evidence in court. Fill in the blanks.

Re:What part of "use a proxy" can't he understand? (4, Insightful)

Nuskrad (740518) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806172)

You seem to be confusing the UK with somewhere that has guaranteed and protected rights. And if you were drunk and shouted "I'm going to kill you", you'd almost certainly be charged with a Public Order offence if the target made a complaint against you.

Re:What part of "use a proxy" can't he understand? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30806214)

How about 'conspiring to tell a killer joke'?

Re:What part of "use a proxy" can't he understand? (1)

Xiph1980 (944189) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806218)

Yeah, I know the UK is legally in a sorry state at the moment, I can only hope that the next voting round will bring some relief for you lot there, or perhaps wait for the fifth of november :)
And about the drunk shout-outs, I actually meant that if a bloke near you is drunk, and very annoying and looking for a fight or whatever, and you in your frustration blurt out something like "I'm gonna cut your throat if you don't get the fuck away from me", so saying it sober, but in a state of severe frustration. Doesn't mean you'd mean it, or actually would be capable of doing that, so shouldn't be grounds for the police to arrest you. Perhaps warn you and say something along the lines of "That's not a very nice thing to say, watch your language" but that should be it.

Re:What part of "use a proxy" can't he understand? (1)

jimicus (737525) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806016)

I think the problem is a lot of people don't really consider what could bring unwanted consequences.

The UK isn't the US - we don't have a great deal in the way of rights to freedom of speech enshrined in our laws. Hence, saying something like this can very easily have serious consequences and you can't start waving around a constitution as a defence.

Does it make me afraid to say some things online? Yes it does. There's lots of things I've typed up on /. only to think about it for a minute then hit "Cancel".

Does it make me feel any safer? Not really. Anyone who wants to blow up an airport is going to have more f*cking sense than to announce their intentions to the world on Twitter first.

Can I do much about it? Well, getting freedom of speech into law is something our politicians don't really consider a terribly high priority - mainly because it's hardly a vote winner. So talking a politician into making it part of policy is going to be an uphill struggle, and like most democracies the system is very heavily weighted against one person or a small group on a crusade.

Do I feel strongly enough about it to emigrate? The law as it stands in terms of freedom of speech has been much the same for centuries. It hasn't yet led to people being disappeared in the middle of the night for voicing an unpopular opinion - the fact that this is being reported is in itself a Very Good Thing. When newspapers are afraid to publish things like this because the editor would rather like to wake up in the morning, that is when you have to worry. And even if I did feel that strongly, I doubt there are many countries in the Western world today where you could say something like that on Twitter and feel perfectly safe that you'd not have any consequences to face.

Re:What part of "use a proxy" can't he understand? (2, Insightful)

bickerdyke (670000) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806100)

Anyone who wants to blow up an airport is going to have more f*cking sense than to announce their intentions to the world on Twitter first.

IIRC the IRA used to give warnings to the police a few minutes before a bomb was set to explode.

I guess they found out that "terrorism" is not identical with "killing people".

Terrorists want to spread fear. Ironically, thats what most gouvernments do in their "fight against terrorism".

Re:What part of "use a proxy" can't he understand? (1, Redundant)

Maddog Batty (112434) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806226)

You need to read up on the IRA. Sometimes they did. Sometimes they did not.

The IRA are not nice people. (Neither are the UDA and other such terrorist organisations)

Re:What part of "use a proxy" can't he understand? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30806274)

On top of this the IRA also had a system in place with code words distributed to the police and newspapers.... if the person phoning gave the correct code word for the day then the authorities knew it was really the IRA.

Re:What part of "use a proxy" can't he understand? (1)

bickerdyke (670000) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806294)

Never meant to imply that. (One of my things that left the strongest impact on me was a day trip to Belfast during my holidays in Ireland. I never imagined that hate could manifest itself as a city - it was almost absurd)

But I'd stick to my point that killing people isn't the goal of terrorists, but rather a means.

Re:What part of "use a proxy" can't he understand? (5, Informative)

VShael (62735) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806260)

The IRA gave coded telephone warnings a few minutes in advance.
This was NOT to allow civilians time to escape, or reduce the number of civilian casualties.

It was to verify that the IRA were the ones responsible for the attack, because after an attack there was usually a RUSH of extremist groups stepping forward to claim responsibility. The IRA wanted to make sure they got appropriate "credit" for the attack.

Re:What part of "use a proxy" can't he understand? (1)

jipn4 (1367823) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806120)

It hasn't yet led to people being disappeared in the middle of the night for voicing an unpopular opinion

Well, but it has apparently led to people not voicing unpopular opinions and venting their feelings; you yourself have canceled posts.

Politics in many areas might be rather different if people weren't afraid to say what they really think and feel.

Re:What part of "use a proxy" can't he understand? (1)

jimicus (737525) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806182)

Very true. I'm not afraid of being disappeared in the middle of the night but I am afraid of the consequences they place on anyone who they even remotely consider a potential suspect - I'd wind up on the US no fly list for sure, and I wouldn't be entirely surprised if other countries start to operate similar no fly lists.

Unfortunately I'm not a US citizen so there's not a great deal I can do about US no fly lists. Our government is too busy felching the US government to make any sort of diplomatic comment about such things.

Re:What part of "use a proxy" can't he understand? (3, Interesting)

tpholland (968736) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806248)

Do I feel strongly enough about it to emigrate? The law as it stands in terms of freedom of speech has been much the same for centuries.

Please don't emigrate just yet—you may be in luck. The European Convention on Human Rights guarantees freedom of speech for all EU citizens. It was enshrined into UK law by the Human Rights Act in 1998; this was the biggest fundamental change in the law regarding freedom of speech for centuries.

The problem is, the way it is enshrined into UK law also introduces a significant number of restrictions, mostly around the areas of security, crime, and morals. But the government has to actually pass specific legislation to limit speech in these areas, and if these national laws fall short of the European Convention then they can be challenged in the European Court of Human Rights.

One of the weaknesses of the British constitutions is that most people—even most British people—seem to have been persuaded that we don't have one, so few people are willing to stand up and fight against unconstitutional laws.

Far from free speech not being a vote winner, it looks likely that reform of our libel laws will become a significant issue at the next election, for example with campaigns like libelreform.org causing a lot of unrest in political circles.

Re:What part of "use a proxy" can't he understand? (2, Interesting)

Christoffer777 (991273) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806284)

If the editor decides not to publish an article for fear of his own life or security, it is too late to start worrying!

If you don't fight these forces/tendencies all the time, suddenly you will wake up in a situation that you cannot change, or is much, much harder to change peacefully.

It should be easier to defend against this stuff than to let it happen and then try to change it back.

This battle requires constant vigilance, not complacency until the point where you suddenly have to revolt or migrate to keep the same level of freedom/security. btw, how do you format paragrap

Living in fear (1)

naeone (1430095) | more than 4 years ago | (#30805922)

My car tyres are flat and I have go to the garage to blow them up. what should i do ?

Re:Living in fear (1)

draco664 (960985) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806026)

Ask the fully armed and dangerously paranoid chaps who will be at your door shortly. Be polite.

Re:Living in fear (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30806054)

My car tyres are flat and I have go to the garage to blow them up. what should i do ?

You should take the bus, of course. I have a much more serious problem, I'm so horny I'm about to explode, but my blow-up doll is flat! Somebody blow up my blow-up doll, please! If you're a sexy adult female (I'll even take a MILF!), post your naughty pic on 4chan and post your blow job application here. Cheers!

Explosively yours,
XOX

Re:Living in fear (2, Interesting)

internewt (640704) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806108)

My car tyres are flat and I have go to the garage to blow them up. what should i do ?

Could be worse, for me it's just the left hand rear tire, aka LHR. Could you imagine how lazy pigs fishing for leads (on twitter, FFS[1]) would react to "I need to blow up the LHR"?

[1] "Yeah sarge, just found out about 'da bomb'. It's going down at chelle97's mum's flat this weekend. It was on that Al-Taliban site, myspace".

Typical.. (3, Insightful)

malkavian (9512) | more than 4 years ago | (#30805936)

Of the way the world is heading. As I keep harping on about, and wish the politicians (and the police) would understand. Orwell's 1984 is a warning, not a "HOWTO manual".
By the standard they've set on this, most of the populace should be under arrest by dint of the anti-terror laws, which over here in the UK are draconian, misguided and completely over the top.
It really comes to something when we need to worry more about our own police and politicians than we ever would about a terror attack.

Gah (5, Insightful)

Mgns (934567) | more than 4 years ago | (#30805978)

Shit like this makes me wanna blow up Parliament

Re:Gah (4, Interesting)

Krneki (1192201) | more than 4 years ago | (#30805994)

Shit like this makes me wanna blow up Parliament

Remember, remember the 5th of November, the gun powder treason and plot. I know of no reason why the gun powder treason should ever be forgot.

Re:Gah (4, Informative)

L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806098)

Guy Fawkes was a terrorist.

Guy Fawkes was a revolutionary.

Re:Gah (4, Funny)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806252)

You could always ask him [slashdot.org] .

Re:Gah (1)

udoprog (1713528) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806266)

Doublethink ay?

Re:Gah (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30806146)

If there's one thing I hate it's ignorant yanks misquoting "Remember Remember" because they only know the idiot film version.

Re:Gah (2, Funny)

draco664 (960985) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806038)

Just be sure not to send a note to all the Catholic MPs beforehand. No good deed goes unpunished.

Re:Gah (1)

Sulphur (1548251) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806204)

And miss question time? Bummer.

Re:Typical.. (4, Insightful)

Yvanhoe (564877) | more than 4 years ago | (#30805990)

Honestly, I'm not sure which side I'm on. The guy makes a joke on twitter, which is public and made for raw information without context. It is akin to write a tag saying the same thing in front of the airport. It is normal for police to investigate, I really don't blame them there. They quickly saw there was nothing to it. I prefer to criticize the airport (who banned the man for life) and his company which suspended him for a lack of common sense.

Re:Typical.. (2, Interesting)

MartinSchou (1360093) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806034)

The guy makes a joke on twitter, which is public

His tweets are protected. [twitter.com]

Re:Typical.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30806058)

Now, they are.

The government will "protect" his tweets for the rest of his life.

Re:Typical.. (1)

LingNoi (1066278) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806084)

no shit! After you get taken in by the police I'd turn off public tweets too.

Re:Typical.. (2, Interesting)

BountyX (1227176) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806162)

UK basically has a nationwide proxy. The following ISPs share a proxy (Virgin Media, Be/O2/Telefonica, EasyNet/UK Online, PlusNet, Demon and Opal). I believe the government announced the execution of this plan mid last year (sorry too tired to link you). Long story short, the info was prob. sniffed before it got to twitter.

Re:Typical.. (4, Informative)

krou (1027572) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806320)

Umm, actually, that's not what happened (at least, that's not what was reported). As this news article [independent.co.uk] makes clear, 'On 13 January, after apparently receiving a tip-off from a member of the public, police arrived at Mr Chambers' office.' Although, that doesn't make it any better to know that people have now been so conditioned in the UK that they've become snoops.

Re:Typical.. (2, Insightful)

Uranium-238 (1586465) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806020)

Frankly this is no different to making a threat against someone's life or any other kind of threat that would entail crime.

Re:Typical.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30806104)

It is different in the scale of the threat and in the level of government involvement and money that will be spent to intervene. I see frankly no reason a bomb threat out of context should be assumed to be a joke. Are we going to tell Al Qaeda to say, "Just Kidding!" after every threat? This guy didn't even give that much indication that it was a joke according to TFA. Even causing a public panic or attempting to cause one is a serious crime, even if they couldn't tie him to a motive or a means to actually act on the threat.

Re:Typical.. (4, Insightful)

internewt (640704) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806170)

Frankly this is no different to making a threat against someone's life or any other kind of threat that would entail crime.

But he didn't threaten anyone, unless you have the reading comprehension of a child and cannot see a joke when one is presented to you.... oh yeah, this is the same police that recently had to lower their testing pass mark as they weren't getting enough recruits. Looks like that policy's working!

The guy from TFA made the mistake of saying something that allowed the pigs to use powers that if they don't use, they might lose!

"Can't have that training be wasted" said police PR spokesman H. Himmler.

Re:Typical.. (4, Insightful)

Jurily (900488) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806186)

Right. Because we all know, everyone is serious on the internet.

Nobody should be arrested because the authorities don't have a sense of humor.

Re:Typical.. (1)

Johann Lau (1040920) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806312)

"politicians (and the police) would understand. Orwell's 1984 is a warning, not a "HOWTO manual"."

But a warning for whom? Certainly not for callous powermongers, because at least in that book, Big Brother wins. And runs (sick, sad, twisted) victory laps in eternity. At least that's how I read it.

One cannot buy into the premise that some people should decide what's good for all people, and accept a minority owning the majority figuratively and literally, and then expect any other outcome in the long run?

IMHO we shouldn't wish for politicians to understand anything, we should seek for the people to care for themselves and one another more than they do. To condemn Big Brother is like explaining cancer cells how they actually *ought* to behave... instead of explaining that to the immune system as long as there is still anything left of it.

I know this is off-topic and honestly, it just feels good to say it so I did =)

This happens weekly (-1)

sciencewatcher (1699186) | more than 4 years ago | (#30805944)

This happens about every other week on an airport somewhere. It will still take some time but gradually more and more people learn not to make such jokes or use such language. Being at an airport is no excuse for using inappropriate language. There once were times (in the nineties) when there were no guns at airport. Now all airports have military style weapons to greet their travellers. Just adopt to the environment a bit more quickly.

Re:This happens weekly (1)

laura20 (21566) | more than 4 years ago | (#30805954)

Dude, read the story. It wasn't at an airport; it was on Twitter.

Re:This happens weekly (1)

sciencewatcher (1699186) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806198)

I read the story. I don't make references towards bomb threads in any remote way on twitter or anywhere else. In 1991, ten years before 9/11 I left from Amsterdam airport. I was greeted by two MP's with automatic rifles in the passenger terminals and the airliner I was on was escorted on the runway by two armoured cars. All passengers were questioned by two independent agents. There and then I figured it is not wise to even remotely hint at explosions. I later got arrested on suspicion of espionage after being caught taking a video of an orange grove. Learn to deal with the world we are living in.

Re:This happens weekly (1)

Leynos (172919) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806276)

"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man."

In short, no thanks.

Re:This happens weekly (1)

LingNoi (1066278) | more than 4 years ago | (#30805980)

Being at an airport is no excuse for using inappropriate language.

You seemed to not have even read the summary. Could I suggest reading the part about the guy making a joke on twitter. Could I also suggest reading the twitter comment he made about said Airport being closed.

Re:This happens weekly (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30806234)

No. The environment can adapt to me, thanks, or the environment can fuck off.

Robin Hood airport (1)

benwiggy (1262536) | more than 4 years ago | (#30805958)

Celebrating 800 years of political violence in the Nottingham area!

sigh (4, Insightful)

abigsmurf (919188) | more than 4 years ago | (#30805960)

It is depressing as hell to be a British citizen.

You get arrested then released without charge, the police take and store your DNA. The EU human rights court says this is illegal and wrong, Labour say they don't care.

You get accused of a sexual offence, it gets recorded. Even if the accusation is entirely baseless and the person who made it is jailed for making it, you'll still have it on your record. Good luck getting a job with children when that accusation is revealed to a potential employer. Even worse, the government can put a court order on these that make it illegal for an employer to reveal why you failed a background check. You're given no legal recourse to this, even if a mistake has been made and you're accidentally added to the register.

You can have (consensual) kinky sex, but if you video it, you're a sex offender. You can be 18 and have sex with a 17 year old legally but videotape it, you're a sex offender. Draw two stickpeople having sex, label one of them as being 17, you guessed it, you're a sex offender.

Organise a protest criticising against soldier in Afganistan and Iraq? That'll be declared illegal and you'll be arrested on public decency charges.

Being held 30 days without charge? Not enough! We must change the law to make it 90 days! After all, you wouldn't have been arrested it you weren't guilty!

It's rather depressing that Labour are supposedly the left leaning of the two main parties. I would hope that the Conservatives would cancel some of these laws when they're in power but I doubt it. Removing laws is pretty hard and the tabloids would crucify them.

Re:sigh (4, Insightful)

zwei2stein (782480) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806032)

(Leftist party is kind of expected to make such draconian laws in order to "protect" public: it is the very essence of being nanny state.)

You know what is actually depressing about this?

People do nothing about it. Chances are, joe sixpack is not going to be bothered by it because chances are he is not going to be bitten by such law. Because as long as you sheep your way throught life and spend evening watching telly, you are safe. All it takes is to simply allow some freedom taken away - freedoms which ordinary people rarely make uses of it is not surprising they are not bothered by disappearance of them.

Law & order is reichwing (1, Informative)

Nicolas MONNET (4727) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806132)

The NuLabour is not "leftist" by any means. Old Labour was. Old Labour is no more.

Law & order bullshit is right wing. It's the shit peddled by the likes of Sarkozy and Berlusconi that gets such morons elected (by retired assholes).

Re:sigh (5, Informative)

rve (4436) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806166)

(Leftist party is kind of expected to make such draconian laws in order to "protect" public: it is the very essence of being nanny state.)

I think you're projecting the American situation on another country.

What it means to be 'liberal' or 'conservative' can be vastly different depending where you are. In mainland Europe 'Liberals' tend to favor more freedom (hence the name liberal) at the expense of having less order and safety, while conservatives tend to favor more order and security at the expense of more repression.

You might find that the conservative vs liberal divide is (as far as I'm aware) uniquely American.

Some anecdotal evidence:

In Turkey, conservatives struggle to protect the strict separation of religion and state against liberals who wish to relax it. Where I live, conservative Christian politicians find their natural allies in the Green party, both wanting to roll the country back to some mythical idyllic past when it looked the way either God or Mother Nature intended, homosexuals join extreme right wing parties (because they feel threatened by Muslim immigration), liberals aim to restrict government interference in people's lives while conservatives wish the government to protect us from every real and imaginary threat conceivable.

Re:sigh (2, Insightful)

internewt (640704) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806254)

I just boils down to the fact that a one dimensional, or even binary, way of measuring political points of view does doesn't work.

Well, it works for one group: the American ruling class.

Whilst the electorate are busy slagging off the other side, the ruling class pretty much get all they want. They might have to bring things in slowly, or policies might need a few attempts at bringing in (lip service to democracy), but sooner or later they'll get their way.

Re:sigh (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30806036)

It's rather depressing that Labour are supposedly the left leaning of the two main parties. I would hope that the Conservatives would cancel some of these laws when they're in power but I doubt it. Removing laws is pretty hard and the tabloids would crucify them.

Even when the Conservatives are elected, the tabloids will still be in power.

Re:sigh (1)

dugeen (1224138) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806042)

Absolutely. But where else is there to go where they speak English and don't have conscription or identity cards? The US - nope, it's support our troops or get out over there too. Australia - rampant net censorship. New Zealand - pray-as-you-go welfare.

Re:sigh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30806076)

Canada?

Re:sigh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30806090)

Sweden?

Re:sigh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30806140)

Deutschland?

Re:sigh (1)

Barefoot Monkey (1657313) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806270)

Absolutely. But where else is there to go where they speak English and don't have conscription or identity cards? The US - nope, it's support our troops or get out over there too. Australia - rampant net censorship. New Zealand - pray-as-you-go welfare.

Let's see... Zimbabwe's right out. I would suggest Oz or NZ but you already discounted those. South Africa could be a good option, although the affirmative action is overboard. That leaves... Canada!

Re:sigh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30806046)

It is depressing as hell to be a British citizen.

It's depressing as hell to be a citizen of any western country because this is going to happen everywhere in the western so-called civilized world. Unless nobody noticed that, we had police abuse in the USA, the UK, Canada, Netherlands, Germany, Italy, France, Greece and other countries. I'm not completely sure if that's a side effect of the global market, but the evidence of it is overwhelming and it is the main reason why I refused to have children: the world is going to see the worst dystopian novels come true in a few years and I would not want to see my sons live such a miserable life.

Re:sigh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30806134)

Britain hasn't had the best reputation in history. Should this kind of thing surprise us? What are the odds of Britain having a revolution?

Re:sigh (1)

Shimbo (100005) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806246)

Britain hasn't had the best reputation in history.

Compared to what? It's been a colonial power but not as brutal as many of the others. It's been a stable democracy with respect for the rule of law for centuries, whilst other European countries were still absolute monarchies.

We gave the world Magna Carta and the Bill of Rights. There's plenty in our histyory to be proud of. Other parts, not so good but that goes for pretty much anywhere.

Finally an XKCD joke that does not exist yet. (1)

Errol backfiring (1280012) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806262)

Draw two stickpeople having sex, label one of them as being 17, you guessed it, you're a sex offender.

and probably won't

Re:sigh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30806286)

With an election looming it would be nice to see some of these issues on the agenda, why aren't they?

No-one seems to care.

The Tories say they are opposed to compulsory ID cards but only because of cost not for any civil liberty reasons.

The only party that seems to be against all this is the Lib Dems, their leader (whoever he is) saying he'd go to jail than carry an ID card.

Re:sigh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30806322)

You get arrested then released without charge, the police take and store your DNA. The EU human rights court says this is illegal and wrong, Labour say they don't care.

Firstly, the European Court of Human Rights isn't an EU institution. Secondly, the law to replace to amend the DNA retention rules to comply with the court ruling is being debated today. It depresses me that hardly anyone even seems to have noticed.

Dissent (4, Insightful)

kegon (766647) | more than 4 years ago | (#30805970)

How very, very sad. How can anyone think for one second that his tweet was serious ? What a bunch of idiots. Not only the authorities but also the person who reported him.

It seems we're slowly moving to a state where only correct thinking is allowed. No joking, no sense of humour, irony or annoyance.

Re:Dissent (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30805992)

Tweety chirped on him and everyone knows Tweety doesn't lie.

Re:Dissent (1)

L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806232)

Slowly moving? This has all come about during Nu-Labour's time in office, mostly Tony Blaire.

Hopefully forcing him to give evidence publicly regarding the invasion of the Middle East will see him get some form of just desserts.

Lucky he did not end like (3, Interesting)

AHuxley (892839) | more than 4 years ago | (#30805982)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DoPPvPbe-SM [youtube.com]
They really like to "ground" people in the UK who make a fuss :)
All this web 2.0 stuff is watched by NSA, CIA, FBI, GCHQ, state task forces and your local PD.
So if your having a lol, remember who provided the seed cash to many of more 'effortless' web 2.0 sites.

VERY slow response (4, Insightful)

MartinSchou (1360093) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806004)

Obviously the police didn't take the threat seriously at all:

A week after posting the message on the social networking site, he was arrested

If it takes the police to find Paul J Chambers [twitter.com] when there a PICTURE [twimg.com] of him on his Twitter profile AND it tells you he's from Doncaster, England.

Now, I'm not the police, but I think that if I had access to a phone book of Doncaster, I could probably find the guy in a few hours. Given that he's 90% likely to have a drivers license, it's not like it'd make it any more difficult to find him.

Geez!

Re:VERY slow response (3, Insightful)

amRadioHed (463061) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806050)

How do you know how fast they responded? It was seven days after he made the post that he was arrested, but we don't know how long it was before the police were aware of the post.

Re:VERY slow response (1)

xyph0r (1153429) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806056)

However, if you did it, you'd be able to do it privately, without all the beaurocracy that the police would likely have to go through. I bet getting an arrest warrant takes a few days. Mere speculation, though. I don't really know anything about police protocol.
but they'd have to:
1) establish that it's a threat
2) do the actual tracking down
3) get a warrant for his arrest
4) ???????????? 5) PROFIT erm, I mean LOOKING LIKE FOOLS

Re:VERY slow response (1)

The FBI (1717712) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806078)

Now, I'm not the police, but I think that if I had access to a phone book of Doncaster, I could probably find the guy in a few hours. Given that he's 90% likely to have a drivers license, it's not like it'd make it any more difficult to find him.

How long do you think it would take to find you?

Re:VERY slow response (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30806196)

Yeah, but he declared that the bomb would go off in a week and a half time, so the police put him on the low-priority list

Why the securithugs do this (5, Insightful)

dugeen (1224138) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806006)

They always claim that they have to take all jokes seriously. But really these events are about punishing people who heckle during performances at the security theatre.

Re:Why the securithugs do this (1)

Goffee71 (628501) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806256)

No, they have to respond to complaints from members of the public, even if it takes them a week or two. During investigations if they find out it was a joke, they can then choose not to get it.

Re:Why the securithugs do this (1)

internewt (640704) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806300)

Damn, I've been shovelling my own version of insight onto this discussion, so I can't give you any slashdot insightrons. Someone mod the parent up, stat!

I like your analogy, "security theatre heckler". I wonder how well that'd go down printed on a t-shirt whilst at an airport? Bonus points for the writing in Arabic ;)

Figure of speech? (1)

El_Muerte_TDS (592157) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806080)

"I'm going to eat at until I explode"

I have a solution (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30806082)

All it needs is a couple million people in every country posting every day the same identical message on every board in the planet.
Good luck arresting them all.

Re:I have a solution (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30806202)

All it needs is a couple million people in every country posting every day the same identical message on every board in the planet.
Good luck arresting them all.

First post?

Why do British police go about in threes? (3, Funny)

Nicolas MONNET (4727) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806126)

Stolen from the comments in the Independent: Why do British police go about in threes? One can read, one can write, the other keeps an eye on the 2 dangerous subversive intellectuals.

Seems appropriate. Although I would say that French police aren't any better, they just go about in pairs.

If I were a terrorist... (5, Interesting)

selven (1556643) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806130)

I would make a fake bomb threat in an airport, and then... just leave.

Millions of dollars wasted, millions of dollars more airport security theater implemented just because, and to top it off no actual bomb needed.

I'm not convinced the police was wrong here (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30806142)

I agree with the Slashdot opinion that Britain tends to go overboard with police action lately, but honestly in this case I'm not so sure they were wrong. The man wrote:

Robin Hood airport is closed. You’ve got a week and a bit to get your shit together, otherwise I’m blowing the airport sky high!!

Sounds like a bomb threat to me. I didn't see any context indicating that this is merely a joke.

I was taught by my parents, many many years before 9/11, that making bomb threats, even jokingly, is a bad idea because if anyone mistakenly takes you seriously, it WILL get you in trouble and possibly arrested. Maybe this guy's mom should have taught him the same thing.

Satire / Comedy in publication is illegal now? (1)

Rivalz (1431453) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806184)

Someone help me out here. If someone were to post a satire joke, poem, or comedic phrase involving blowing up the planet via twitter would be actionable offense and any organization would be foaming at the mouth to have first dibs on this person. I understand questioning an individual and holding them for the normal time. But arresting and charging someone with a crime is not the way to handle things.

idiot (3, Insightful)

chentiangemalc (1710624) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806200)

Interesting a lot of people defending this guy - but threatening to blow up an airport is just stupid. this is nothing new with bomb threats though , even pre-9/11 when in primary school somebody called our principal and made a bomb threat, and the whole school had to be cleared for the day while it was searched, and even though no bomb was found the police still spent some effort to find the prankster, because even as a joke there is a necessity for such threats to be investigated, and is a waste of police resources and time. don't even bother with proxy, just don't make bomb threats, it's not smart or funny.

Guess Britain and the U.S. are safe of Qaeda now (1)

fadir (522518) | more than 4 years ago | (#30806220)

There is no need for more attacks, the authorities do a splendid job at keeping their citizens frightened and in fear.
Probably just a question of time until they start bigger raids and maybe even start to execute people to be sure that those cannot cause any harm.

What has the world come to? One bigger terrorist attack and the U.S. bombs the shit out of 2 countries. Some more unsuccessful tries and several countries go mental and start to treat everyone like a possible mass murderer. I guess I get banned from several countries now for posting subversive messages and being a possible threat as well.

Time to relocate to a lonely island, a long forgotten cave on Antarctica or into a tend in the desert. That sounds almost comfortable compared to what we experience here at the moment.

(Oh for sarcastically disabled people and authorities: that was sarcasm, all of it. Gotta make sure to add that to every post on the net now. You never know who's just waiting with a gun next to your door ...)

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...