
En bild på författaren av den nya lagen i Israel!
Israels nya föreslagna terroristlagstiftning gör i praktiken att all kritik, eller all medlemskap i organisationer som kritiserar Israel, definieras som terrorism. Om man ska tolka lagens bokstav borde jag kunna dömas som terrorist för att jag publicerar detta blogginlägg! Maken till luddiga gummiparagrafer har jag aldrig sett!!
Jag har normalt sett en hel del förståelse för Israels utsatta läge. Jag förstår mig inte på alla vänsternissar som okritiskt stöder vilka galningar som helst som kallar sig ”Palestinier”. Hamas erkänner inte Israels existens och dödar oskyldiga, den organisationen ska man alltså inte ha något att göra med om man är det minsta bekymrad om människors väl och ve.
Nu när jag har sagt det: över till själva den föreslagna lagen.
Israels nya terroristlagstiftning gör mig oroad. Och än mer oroad är jag över att detta förslag till ny terroristlagstiftning inte debatteras i Europa.
Se på definitionen av terrorism i lagförslaget. Den är så luddigt skriven att var och en som mot Israels politik kan definieras som terrorist.
Det enda som krävs är att du, eller organisationen du är medlem i, agerar utifrån politiska motiv, vill få internationella organisationer att ändra sin politik, gentemot Israel, är effektiva (=gör sin/din röst hörd).
I praktiken kan varje medlem av Vänsterpartiet dömas för terrorism om de besöker Israel. Iallafall om man tolkar lagens bokstav. Och varje medlem av varje organisation som ogillar någon del av Israels politik!!!
Jag klistrar in hela lagen här så den får spridning i Sverige! Värre terroristlagstiftning har jag då aldrig sett!!! Jag markerar de delar av texten som gör mig till terrorist!
Och jag vill återigen säga att jag inte stöder Hamas eller tar ställning för arabisk chauvinsim, men detta var nåt av det mest kvalificerade skitprat jag någonsin sett en regering lägga fram! Det är sånt här som får folk att bli rasande förbannade på Israels regeringar!
/T (Källa: JNEWS)
Definition of “terrorism”:
A “terrorist act” means the use or threat of action where-
(a) the use or threat is made from political, ideological or religious motives or out of hostility to the public,(b) the use or threat is designed to intimidate the public or to persuade a government or governmental organization, including international governmental organizations or public organizations, to act or to refrain from acting in a certain way; in this paragraph, a prior reasonable assumption that the use or threat of such an action will intimidate the public shall be the same as design to intimidate the public,
(c) the use or threat involves one of the following, or poses an actual risk of one of the following:
(1) actual damage to the body or liberty of a person, or danger to a person’s life or risk of serious injury to a person
(2) serious damage to state security or to the health or safety of the public
(3) serious damage to property or damage to property that involves or may involve damage to government institutions or symbols(4) damage or serious interference with essential infrastructure, systems or services, or serious damage to the state economy or the environment, or damage to the environment that could cause serious financial damage.
Definition of “terrorist organizations”:
The proposed law extends the definition of a “terrorist organization” to include so-called “envelope organizations” – organizations promoting, encouraging, supporting, cooperating or enabling the activities of “terrorist organizations.” Its explanatory notes specify that terrorist organizations are accompanied by support organizations engaged in socio-economic activities, as well as sympathizing organizations, without which they could not function.
The law also extends the definition of a member of a “terrorist organization” to persons participating in meetings or other activities of organizations defined as terrorist, or agreeing in principle to join a “terrorist organization,” even without acting on its behalf. Membership is assumed to remain in place until proven otherwise, and the burden of proof is on the alleged member.
Under the new law, if any crime is committed by a “terrorist organization” or by a member of one, it is assumed that this crime was committed with the intentions of a terrorist act. Crimes by a member of a “terrorist organization” are therefore assumed to be terrorist acts unless proven otherwise.
The Minister of Defense shall be authorized to declare an organization as a “terrorist organization,” but suspects and organizations can be convicted of terrorism or of membership even if the organizations involved have not been officially declared “terrorist organisations.”
The law grants the Minister of Defense the authority to declare organizations or individuals as terrorist, based on similar declarations by authorities overseas.
Suspects’ and detainees’ rights:
The proposed law permits a suspect to be held for up to 96 hours before being brought before a judge, and revises the period of detention of terrorist suspects without charge up to 30 days.
It also enables court hearings to be held in the absence of the suspect and denial of counsel for prolonged periods.
The law extends scope of the law permitting Administrative Detention (internment without trial), enabling the Minister of Defense to also impose “control orders” prohibiting the suspect from leaving a place or area, to impose exit bans from the country, and to ban suspects’ access to certain places, for a period of up to one year. It also enables police and army extensive authority to search persons and premises or carry out “any reasonable act” for the enforcement of these limitations.
Penalties:
Penalties are significantly stricter than in current anti-terrorist legislation. Those convicted of terrorism will serve 40-year minimum prison sentences, instead of 30.
According to the proposed law, criminal offenses should be punished more strictly if by intention, aim and circumstances they fulfill the definition of terrorist acts. Criminal offenses made with the intention of terrorism shall receive a double prison sentence, or 30 years.
In addition the law includes newly defined terrorism-related crimes with severe penalties, such as:
Directing a terrorist organization (25 years); employment by a terrorist organization (15 years); membership in an organization, whether it is an officially declared terrorist organization or not, and without proven participation in its activities (5 years); public expression of sympathy with a terrorist organization (3 years); Incitement to terrorism, including publicly encouraging, lauding or supporting terrorist acts or organizations; holding forbidden publications for dissemination or providing services for preparation, dissemination or publication or forbidden publications (minimum 3 years); providing means or services that can assist terrorist acts (2 years); harboring after terrorist acts (3 years); non-prevention of terrorism (3 years); threatening terrorism (half the sentence of the threatened act or 5 years); training for terrorist acts, for prevention of their discovery or for disruption of their investigation, or for the use or manufacture of weapons (7 years); receiving such training (5 years); trading in arms for terrorism (20-25 years); trading or holding goods belonging to a terrorist organization in order to pre-empt freezing of assets or confiscation (3 years); failing to report assets (1 year); vandalism to property for terrorist ends (7 years); or violation of control orders (2 years).Freezing of assets:
The proposed law includes a comprehensive chapter detailing extensive authority for three different methods of seizure of property and freezing of assets of suspected organizations and individuals without recourse to fair process. To this end, secret evidence and inadmissible evidence may be presented to the court in order to demonstrate connection between the assets and the perpetrator of the act, even if the organization involved is not a declared “terrorist organisation.” The law also grants the authorities extensive search and confiscation rights for purposes of seizure, and the right to close premises.
—————————————————-
Lägg till Jerlerup på twitter genom att klicka här!
Lägg till Liberaldemokraterna på Twitter genom att klicka här!
—————————————————-
Nytt: SDS, SVD, V, S, JINGE, V, S, V, V, PP, V, C, JINGE, Falkvinge , SVD, Expressen, DN, SVD
Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om Liberaldemokraterna, Hamas, Liberalism, Torbjörn Jerlerup,Palestina, israel,
Ja, rättssäkerhet och internationell rätt har aldrig Israel varit jätteduktiga på! Jag är liberal, men varken Israel- eller Palestinakramare! Internationell rätt måste följas, annars blir verkligen världen en anarki styrd av den starkes rätt!
Pingback: Liberaldemokraterna, vad är det? « Sverige är inte världens navel!
Jag är fullständig kallsinnig till skandinavers åsikter kring Israels handlande.
Jag stöder Israel på gott & ont, då Israel är regionens enda demokrati.
Resten är fickfilosofi från besserwisser där aldrig har skådat hur mynningen på en laddat Kalashnikov ser ut.
Just like playing music, video game voices are really clear.
All of the information and pictures displayed in this article are from the author’s own experience. Users have the choice of not only connecting their desktop computer, but the are also able to connect their i – Pod, PDA, stereo system, or other audio sources.