Slashdot Mirror


Arrested CERN Physicist Gets 5 Years For Terror Plot

An anonymous reader sends this followup to news we discussed in 2009 of a CERN physicist who was arrested for allegedly being in contact with al-Qaeda. The physicist, Adlene Hicheur, has now been sentenced to five years in prison. "He came under suspicion when threatening messages were sent to President Sarkozy in early 2008. The security services uncovered a series of email exchanges between Hicheur and an alleged al-Qaeda member called Mustapha Debchi. After his arrest in 2009 police found a large quantity of Islamist literature at his parents' home. At the start of his trial the 35-year-old scientist admitted that he had been going through a psychologically 'turbulent' time in his life when he wrote the emails. He had suffered a serious back injury, for which he had been taking morphine. But he always denied he intended to carry out any attacks."

113 of 155 comments (clear)

  1. didn't actually intend? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Well, that's OK then, let him go.

    1. Re:didn't actually intend? by dave420 · · Score: 1

      Nice generalisations. That's usually a great indicator the poster is full of shit.

    2. Re:didn't actually intend? by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      Interesting concept, let's stretch that into another analogy. You annoy the crap out of me and I ease that frustration by coming out with all sorts of 'ON PAPER' crazy crap, plots and schemes that I will in reality never do.

      The crazy crap, ploting and scheming 'ON PAPER' is all it ever is, even when it is shared amongst other frustrated idiots.

      This pointless strategising is no different to millions of people taking over the world on computer games. When then isn't a crime, the actual act there isn't a crime. When there isn't any material for carrying (real material no the crap, can of petrol for the lawn mover and a half a dozen empty soft drink bottles) the crime, then they aren't really serious.

      When a single warning would suffice and end the problem, you professionally paranoid wankers, stop being dicks trying to get promoted, drop around and issue the bloody warning. Even when the plotters and schemers get all huffy and start complaining to anyone that'll listen, I bet that it stops their mad schemes in it's tracks.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
  2. Re:What a dick. by MagikSlinger · · Score: 2

    Yeah! Just leave that to the birds! :-)

    --
    The bitter lessons of a veteran coder: http://bitterprogrammer.blogspot.com
  3. Aside from this strange story. by wcrowe · · Score: 1

    I'm intrigued by the nearly-impressionistic courtroom sketch artist's work displayed in the article.

    --
    Proverbs 21:19
    1. Re:Aside from this strange story. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That's a typical courtroom sketch in France, pencil and watercolor on paper. There are a handful of journalists specialized in courtroom sketch in France, so you've got to recognize their artwork. This one is signed Benoit Peyrucq from Agence France Presse. Just google his name to find more drawings from his hand.

      More examples of French courtrooom sketches
      http://www.iconovox.com/blog/2009/09/29/le-dessin-au-tribunal/
      http://traitsdejustice.bpi.fr/home.php?lg=fr&id=78

  4. Re:What a dick. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    What's a fracking wanker? Is that like, someone who jerks off to the extraction of shale oil?

  5. Re:What a dick. by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 4, Funny

    Or *use* CERN to destroy the false vacuum.

  6. Thought Crime by flyingfsck · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As far as I can tell this guy did not actually do anything. He got 5 years for a thought crime.

    --
    Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
    1. Re:Thought Crime by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

      Ah; but since the authorities made fairly significant fools of themselves in the prior guy-tooling-around-on-a-motor-scooter-and-shooting-people case, somebody has to go to jail for being a scary rag-head...

    2. Re:Thought Crime by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      He did confess to writing the threatening emails. that is considered a crime.

    3. Re:Thought Crime by masternerdguy · · Score: 1

      Oh nice. So we need to allow terrorists to hit their target before pressing charges otherwise they're "innocent". This isn't EVE Online.

      --
      To offset political mods, replace Flamebait with Insightful.
    4. Re:Thought Crime by BasilBrush · · Score: 2

      You know, with shoplifters, you can't arrest them until they leave the shop with the goods. And that's a good thing. There's always the outside chance that the frozen chicken they've stuffed up their jumper will be presented at the checkout before they leave.

      With terrorists, it's not such a good idea to wait until they've actually committed the physical crime. That tends to cost a lot of lives.

    5. Re:Thought Crime by slew · · Score: 4, Funny

      As far as I can tell this guy did not actually do anything. He got 5 years for a thought crime.

      Given this person is a theoretical physicist, perhaps thinking about, but not doing, is sufficient evidence of something? Just a thought ;^)

    6. Re:Thought Crime by tomhath · · Score: 3, Informative

      He sent threats to the president of France. That a crime most countries would take pretty seriously.

    7. Re:Thought Crime by tomhath · · Score: 1

      Please explain how they made fools of themselves. They caught up with the guy pretty quickly; unfortunately after he committed some pretty heinous crimes.

    8. Re:Thought Crime by wisnoskij · · Score: 1

      That is not fair, there is no proof that he ever thought about attacking anyone.
      The only evidence I see is that he knew a few Islamic extremists and had some of their literature. So he is guilty by association.

      --
      Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
    9. Re:Thought Crime by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      As far as I can tell this guy did not actually do anything.

      Yeah, in the US, at least one overt act is required in addition to talking/email/whatever for crimes of conspiracy to commit foo. Dunno how things are in France, but it sucks.

      He got 5 years for a thought crime.

      Well, no. A thought crime would be based on holding certain opinions. AIUI (I haven't read the emails -- are they available somewhere?) he actually discussed plans for a terrorist attack. It's certainly not something that IMO could be considered criminal in a free country, but it is a small step short of thought crime as such.

    10. Re:Thought Crime by Baloroth · · Score: 5, Informative

      Hardly. Conspiracy and planning to commit a crime is a crime, for good reason. Do we wait for a murderer to shoot someone before we can arrest and charge him? No, and for good reason.

      Thought-crime is quite different from actively communicating willingness to be part of an "active terror unit" (as TFA says).

      --
      "None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
    11. Re:Thought Crime by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      So give him jail time based on what he did instead of what he might do. There are sane Laws against uttering threats in most countries. I assume france is the same. Considering this is terror-law, he should be happy he was at least charged with something and given a sentance. If this was in the US he might not ever be chrged or released.

    12. Re:Thought Crime by geekoid · · Score: 1

      He didn't go to jail for the thought of 'overthrowing the government
        but for the means he threatened to do it with"

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    13. Re:Thought Crime by tomhath · · Score: 2

      They did exactly that. Threat is 5 years, acting on that threat is life without parole. People are arrested and convicted of that crime in the US on a fairly regular basis.

    14. Re:Thought Crime by WillDraven · · Score: 1

      Not around here (Raleigh, NC). They call it "concealing merchandise" and it's prosecuted like a misdemeanor larceny charge.

      --
      This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
    15. Re:Thought Crime by BootysnapChristAlive · · Score: 2

      Someone is generally innocent until they do/try to do something. Otherwise it's just a thought crime (unless they were threatening to do something and those threats were very likely to be carried out).

      I understand the desire to protect people, but not at the cost of individual rights. Everything else is just "for the children"/TSA mentality.

    16. Re:Thought Crime by TheRaven64 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      With terrorists, it's not such a good idea to wait until they've actually committed the physical crime. That tends to cost a lot of lives.

      There are steps in between thinking about something and doing it. For example, I could write a description of the orbital corrections required how to fly an asteroid into London during the Olympics. I could hate the Olympics enough to want to do it. Unfortunately, since I lack a space program, I can't actually do it. Arresting me for doing it would make no sense. On the other hand, if I'm threatening to set off a car bomb and I'm sitting at home with a van full of fertiliser and home-made detonators, the security services would be negligent if I were allowed to go for a drive.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    17. Re:Thought Crime by Mike+Buddha · · Score: 1

      Planning a crime is a thought crime?

      --
      by Mike Buddha -- Someday the mountain might get him, but the law never will.
    18. Re:Thought Crime by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Yes,

      And we have Christian terrorists in this country who actually carry out acts of terror-- bombing family planning clinics, murdering doctors, kidnapping family members of doctors, blowing up federal buildings killing hundreds. etc., but when it is a Christian, it is a lone actor, not Christian terrorists. I bet every one of the Christian terrorists had "Christian literature" in their homes as well.

      If we are going to go after Muslims, we need to go after Christians and Jews, etc. using he same standard, or we cannot call ourselves a nation of laws.

    19. Re:Thought Crime by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      At what point is it acceptable for them to step in?

      When you get in the van? When you buy the fertilizer? When you put them together into something that could explode?

      How long are we allowed to monitor you? When you bought the van in the first place?

    20. Re:Thought Crime by 0111+1110 · · Score: 2

      Perhaps the fact that it is considered a crime is the point. We have so few actual terrorists that we need to start arresting people who merely fantasize about it. Whatever happened to "sticks and stones will break my bones, but words will never hurt me."

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    21. Re:Thought Crime by 0111+1110 · · Score: 2

      So you want to convict people of just thinking about terrorism? You do realize that the definition of "terrorism" is going to continue to expand? Eventually it will include some activity that you think about.

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    22. Re:Thought Crime by tftp · · Score: 1

      he actually discussed plans for a terrorist attack

      You can see such discussions even in some very public threads on Slashdot. One can discuss plans of a terrorist attack to commit it or to defend against it. The distinction can be undetectable until you actually start acting toward one goal or another.

    23. Re:Thought Crime by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      As far as I can tell this guy did not actually do anything. He got 5 years for a thought crime.

      He's a CERN phycicist. That's some serious thinking going on in his head. It's like driving a tank instead of a bike. You must be more careful with a brain like that, everybody knows that.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    24. Re:Thought Crime by Jonner · · Score: 2

      Contemplating violence is quite different from taking concrete, provable steps toward that goal. The article is extremely light on what this guy planned to do or what steps he took.

    25. Re:Thought Crime by Jonner · · Score: 1

      You can't talk about "actually committed the phyical crime" without defining the crime. There could be a law that makes it a crime to stuff a frozen chicken up one's jumper, something much more observable than what goes on inside someone's head. AFAICT from TFA, all this guy did was communicate with "an alleged contact in al-Qaeda" and express willingness to become part of an "active terrorist unit." If that's enough to make him a terrorist, a woman saying "I'm going to kill my husband" could be convicted of attempted murder.

    26. Re:Thought Crime by theArtificial · · Score: 1

      Whatever happened to "sticks and stones will break my bones, but words will never hurt me."

      Words like yelling Fire in a crowded place or threatening the POTUS (1917)? Or Hate Speech laws... there are lots of words which are actionable.

      --
      Man blir trött av att gå och göra ingenting.
    27. Re:Thought Crime by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      You can't talk about "actually committed the phyical crime" without defining the crime. There could be a law that makes it a crime to stuff a frozen chicken up one's jumper, something much more observable than what goes on inside someone's head.

      And there could be a law that makes it a crime to engage in email correspondence with people you know to be in terrorist organisations, saying you are wanting to do a terrorist act. Which is equally observable.

      a woman saying "I'm going to kill my husband" could be convicted of attempted murder.

      Women who've tried to make arrangements with others to carry out the murder of their husbands have indeed been prosecuted.

      In all these cases it's a step beyond thought crime, to early action. One can't wait for later action when people would die.

    28. Re:Thought Crime by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      He did do something. He entered into email correspondence with a terrorist organisation offering to carry out a terrorist act.

      If he got in touch with a hit man asking for you to be killed do you think that should be illegal? Or would you want to wait until the hit-man has a gun to your head?

      After all, by your concept of thought crime, having such a discussion with a hit-man would be thought crime, not real crime.

      You probably want to re-read 1984. Thought crime is the crime of THINKING things contrary to the wishes of the state. It only takes one.

      By the time you've involved someone else, then it's conspiracy. Winston Smith was caught due to his conspiracy, but the crime itself was the actual thought.

    29. Re:Thought Crime by BasilBrush · · Score: 2

      There are steps in between thinking about something and doing it.

      Yes, and he took some of them. Thus making it more than a "thought crime".

    30. Re:Thought Crime by BootysnapChristAlive · · Score: 1

      He did do something.

      Okay.

      After all, by your concept of thought crime

      Did you read my comment? "(unless they were threatening to do something and those threats were very likely to be carried out)."

      But I do have a problem with imprisoning them if it's not damn likely that they were going to carry out the supposed plan.

    31. Re:Thought Crime by BootysnapChristAlive · · Score: 1

      At what point is it acceptable for them to step in?

      When the threat not only looks credible, but it's likely that you'll be able to carry it out.

      The government has misinterpreted obvious jokes before. Threats that were not credible at all. All parties involved knew they were jokes, but since the government doesn't know the people and is an emotionless overlord, it took them seriously.

      If a threat is not likely to be carried out, it's just a waste of taxpayer money (and an individual's freedom) to imprison them. They could be joking/emotional. Very possible with human beings.

      Might as well defend the TSA if you want to defend against unlikely threats.

    32. Re:Thought Crime by NemoinSpace · · Score: 1

      I don't know but if I'm following this thread right, people that live there don't get robbed as much?
      How long's it been since you "got out", i mean, lived there?

    33. Re:Thought Crime by NemoinSpace · · Score: 1

      No it's not. Stealing is stealing. Because you put on a big act making believe you didn't mean to steal just makes you a nut job to boot. You still do jail time after you get out of the physco ward.

    34. Re:Thought Crime by jo_ham · · Score: 2

      I agree with your post, but just a technical point - a person is not a murderer until they have actually murdered someone. If you arrest the person before they kill someone then attempted murderer is probably more accurate, assuming the planned crime was obvious.

    35. Re:Thought Crime by catmistake · · Score: 1

      the security services would be negligent if I were allowed to go for a drive.

      Well, I don't know where you're from, buddy, but here in teh Good 'ol U. S. of A® we have a little thing known as the Second Amendment to the Constitution. You can have my van full of fertilizer wired for detonation when you pry it from my cold, dead hands.

      Note to NSA/DHS/FBI, et al.: This is what's known as a protest comment. The comment should not be taken literally. I do not own a van, flush my fertilizer nearly as soon as it is constituted, and the only thing I am aware of in my life that detonates is my true love, usually about this time every year.

    36. Re:Thought Crime by TheLink · · Score: 1

      Whatever happened to "sticks and stones will break my bones, but words will never hurt me."

      What happened? That remark has never been true soon after words were invented.

      And just wait till voice controlled stuff becomes even more popular and prevalent.

      --
    37. Re:Thought Crime by LienRag · · Score: 1

      Where did you get that he was the one issuing threatening emails? Certainly not in TFA... The only thing I found that he confessed was discussing with internet trolls while under morphine for his discal hernia.

  7. Re:What a dick. by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 4, Informative

    Nice guess: "General director of the National Police Frederic Pechenard stated in November 2009 that Hicheur planned to attack a base of the National Defence in Annecy, which harbours the 27eme bataillon de chasseurs alpins, involved in Afghanistan." (Wikipedia.)

    In short, it looks like he was a scientist who hated the government, not someone bent on destroying the accomplishments of western civilization.

    Interestingly, the BBC article calls CERN "Cern" as though it were a person. To whom do we address our complaints?

    --
    Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
  8. Higgs Boson is great! by MRe_nl · · Score: 4, Funny

    And Standard Model is His prophet!

    --
    "Kill 'em all and let Root sort 'em out"
    1. Re:Higgs Boson is great! by Chris+Burke · · Score: 2

      Have you heard the good news of our Super-Symmetric Savior?

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    2. Re:Higgs Boson is great! by MRe_nl · · Score: 2

      Begone, Fermion apostate!

      --
      "Kill 'em all and let Root sort 'em out"
  9. Seriously? by schitso · · Score: 1

    After his arrest in 2009 police found a large quantity of Islamist literature at his parents' home.

    He obviously must be a terrorist, then.

    1. Re:Seriously? by geekoid · · Score: 2

      one data pooint without context. Well done. Now you can forgo thinking all together.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    2. Re:Seriously? by schitso · · Score: 1

      woosh

  10. Re:Communication Crime by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    FTFY

  11. a large quantity of Islamist literature by Eponymous+Hero · · Score: 1

    i bet it turned out to be an oversized print of a single copy of the quran. jihad on me for not capitalizing it. so if i find a large quantity of christian literature, should i assume an impending crusade? actually, i probably should.

    --
    insensitive clod overlords obligatory xkcd car analogy russian reversals whoosh pedant fanbois ftfy in 3...2...1..PROFIT
    1. Re:a large quantity of Islamist literature by geekoid · · Score: 1

      If they also had made threats,had the means to carry them out, and was in contact with terrorist christian cells to aid in carrying out your threats? then yes, you should expect that person to carry out a Christian Jihad i.e. crusade

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    2. Re:a large quantity of Islamist literature by Eponymous+Hero · · Score: 1

      sooooo, dubya bush then...

      --
      insensitive clod overlords obligatory xkcd car analogy russian reversals whoosh pedant fanbois ftfy in 3...2...1..PROFIT
  12. "intent" is the concept in question here by circletimessquare · · Score: 4, Insightful

    if you threaten mayhem, it is a not a "thought crime" to catch you and punish you on that basis

    if you threaten mayhem it is a statement of intent, for which you can, and should, be punished

    for example, if i were to threaten the life of the president, i would get a visit from the secret service, and i should get such a visit, and i should be punished

    if i call my girlfriend and tell her i am going to kill her, she should call the police, and the police should visit me, and they should visit me, and i should be punished

    this is not rocket science here folks. if you make a statement of intent to do bodily harm, it is going to be taken seriously, and it should be taken seriously

    now mod me troll and go back to being flabbergasted at a simple commonplace and normal legal convention

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:"intent" is the concept in question here by BootysnapChristAlive · · Score: 1

      if you threaten mayhem, it is a not a "thought crime" to catch you and punish you on that basis

      The likelihood of them carrying out the threat must also be taken into account. For instance, we can't punish people who were simply emotional and/or joking and had no intent to carry out the threat anyway.

    2. Re:"intent" is the concept in question here by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

      go ahead and threaten to kill someone. then later say you were just being emotional or joking. tell us how that works out for you

      you don't joke about making threats of bodily harm. it isn't funny, because the "likelihood" of carrying out a threat is not something that anyone except the threat maker can know

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    3. Re:"intent" is the concept in question here by BootysnapChristAlive · · Score: 1

      go ahead and threaten to kill someone. then later say you were just being emotional or joking. tell us how that works out for you

      Citing how the law is right now not isn't going to convince me of anything. If anything, it's just an appeal to law.

      it isn't funny

      Your opinion. There have been cases where people have been misinterpreted by the government. Everyone involved knew it was a joke, but since the government doesn't know people, they took it seriously (although the fact it was a joke should have been obvious).

      Having robotic, unsympathetic overlords as rulers can truly be harmful.

      because the "likelihood" of carrying out a threat is not something that anyone except the threat maker can know

      What are you talking about? After investigating (assuming it wasn't a completely obvious joke), if it is determined that they did not have the means to carry out the threat to begin with, a prison sentence likely won't be necessary.

      For instance, if someone said that they were going to build a billion nuclear bombs in a single day and shoot them at the US, that would qualify as an obvious joke. At the very least, nothing to take seriously.

      Lighten up.

    4. Re:"intent" is the concept in question here by rthille · · Score: 1

      Not the same. I can say I wish someone would kill Rand Paul, but that's not the same as threatening to do it myself.

      Hell, didn't the CIA have an assassination market under the guise of payment for predictions on the date of death of people?

      --
      Awesome furniture, accessories and cabinetry in Santa Rosa, CA: http://humanity-home.com/
    5. Re:"intent" is the concept in question here by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      go ahead and threaten to kill someone. then later say you were just being emotional or joking. tell us how that works out for you

      Been there, done that. Drunken fight, telling off from police. NFA.

      And fix your shift key, you spacker. All lowercase is just so 1990s.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    6. Re:"intent" is the concept in question here by X.25 · · Score: 1

      if you threaten mayhem, it is a not a "thought crime" to catch you and punish you on that basis

      if you threaten mayhem it is a statement of intent, for which you can, and should, be punished

      for example, if i were to threaten the life of the president, i would get a visit from the secret service, and i should get such a visit, and i should be punished

      You obviously have no idea what you're talking about.

      Yes, you would be arrested, but you would not be charged with "terror plot".

      if i call my girlfriend and tell her i am going to kill her, she should call the police, and the police should visit me, and they should visit me, and i should be punished

      You will find that in many countries, police can't do much, except bring the person who threatens in, talk to him/her, then release him/her. Court could try to prohibit that person from approaching/contacting you, but that is all pointless if person is planning to kill you.

      Once that person kills you, then the police can actually do something. Paradoxal, but that's how it is.

      this is not rocket science here folks. if you make a statement of intent to do bodily harm, it is going to be taken seriously, and it should be taken seriously

      if you threaten to 1% (or the 'president'), then yes - you will suffer some consequences.

      If you threaten to me or my neighbour, pretty much nothing will happen.

      Are you 12 years old or something?

      This person could have been charged according to laws that handle 'threats to president', but charging him with terror plot is beyond ridiculous.

      Thought crime. It is here, finally.

    7. Re:"intent" is the concept in question here by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

      "Once that person kills you, then the police can actually do something. Paradoxal, but that's how it is."

      This is acceptable to you?

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  13. Re:What a dick. by JonySuede · · Score: 1

    Almost, it is someone who extract shale gas while wanking.

    --
    Jehovah be praised, Oracle was not selected
  14. Disagree on simplistic view... by SuperKendall · · Score: 2

    for example, if i were to threaten the life of the president, i would get a visit from the secret service, and i should get such a visit, and i should be punished

    You'd probably get a visit but you should NOT be punished.

    In this instance the jail time comes because he went beyond stupid threats into contacting someone else about details that might bring threats to fruition. A much grayer area than mere threats...

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  15. Re:What a dick. by Chris+Burke · · Score: 3, Informative

    I think I read before that BBC policy is to only capitalize the first letter of acronyms, as distinct in this context from initialisms, which are when you abbreviate something with the first letter of every word but don't pronounce the result as if a word e.g. Cern vs EPA.

    --

    The enemies of Democracy are
  16. Imagine his power by Lucas123 · · Score: 1

    The ability tear this universe another black hole. I just shudder to think.

  17. Canada agrees by H0p313ss · · Score: 1

    Uttering threats is a criminal act in Canada.

    --
    XML is a known as a key material required to create SMD: Software of Mass Destruction
    1. Re:Canada agrees by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      That looks suspiciously short and way too readable to be a full statement of the actual law.

      If it applied every time someone shouts at someone for driving like an asshole or when people get riled up in a pub the entire population would be locked up.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    2. Re:Canada agrees by H0p313ss · · Score: 1

      That looks suspiciously short and way too readable to be a full statement of the actual law.

      If it applied every time someone shouts at someone for driving like an asshole or when people get riled up in a pub the entire population would be locked up.

      Fortunately Canadian judges are not elected. So you have to have a pretty good case.

      --
      XML is a known as a key material required to create SMD: Software of Mass Destruction
  18. Re:What a dick. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Interestingly, the BBC article calls CERN "Cern" as though it were a person. To whom do we address our complaints?

    To Bbc?

  19. I wonder about the sentence disparity by Quila · · Score: 1

    Murder: Get X years, life in prison, or death penalty

    Attempted murder: Get X/2 years

    Why are we rewarding people for failure?

    1. Re:I wonder about the sentence disparity by chadenright · · Score: 3, Interesting

      We're selectively breeding for an inability to commit murder. Social engineering at its finest!

    2. Re:I wonder about the sentence disparity by owlstead · · Score: 1

      Why is this modded interesting? I have a strong feeling it does not work that way, and "we" are certainly not doing that on purpose. Funny maybe, interesting? Nah.

    3. Re:I wonder about the sentence disparity by Lieu21 · · Score: 1

      Where is +1 pedantic?

  20. Re:What a dick. by Mike+Buddha · · Score: 1

    He was probably getting anti-matter to blow up the Vatican.

    --
    by Mike Buddha -- Someday the mountain might get him, but the law never will.
  21. Re:What a dick. by SomePgmr · · Score: 4, Funny

    Maybe a battlestar pilot with a habit of rubbing-one-out on the hangar deck after a successful run against the toasters.

  22. 5 years is nothing by benjfowler · · Score: 1

    The penalty for this very serious crime is unbelievably lenient. The muslims of France who would wish her ill, must be pissing themselves laughing now.

  23. Healing Time by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 1

    Well now he has 5 years to let his back heal without too much else to worry about.

    --
    "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
  24. Missed opportunity for DCRI/DGSE by FatLittleMonkey · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What ever happened to old fashioned spycraft? You know who he is, put him under surveillance, monitor his emails/phone/travel/visitors, he's in contact with al Qaeda, let him run with it. If he is directed to meet any local AQ contacts, bam, new surveillance targets. If he organises an actual attack, you intercept and now you have him and possibly a whole local cell, and not just for writing a few stupid emails. Hell, if nothing happens, then arrest him, wave terrorism charges at him, but only to turn him and send him out to work for you; give him a better story to lure out AQ, say he has access to radioactive material for a dirty bomb, but needs explosives and a bomb maker...

    --
    Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
  25. Hmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    What constitutes a "large quantity" of Islamist literature? When Christians get arrested do the articles talk about large quantities of Christian literature being found in their homes? What a horrible article.

    1. Re:Hmm by Roachie · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yes.

      Next question.

      --
      This sig is not paradoxical or ironic.
    2. Re:Hmm by Psyborgue · · Score: 1

      Breivik called religion a crutch. Not many who believe in what the Bible said and who call themselves Christian would agree with that statement. He saw religion as a useful placebo -- one that he used during his attacks to avoid the fear of death. When he referred to himself as Christian he was doing so in the cultural sense (in the same sense as many neo nazis do), not in the Religious sense. He saw Christianity itself, as a religion, as far too pacifist for his goals and would be in need of reform. Nowhere in the New Testament (what Christians follow) will you find any incitement to violence. The Qur'an is an entirely different matter. It has entire chapters dedicated to warfare (8, 9, among others). Note that I am not a Christian. I'm just trying to be fair. All religions are bad, but some religions are far more dangerous than others.

  26. Re:What a dick. by RabidReindeer · · Score: 1

    He was probably going to blow up CERN the fracking wanker.

    No. He was planning on developing a process whereby 100% of the mass in a 3oz. bottle of distilled water could be converted to energy. Should be roughly enough to blow up a plane, all the surrounding planes, the airport and a good size chunk of surrounding city.

    The activating mechanism, of course, fits in his underwear.

  27. What a fucking farce. by euxneks · · Score: 2

    The security services uncovered a series of email exchanges between Hicheur and an alleged al-Qaeda member called Mustapha Debchi.

    OK, Alleged. Someone alleged to be part of the Al-Qaeda. Why would that be a crime?

    After his arrest in 2009 police found a large quantity of Islamist literature at his parents' home.

    This is utterly ridiculous! What the fuck? Where is his religious freedom? I'm atheist as fuck, but if this dude had Christian literature it wouldn't have even garnered attention. Fuck everything about this.

    --
    in girum imus nocte et consumimur igni
    1. Re:What a fucking farce. by MICHICAUST · · Score: 1

      Dude, there's a difference between "islamic" and "islamist". The former is the common person's islam while the latter describes an extremist and at times violent ideology.

    2. Re:What a fucking farce. by Psyborgue · · Score: 1

      The former is the common person's islam. The latter is somebody who has actually read the Qur'an and follows it's commands. Islam is anything but a religion of peace.

  28. Re:What a dick. by ppanon · · Score: 1

    Who knows? Maybe some people thought that black hole creation theory was probable and decided they wanted to secure that weapon of mass destruction for use against the decadent West.

    --
    Laissez lire, et laissez danser; ces deux amusements ne feront jamais de mal au monde. - Voltaire
  29. Re:What a dick. by mug+funky · · Score: 1

    that's dumb.

    Britons call it "the beeb" anyway, should we not call them the Bbc?

  30. Re:What a dick. by TapeCutter · · Score: 2

    This is not in any way standard English

    Of course not, there's no such thing.

    --
    And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
  31. Re:What a dick. by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

    To Bbc?

    Yes, but only on Bcc.

    --
    Ezekiel 23:20
  32. Thought != Stated intentions. by TapeCutter · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Issuing death threats in writing or over the phone is a crime in most places, when done in a manner that can be recorded a direct threat of violence ceases to be a thought crime and becomes a stated intention, (metaphorically, it's a declaration of war). OTHOH, 5yrs is way over the top for such a trivial offence against the peace the rest of us actively maintain, especially since he had time to act on his threats but chose not to. A weekend in the slammer would be more than enough to convince him he's not as 'smart' as he thinks he is.

    I think more fair chunk of the violence in the world could be averted if someone steps in early and cools things down with a glimpse of the consequences (or a distractingly funny one liner), but 5yrs is stepping in with jackboots since it's longer than most people get for carrying out their verbal threats of violence.

    In other words, there are no GoodGuys(TM) in TFA, it's not a matter of choosing who's right because neither side has a moral or ethical leg to stand on.

    --
    And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    1. Re:Thought != Stated intentions. by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

      /s "I think more fair chunk" , "I think a fair chunk"

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    2. Re:Thought != Stated intentions. by LienRag · · Score: 1

      He had a fair trial and should take responsibility for what he did.

      Like you're obviously doing by posting AC...

    3. Re:Thought != Stated intentions. by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure why people are so compassionate

      Which makes me wonder why you think 'we' have a problem and you don't?

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
  33. The Moral of the Story is... by captjc · · Score: 1

    ...don't associate with people named "Mustapha." Also "Damien", "Boris" and "Rasputin".

    It won't end well.

    --
    Slow Down Cowboy! It's been 1 hour, 47 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment
  34. Its a statistics game; not security by bussdriver · · Score: 1

    Another bad guy caught with another headline to make politicians and managers look good by playing the numbers game. Why delay another stat at great expense and lost political points when you can get results TODAY? Besides, enemies give you more purpose why would you want really to eliminate them completely?

    Run the system like a business, short term gains at low cost and with high volume. Why invest in long term things that will benefit the people who get your job afterwards? If you don't perform as well as the last guy by raising the numbers you may not be around for long...

  35. Re:What a dick. by jo_ham · · Score: 1

    Well, it stands for British Broadcasting Corporation, so by their own rules, that would be BBC.

    We also call it many things - the beeb, the BBC, auntie, channel one/two etc.

  36. Re:What a dick. by Lexx+Greatrex · · Score: 1

    No. He was planning on developing a process whereby 100% of the mass in a 3oz. bottle of distilled water could be converted to energy. Should be roughly enough to blow up a plane, all the surrounding planes, the airport and a good size chunk of surrounding city.

    Indeed. About 1.8 megatons of TNT according to e=mc^2... I never get tired of doing that calculation.

    The activating mechanism, of course, fits in his underwear.

    If by his underwear you mean a colossal Penning trap capable of storing 3oz of antimatter, yes indeed! The brilliance of this evil scientist plot is it will only cost trillions of dollars and take at the very least several decades to fulfill -- so it will easily slip right under the radar.

  37. Re:What a dick. by Chris+Burke · · Score: 2

    Eh it makes a certain kind of sense, but someone below said they do PC as Pc which is even dumber.

    --

    The enemies of Democracy are
  38. Re:What a dick. by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 1

    Sure there is. The best part is that there are so many different standards to choose from—and in practice they're all ignored. Just like any other standard.

    --
    Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
  39. Re:What a dick. by Chrisq · · Score: 1

    that's dumb.

    Britons call it "the beeb" anyway, should we not call them the Bbc?

    Well. you could always LASER anyone who comes onto your RADAR for using that practice.

  40. Wait... by MICHICAUST · · Score: 1

    ...he didn't actually do anything and gets five years in prison for - nothing??? What third-world dictatorship does he live in?!?

  41. Re:What a dick. by tinkerton · · Score: 1

    Actually he was a secret agent of the pentecostal church trying to trigger the apocalypse by creating a mini black hole that would end up engulfing the planet.

  42. In other situation... by Alex+Belits · · Score: 1

    ...I would welcome a 5-year prison sentence for a person who calls himself a physicist while entertaining idiotic superstitions. But this is a matter of incompetence and possibly fraud, not terrorism.

    --
    Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
  43. Re:What a dick. by WillHirsch · · Score: 1

    Sorry, but where, exactly? Sounds like you just made that up.

  44. Re:What a dick. by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1
    To hit on the news.bbc.co.uk search for PC returns this article, containing:

    Mr Southey said Mrs Roberts had told one officer, Pc Jacqui Reid, that she did not mind being searched but would prefer it to be conducted at a police station as young people with whom she worked might see her being searched in the street.

    It seems they're now inconsistent about it, because the next few articles all use PC, but going back a bit further you'll find a lot.

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  45. Re:What a dick. by Mufasa_ooh_sayitagai · · Score: 1

    Well, played...

  46. Re:What a dick. by cffrost · · Score: 1
    --
    Thank you, Edward Snowden.

    "Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan
  47. Re:What a dick. by toruonu · · Score: 1

    We cross the streams all the time. That's how we get collisions :P If you look closely at the LHC status pages you can even see what the crossing angle is :P

  48. Re:What a dick. by RabidReindeer · · Score: 1

    If by his underwear you mean a colossal Penning trap capable of storing 3oz of antimatter, yes indeed! The brilliance of this evil scientist plot is it will only cost trillions of dollars and take at the very least several decades to fulfill -- so it will easily slip right under the radar.

    No I didn't. For one thing, that doubles the amount of mass involved, multiplying the explosive effect. Show some restraint!

    He's a physicist. That means he should have developed a process whereby he can flip over 50% of the water molecules into an anti-matter state under the influence of a catalytic reaction induced by 2 AA batteries and a single grain of table salt. I think Isaac Asimov wrote a story to that effect once.

    Snarfiness aside, that's how terrorists got to be more scary than the Evil Empire. The more we learn about the Universe, the more powerful the levers we learn how to pull are. A single person these days can wreak more havoc than an entire barbarian horde used to.