<p>
</p>
<p>Before you look at the link, guess what her job was.</p>
<p>[British</a> Muslim woman convicted of penning poems about beheadings | the Daily Mail](<a href=“British Muslim woman convicted of penning poems about beheadings | Daily Mail Online”>British Muslim woman convicted of penning poems about beheadings | Daily Mail Online)</p>
<p>Would you favor similar laws in the U.S.?</p>
<p>to be thrown in jail for writing is damn scary</p>
<p>kind of what some of our founding fathers feard</p>
<p>cgm: I agree, and if she was thrown in jail because she was penning poems, I would agree with you. The article is misleading in how it is titled and introduced - unspurisingly.</p>
<p>In reality, she was arrested because she had an extensive collection of manuals related to terrorism. Manuals on how to make roadside bombs, how to use a sniper rifle properly, etc. etc. She also tried to send money to terrorist groups.</p>
<p>I don’t have any problems with someone being thrown in jail for that.</p>
<p>so she had books…so what? i have books…having reading material should not be a reason to jail anyone</p>
<p>imagine, being thrown in jail for having reading material- um, does that sound like something that should be done in a democracy?</p>
<p>and my H sent money to Sein Fien…good thing he wasn’t jailed for that</p>
<p>[AFP:</a> ‘Lyrical Terrorist’ found guilty in British court](<a href=“http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5jGSQbQoIMInqQHZj92K8M1zxBrqw]AFP:”>http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5jGSQbQoIMInqQHZj92K8M1zxBrqw)</p>
<p>LONDON (AFP) — A 23-year-old who called herself the “Lyrical Terrorist” and penned poems with titles including “How To Behead” has Thursday become the first woman to be convicted under terrorism legislation.
Samina Malik, who worked in a newsagent at London’s Heathrow airport, was a “committed Islamic extremist who supports terrorism and terrorists,” prosecutor Jonathan Sharp told the Old Bailey.
Malik, from Southall, west London, denied being a terrorist and said she used the nickname because she thought it was “cool”.
She was convicted of possessing records likely to be useful in terrorism and bailed ahead of sentencing on December 6.
Judge Peter Beaumont warned her that she could face jail, adding: “You have been in many respects a complete enigma to me.”
When police searched Malik’s bedroom after arresting her last October, they found a document in which she said she wanted “the opportunity to take part in the blessed, sacred duty of jihad”, prosecutors said.
“I always sit alone to think and ponder how it would be to unite with the Muslim ummah (community) and to go shoot rocket-launchers, help them load their ammunition, nurse the wounded, and what the atmosphere would be like,” she added.
Her poem “How To Behead” contained the line: “It’s not as messy or as hard as some may think/It’s all about the flow of the wrist.”
Officers found documents on her computer entitled “How To Win In Hand To Hand Combat,” “How To Make Bombs” and “Sniper Manual”, the court heard.
On an Internet social networking site called Hi-5, she described her favourite television shows as “watching videos by my Muslim brothers in Iraq, yep the beheading ones, watching videos by Osama bin Laden…and other videos which show massacres of the kaffirs (infidels)”.</p>
<p>lets through her in jail for that</p>
<p>CGM: Do you have reading material that’s about how to use terrorist tactics to kill people?</p>
<p>I’m very loathe to censor literature and stuff like that, but there’s a line that has to be crossed before I consider it excessive, and sending a woman to jail because she is reading stuff about how to kill people doesn’t quite approach that line, for me. She had an al-Quaeda jihad manual!</p>
<p><em>edit</em> As to your 2nd article, it omits the actual reasons she was jailed. I don’t know if you posted it for that exact reason, or what, but she **wasn’t jailed for the poems/b]. She was jailed because she had all the terrorist manuals. The poem thing is a red herring that is being used by the press as some kind of incitement or something.</p>
<p>I find it really scary that possessing reading material is itself a crime…</p>
<p>I wathc Dexter who talks about murdering bad people, i read mysteries that talk about murder and mayhem…so what?</p>
<p>So she had a manual…my goodness gracious…</p>
<p>Guess we should all stop watching 24 then…that’s a manual for torture and killing if there ever was one</p>
<p>And if I did have a manual like that…when it become illegal to have books we are in a very very dangerous place</p>
<p>what one judge considers okay, another can consider terrorist</p>
<p>and once we start jailing people for their reading material, we have lost all freedoms</p>
<p>btw, dont’ go into porn, of course kiddie porn is wrong and pictures should be illegal, but as replusive as Writing about it is, writing shouldn’t be illegal</p>
<p>CGM: I agree with you absolutely about the slippery slope, and I’m just as frightened as you are of the possible consequences of censuring people for possessing certain reading material.</p>
<p>But honestly, use your judgment. This wasn’t 24; this wasn’t a murder mystery; this wasn’t an action movie. This was a vast collection of terrorist manuals, published by terrorist organizations. That’s criminal.</p>
<p>I think criticizing the British government’s prosecution of this woman shows an amazing lack of the sensitivity to the cultural traditions of others. It’s not fair to judge the British by American sensibilities. They have a rich history and tradition of their own and we can’t expect to force our laws upon them. Personally, I like diversity and celebrate the traditions of other cultures.</p>
<p>citygirlsmom said: so she had books…so what?</p>
<p>You would say this for someone whose fav videos are “the beheading ones” and enjoys watching Osama and “massacre of the infidels” ?</p>
<p>How do you know she didn’t just do that for entertainment and not already stepped over the line - of becoming a terrorist?</p>
<hr>
<p>WashDad said: Personally, I like diversity and celebrate the traditions of other cultures.</p>
<p>what if those other cultures want to kill you and your family?</p>
<p>edvest1: I’m 99% sure that WashDad was referring to respecting the culture of the British state in which prosecuting people for things that may be considered the domain of person liberties in America is not something that he agrees with. Not that he thinks terrorism should be respected as a culture.</p>
<p>I believe it is and should be illegal to produce something to incite or provoke others into violence.
I do not believe that true free speech aims at harming others</p>
<p>I think WashDad’s comment was tongue-in-cheek.</p>
<p>If you read the article, this person sounds like a ticking time bomb - maybe literally.</p>
<p>Britain’s been attacked by terrorists numerous times recently including at Glasgow airport while I was in Scotland last summer. They need to exercise vigilance. So does the USA.</p>
<p>[boy we have short memories](<a href=“Professor: Shooter's writing dripped with anger - CNN.com”>http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/17/vtech.shooting/</a>)</p>
<p>If someone is a risk to others and indicates that in their writings- is" free speech" of the individual, more important than the safety of the group?</p>
<p>Apparently some feel it is.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No. Rather than prosecute her, I would surveil her (so to speak.)</p>
<p>My libertarian sympathies are always strained by cases like this. This woman wrote a “poem” detailing the best method by which to saw off the head of a living human being.</p>
<p>So many other things to get exercised about, so many other people to be concerned about.</p>
<p>I’ve seen double standards before, but emeraldkity’s observation should strike home to some of the other posters on this thread. </p>
<p>This is what police and surveillance are for. Its too bad they didn’t wait to see who else they could round up in her network of fellow travelers.</p>
<p>emeraldkity is correct.</p>