You may be aware there is government legislation (The Terrorism Act 2006) which makes it a criminal offence to make “a statement that is likely to be understood by some or all of the members of the public to whom it is published as a direct or indirect encouragement or other inducement to them to the commission, preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism or Convention offences.”
If you’re interested and can’t sleep very well you might like to take a look at all the offences covered:
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2006/ukpga_20060011_en_2#pt1-pb1-l1g1
What’s most concerning is the wording “likely to be understood by some”. How can we legislate for the inference or meaning taken by an individual? Poor old Dunkin’ Donuts – they’d be doing a 7 year stretch if they’d run their seemingly innocent ad campaign from 2008 in the UK:
So where does that leave us? Are we in breach of the Act? Presumably the more incendiary amongst us may see the words ‘Terrorism’ or Terrorists’ and take it as an immediate green light to take up arms! The very words seem to carry a great deal of power these days – but do they really persuade people to commit the very acts they describe? Surely that’s absurd?
Recent Comments