UK Woman Charged As Terrorist For Computer Files

Terror Alert Brown writes "Reuters is reporting that a UK woman has been charged as a terrorist because of computer files on her hard drive. According to the article, these files included 'the Al Qaeda Manual, The Terrorists Handbook, The Mujahideen Poisons Handbook, a manual for a Dragunov sniper rifle, and The Firearms and RPG Handbook.' She was picked up in connection with the plot stopped in August to detonate explosives in airplanes flying out of Heathrow airport. Now might be a good time to delete any copies of the Anarchist's Cookbook you once read for amusement and still have floating around on your hard drive."

She was linked to a group of terrorists...

She was linked to terrorists, and the files are evidence.

She wasn't arrested and charged BECAUSE of the files.
there is a difference.

Re:She was linked to a group of terrorists...

read the next paragraph ma man...

Police said the charges against the woman were connected with the arrest last month of a man caught at Heathrow airport in possession of a night vision scope and a poisons handbook.

the wouldnt have looked at her without some evidence she was linked to the man who was arrested prior who had similar documents on a hard drive.

Re:She was linked to a group of terrorists...

A totally innocent combo:

...in possession of a night vision scope .... and a poisons handbook.

... especially in light of:

MI5 tracking '30 UK terror plots' [bbc.co.uk]

MI5 knows of 30 terror plots threatening the UK and is keeping 1,600 individuals under surveillance, the security service's head has said.

Re:She was linked to a group of terrorists...

My point is that the charge against her is apparently "possession of forbidden documents." I understand the reason that she's a suspect.

> they wouldnt have looked at her without ...

you're getting close to the "don't worry about making everything illegal, the cops will only arrest people they think are criminals" argument.

Re:She was linked to a group of terrorists...

Forbidden in the context of terrorism, yes. If I was writing a book about Al Qaeda I could legally possess the Al Qaeda Manual; if I was planning an act of terrorism it wouldn't.

The relevant section of the Terrorism Act 2000 is here - http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00011--g.htm# 57 [opsi.gov.uk]

It's not a great law as it basically makes being a bit terroristy a crime rather than something concrete such as possession of a weapon - possess a weapon such as plastic explosive and you've committed an offence (assuming you're not special forces or in mining); planning to do a terrorist spectacular would make the offence worse, but even if the law couldn't prove terrorist intent they'd still have you. Here the law has to prove (should this ever come to court) terrorist intent, otherwise there's no offence.

But it's better than banning the books outright.

Since when is linking a crime?

I think the most terrifying aspect of this whole thing is that she was arrested not because of anything she did, but rather because of her association with others the government doesn't like.

This isn't justice; it's not even close. It's more like vigilantism with official sanction.

How long will it be before merely showing an interest in "Terrorist Causes" or "Terrorist Methods" - however defined by the government - is enough to get one arrested? Or has it happened already?

Democracy in Britain is officially dead.

Re:Since when is linking a crime?

Democracy=This,

If the people say they want a witch hunt then you have to give the people a witch hunt. If you think democracy is some magic wand where everyone does right then you're wrong. It's an excuse for the masses to hunt the minorities while feeling they have the high ground and "doing the right thing".

Re:Since when is linking a crime?

If the people say they want a witch hunt then you have to give the people a witch hunt. If you think democracy is some magic wand where everyone does right then you're wrong. It's an excuse for the masses to hunt the minorities while feeling they have the high ground and "doing the right thing".

That is why most "democratic" nations are actually variations on a theme called "Republic". That is the democractic will of the masses is constrained by a set of rules, such as the Bill of Rights, Habeas Corpus, and the like. This prevents (at least in theory) tragic outcomes of the proverbial situation where 2 wolves and a sheep vote democratically on "what's for dinner?".

And that is precisely why the recent abolishment of Habeas Corpus by the "conservative" fear mongerers is such a devastating (and maybe fatal) blow to the integrity of system of government of the US.

Re:Since when is linking a crime?

Please try to read John Stuart Mill's treatise, On Liberty. Mill discusses a danger to democracy he refers to as "the tyranny of the majority." This is one of the strongest arguments for a Republic that has intrinsic rights at its core.

Re:Since when is linking a crime?

How is this insightful? She was "associated with" people who tried to blow up several airplanes. I use quotes because it sounds like they're saying she was a collaborator, or part of the cell. These aren't people "the government doesn't like," these are people who demonstrably tried to kill hundreds of innocent people.

Re:Since when is linking a crime?

No formal charges?

DONALD STEWART WHYTE, 21, OF HIGH WYCOMBE, BUCKS

Charge under Section 5 (1) the Terrorism Act 2006 says "between 1 January and 10 August 2006, with the intention of committing acts of terrorism, [he was] preparing to smuggle parts of improvised explosive devices on to aircraft and assemble and detonate them on board".

Mr Stewart Whyte also faces three firearms charges. The first said "on 9 August he had in his possession a Baikal 8mm pistol, contrary to section 5 (1) of the Firearms Act 1968".

He is also charged with possessing a magazine clip with 10 rounds of ammunition and a silencer without holding a firearms certificate, contrary to section 1 (1) of the Firearms Act 1968.

MOHAMMED SADDIQUE, 24, OF WALTHAMSTOW, EAST LONDON

Charge under Section 5 (1) the Terrorism Act 2006 also says "between 1 January and 10 August 2006, with the intention of committing acts of terrorism, [he was] preparing to smuggle parts of improvised explosive devices on to aircraft and assemble and detonate them on board".

AHMED ABDULLAH ALI (AKA ABDULLAH ALI AHMED KHAN), 25, OF WALTHAMSTOW, EAST LONDON

On diverse days between 1 January 2006 and 10 August 2006 within the jurisdiction of the Central Criminal Court conspired with other persons to murder other persons (contrary to Section 1 (1) of the Criminal Law Act 1977).

On diverse days between 1 January 2006 and 10 August 2006 within the jurisdiction of the Central Criminal Court with the intention of committing acts of terrorism engaged in conduct to give effect to their intention to smuggle the component parts of improvised explosive devices onto aircraft and assemble and detonate them on board (contrary to Section 5 (1) of the Terrorism Act 2006).

TANVIR HUSSAIN, 25, OF NO FIXED ADDRESS

On diverse days between 1 January 2006 and 10 August 2006 within the jurisdiction of the Central Criminal Court conspired with other persons to murder other persons (contrary to Section 1 (1) of the Criminal Law Act 1977).

On diverse days between 1 January 2006 and 10 August 2006 within the jurisdiction of the Central Criminal Court with the intention of committing acts of terrorism engaged in conduct to give effect to their intention to smuggle the component parts of improvised explosive devices onto aircraft and assemble and detonate them on board (contrary to Section 5 (1) of the Terrorism Act 2006).

UMAR ISLAM (AKA BRIAN YOUNG), 28, OF STRATFORD, EAST LONDON

On diverse days between 1 January 2006 and 10 August 2006 within the jurisdiction of the Central Criminal Court conspired with other persons to murder other persons (contrary to Section 1 (1) of the Criminal Law Act 1977).

On diverse days between 1 January 2006 and 10 August 2006 within the jurisdiction of the Central Criminal Court with the intention of committing acts of terrorism engaged in conduct to give effect to their intention to smuggle the component parts of improvised explosive devices onto aircraft and assemble and detonate them on board (contrary to Section 5 (1) of the Terrorism Act 2006).

ARAFAT WAHEED KHAN, 25, OF WALTHAMSTOW

On diverse days between 1 January 2006 and 10 August 2006 within the jurisdiction of the Central Criminal Court conspired with other persons to murder other persons (contrary to Section 1 (1) of the Criminal Law Act 1977).

On diverse days between 1 January 2006 and 10 August 2006 within the jurisdiction of the Central Criminal Court with the intention of committing acts of terrorism engaged in conduct to give effect to their intention to smuggle the component parts of improvised explosive devices onto aircraft and assemble and detonate them on board (contrary to Section 5 (1) of the Terrorism Act 2006).

ASSAD ALI SARWAR, 26, OF HIGH WYCOMBE

On diverse days between 1 January 2006 and 10 August 2006 within the jurisdiction of the Central Criminal Court conspired with other persons to murder other persons (contrary to

"linking" should be considered very carefully

So... do you know, for certain, that everyone you know, or have exchanged files with or phone messages or mail or time with, is *not* or *will not in the future* be considered a criminal or a terrorist?

  Years ago I dated a woman for several months who was arrested (and eventually convicted) as being a courier for a methamphetmine distribution ring a few months after we ceased seeing each other. I had no idea what she was into, but I was visited many times by police officers who grilled me at length as to our relationship - because my phone# was in her cellphone and there were "handwritten documents" - letters, notes, journal entries - in her domicile that had my name on them - and threatened with prison for being "non-cooperative"; my apartment was searched twice, and details of the investigation leaked to local reporters.

  I was "associated" with a drug ring, although I had no knowledge nor involvement in it. Fortunately I was cleared without being indicted or subpeoned, but only after several months of random interrogation and very annoying, obvious and aggravating surveillance which cost me reputation and money. Many months later there were still people spreading damaging rumors about me; I eventually moved more than a thousand miles from there, partially for personal reasons, but also because my business dried up to an extent as a result of the attention. One of the things the police threw at me was our intense exchange of phone calls over that short period. They just didn't seem to believe that maybe I was interested in her because she was an attractive woman. I spoke to a local lawyer about it who told me there was no recourse - iow, I couldn't sue the local police department for the damage caused.

  I'd like to note that no public statement was ever made by the local PD regarding my innocence, despite repeated demands on the part of me and my lawyer to do so. That, to me, was criminal negligence on the part of the local PD. How many times does one see public apologies for ruining someone's life in that sort of circumstance? IF this woman turns out to have been innocently duped, will she ever recover her life? What recourse might *she* have?

  In the US, we have this oft-repeated yet apparently little understood concept called "innnocent until proven guilty". Or at least we used to.

  I'm not defending the woman in the article (insufficient data), but I am trying to point out just how damaging baseless allegations can be, especially when made by "authorities" and spread by the media - and if you think that you are immune to it, you might want to reconsider that. It can happen to anyone; don't think you're immune to it simply because you are innocent. People in a society are interconnected, that's why we call it a society. What are you going to do, avoid all connections with other people? There was another sort of damage there - I'm even more paranoid than I used to be when it comes to relationships. Can I sue them for it? Should I? I've been advised against it, as the burden of "proof of damages" would be too difficult. But the damage is very real.

  So tell me, friend, where should the line be drawn?

snarked

 

Re:Since when is linking a crime?

I think the most terrifying aspect of this whole thing is that she was arrested not because of anything she did, but rather because of her association with others the government doesn't like.

You act as if this is a new thing - but its not. She could just as easily been implicated in a group plotting a murder, or a bank heist, or an insurance fraud scheme - and still be picked up questioning and possible charged if she was found in possesion of circumstantial evidence linked to that type of crime. Its pretty much routine.
 
 

Democracy in Britain is officially dead.

Nah. Nothing much has changed (at least in this particular case) except it made the media. (If she was implicated in a child pornography ring, and found with lolikon on her PC - I bet you'd be among the first frothing at the mouth to hang her high.)

Re:Since when is linking a crime?

Do you remember the paedophile riots a few years back when a paediatrician in Portsmouth was beaten up because the mob were too stupid to know the difference?

Same mentality, new cause...

It's a strange time

I am hoping that there were other lines of evidence against this woman as this is what we need to be very careful about here in the US. The concept of a thought crime is not new and any society that starts prosecuting individuals for books they may possess or for studying things is becoming a a darkness right out of an Orwellian nightmare.

Hell, as kids we had copies of the Anarchists cookbook and manuals that the US government printed for crafting insurgencies and survival that had all sorts of directions for creating improvised munitions and such. It makes me wonder if we would have been suspects back then. Of course the early 80's were a different time when a couple of 14-15 year olds could carry a rifle out in the Texas countryside to shoot cans without even a second glance. Now, we have bastardized Republicans (Neocons) who are out to create National IDs, document any passage in and out of the country, search our personal information including credit files and library files, and some even propose to index all of the information on personal computers in an effort to screen out "enemy combatants" not to mention revoking Constitutional rights such as Habeus Corpus. It's a strange time.

Re:It's a strange time

Some reading material for you all:

The Al Qaeda Manual: http://www.disastercenter.com/terror/ [disastercenter.com]
The Terrorist's Handbook: http://www.totse.com/en/bad_ideas/irresponsible_ac tivities/168593.html [totse.com]
The Mujahideen Poisons Handbook: http://www.thedisease.net/arcana/nbc/chemical/Muja hideen_Poisons.pdf [thedisease.net]
The Dragunov Sniper Rifle Technical Description and Service Manual: http://kalashnikov.guns.ru/manual/english/svd/ [kalashnikov.guns.ru]

Now don't go reading this stuff and getting yourself arrested.

Re:It's a strange time

It's illegal to plan crimes.

Say that to yourself again, really slow this time. What about writing novels, movie scripts, or what about those individuals in police agencies and federal agencies that think about planning crimes to prevent them. What you are saying is that it is illegal to think about carrying a crime out. There should be nothing illegal about that. However, if you go about carrying those plans out, then it becomes a crime. Or at least that is how it should be.

Say for just the fun of it have some blueprints for making bombs then on the same table have a postcard with the parliment buildings on it.

If you really believe this, then you are part of the problem.

The cops don't just go searching random computers hoping they'll stumble on some terrorist then they can arrest them.

But these are just the sorts of things the US and UK governments have been moving towards. Datamining through any available database available to them to search for incriminating evidence and calculate likelihood indices for incrimination.

Re:It's a strange time

Say that to yourself again, really slow this time. What about writing novels, movie scripts, or what about those individuals in police agencies and federal agencies that think about planning crimes to prevent them. What you are saying is that it is illegal to think about carrying a crime out. There should be nothing illegal about that. However, if you go about carrying those plans out, then it becomes a crime. Or at least that is how it should be.

The key is intent... And it's up to a court to decide that, not police officers.

 

Re:It's a strange time

If she had been arrested only for the files on her HDD that would be absurd, but she was connected with a terrorist group which they had foiled; the files on her HDD are practically incidental.

This is a case of MI5 doing a damn good job, not a big brother issue; infiltrate the terrorist organization, collect information, bring everyone involved in before the plot takes shape.
The mind boggles at the idea that terrorists, who plan to blow up/irradiate/poison civilians and don't plan to get away with it, shouldn't have any action taken against them until they've committed their crime.

Re:It's a strange time

The cops don't just go searching random computers hoping they'll stumble on some terrorist then they can arrest them.

No, not random computers. Computers of minorities and people whom they don't like.

When

When the Mujahideen Poisons Handbook is outlawed, only outlaws will have the Mujahideen Poisons Handbook.

Mod Parent Funny

Slashdot, the only place where a blow-coffee-through-nose remark gets modded insightful.

I guess it would be a good time to bring it up

...that the EU rules on flight were strictened for basically no logical reason, but based on the horsecrap Blair is feeding to the UK and the world.

Basically the overwhelming majority of experts on the field confirmed that liquid explosives and things like dirty bombs are not feasible or existant.

Re:I guess it would be a good time to bring it up

Yeah. That's why they wanted to use TATP [wikipedia.org]. You would only need to bring a complete mobile chemical laboratory to the plane, mix stuff with chemical fumes and being extemely careful for 2-2.5 hours in the toilet and then if you're lucky you could detonate it. Sounds realistic.

About dirty bombs: it spreads the radiation! This means the small pieces are not nearly enough to cause even a temporary health problem! -- that's a summary coming from a terrorism expert.

Looks like it was a good thought, dreadful summary

Experts have pointed out that the UK peroxide bombing plot, as discussed, was wildly implausible [interesting-people.org].

You are completely correct that both liquid and binary explosives exist. Nitroglycerin has been used as an explosive in the past.

However, the restrictions on carryon luggage didn't seem to be solving any actual security problem and don't really seem intended to. (If you're really worried about binary explosives, why make them pour the containers into the same bin, in front of what could be hundreds of people?)

I'm as guilty as she is...

I'm from the UK and heard this story on the radio today

My HD still has the anarchist cookbook and all sorts of shite in my home directory. Stuff I copied from friends on floppys back when I was a 13yo.
I am honestly getting worried where CCTV Blairs Britan is taking us.

No I've nothing to hide. I've nothing to share either.

RPG Handbook?

Uh, if you'll excuse me, I need to go hide my D&D Player's Handbook. Yeah, it's first edition, but you can't be too careful, I guess.

RPG handbook

"the Al Qaeda Manual, The Terrorists Handbook, The Mujahideen Poisons Handbook, a manual for a Dragunov sniper rifle, and The Firearms and RPG Handbook."

I of course misinterpreted the acronym, but they sure do look like RPG manual titles, don't they? "Dungeons and Dragunovs". Did they read them? They'd feel rather silly I bet if they said "At level five, you can learn Mujahideen Sneaky Poison Attack that does 2d6 damage if you roll..."

Not to be flippant, but even the summary points out that she was arrested in connection with a bomb plot, and then these documents were found. Presumeably the prosecution's case will rely on drawing that connection, with the manuals as circumstantial evidence. Frankly if that's the best they have the case may fail, but if it's part of a larger collection of evidence (like that which lead to her arrest) then it may not. The justice system has held up fairly well as fair as maintaining standards of burden of proof even in terrorism cases, so barring something like false arrest I'm not feeling any rights violations here.

Slashdot needs

a terrorism icon.

Delete? Not quite yet...

Now might be a good time to delete any copies of the Anarchist's Cookbook you once read for amusement and still have floating around on your hard drive.

Don't forget the missing intermediate steps of encrypting it, and then making a backup copy on secure, durable media.

Someone who has all these files on their hard drives is either a compulsive packrat or might be up to no good... certainly it might raise a few eyebrows. But it shouldn't be illegal to possess these things, and isn't, yet. If possessing certain types of knowledge becomes illegal in and of itself, that's when we'll need the Anarchist's Cookbook the most.

One more reason...

Not to be playing RPGs (role playing games). RPGs are likely to get you shot by a gun-toting law official who thinks you're Sauron even though you're pretending to be a well-armed hobbit.

Is worse for those of us that bought the book.

Some of us bought the book ( and others like it ) many years ago, when it was still legal to read, and information was not restricted. Now we may pay for exercising our rights back then since the rules have changed since then.

Once knowledge becomes a crime, freedom is gone.

Re:Is worse for those of us that bought the book.

The Cookbook and plenty of others that won't help you accidentally kill yourself are available quite legally.

Maybe this will help:
I can buy lockpicks and lockout tools legally. I can buy manuals to unlock any vehicle, also legally.
If I'm busted for conspiracy to steal (as opposed to lawfully repo) cars, that stuff becomes evidence along with the rest of the evidence supporting the charges.

Re:Is worse for those of us that bought the book.

Better be careful, carrying lock picks in certain jurisdictions is a crime. Including Washington D.C.

Jumping to Conclusions

I think people are jumping to conclusions. It sounds to me like she has more on her then simply having the material that she had. The police say that she was connected with the terrorist cell that was busted up earlier. If she is just an innocent bystander with some sketchy reading material she got out of curiosity (not malicious intent), then I imagine nothing is going to come of this. On the other hand, if she is connected to a terrorist cell and has more then just some questionable reading material, let her burn. I personally will reserve judgment about whether or not this is a violation of her rights until after the charges have been made clear. The little blurb in TFA really doesn't give enough information to judge if this is an over reaction or not.

Just a thought

"so you're a cop, and this guy is bringing a night vision scope into the country"

You realize they sell those things at Costco, right?

We're all at risk!

I could be charged with being heterosexual for the pr0n on my hard drive...

A small experiment

Try this: google for "cia manual"

You find things like:
KUBARK Coercive Questioning - Counterintelligence Interrogation (Torture)
A Study of Assassination (Assassination)
Psychological Operations in Guerrilla Warfare (Terrorism)
and so on.

Now, I wonder how much material on her hard-drive came originally from the US?

I am not sticking up for her or for terrorists or for barnyard sodomists, but I do have to wonder about karma.

For fun, you can google for "School of the Americas"
For extra points: go to Wikipaedia and look up "Mujahideen". Look under "Afghan Mujahideen". See who organized, financed, armed and trained them.

Shake your head and marvel at how stupid OUR governments can be.

The documents in question

I'm sure a handful of other people are posting it as I'm writing this, but here's a link to the Mujahideen Poisons handbook [thedisease.net].

Also, the Al-Qaeda Manual [disastercenter.com] (interestingly, this was distributed by the FBI)

The Dragunov sniper rifle manual [kalashnikov.guns.ru]

No luck searching for the RPG & Firearms handbook.

They better arrest me for rape...

because I've got all the equipment to carry that out.

Bwahahahaha!!!

They should look at MY hard drive - got nuclear weapons plans there from Cryptome just last week! Not to mention every military weapons and improvised weapons and explosives manual and hacker book there is.

Bwahahahaha!!

And with MY background, they REALLY would be concerned.

Of course, I'm white and not Muslim...

When I got arrested for armed bank robbery back in 1993, the judge was provided copies of papers from my room. He didn't know whether to poop or go blind. All he could say was that he didn't think some of the stuff there was possible.

He was wrong. Someday somebody somewhere (other than me) will prove him wrong.

Re:One Word in Response

The write-up is wrong. Now is the time to download ALL the above-mentioned documents, and share them. Let them try to arrest all of us.

Re:One Word in Response

I am in full agreement. If reading this article scares you into deleting your text files, then the tyrants running our governments have won, and the citizens have lost.

Now is the time to download and collect as much information on these subjects as you can. Voice your opinion through your actions. If "We the People" believe, in our so-called democracies, that holding such information shouldn't be a criminal offense, then our governments do not have the right to tell us that it is.

Unless, of course, you all disagree...

Re:One Word in Response

I can't think how to explain this succinctly. All the nerds in the world can download all the anarchist cookbooks they want, but that isn't going to stop the government from selectively prosecuting only the people they want, and totally ignoring the rest. It's not even like the general public is going to notice what you have on your hard drive, and move to have whatever law changed so that we aren't techincally criminals anymore.

Re:One Word in Response

If we were all going to perform out acts of protest and civil disobedience quietly from our basements, you would be right.

But who does that?

When you protest you do your best to make sure you are visible. In this case you would do things like distributing fliers and CDs with the forbidden documents. You would let everyone know that you have these things. You would make sure that either the government has to persecute you (and thousands like you) too, or admit their hypocrisy.

Re:One Word in Response

Britain has become the showcase of how to facilitate big brother socialism. They have more cameras per capita than any other country I know of and plan on adding more and to add microphones and loudspeakers to them. Civil rights have been abrogated to the point of non-existence. I didn't know how close to current times the movie V for Vendetta was. This is normal for the UK, after WWII the government completely disarmed the populace and were well on the way to this state until WWII interupted. They did rally and win in the face of crushing odds. I don't think that the modern British citizen is capable of that amount of fortitude anymore. I feel this way mostly because the elimination of their rights has went with mostly a whimper.

Re:Linky?

who's going to provide a link to where we can all download said handbooks?

Mujahideen Poisons Handbook [thedisease.net] (PDF)

Re:One Word in Response

The write-up is wrong. Now is the time to download ALL the above-mentioned documents, and share them. Let them try to arrest all of us.

I think it is safe to say you missed the essential elements of what happened, so lets recap what we know from the news:

The arrested was Samina Malik, 22, an Asian woman who allegedly was working or had worked at Heathrow airport as a shop assistant. (Could she have been an insider at a juicy target for terrorists?) She has been charged with four offences under the Terrorism Act 2000.

Malik was allegedly associated with Sohail Anjum Qureshi, previously charged as part of the same investigation. How was he nabbed? It is alleged that on 18 October he was plotting to go to Pakistan (well known as home to various terrorist organizations, training camps, and the gateway to Afghanistan)(groups in Pakistan have been tied to a number of attacks planned against the UK) taking with him, among other things:

-Camping equipment
-£9,000 cash
-A night vision scope
-The Mujahideen Poisons Handbook
-Two metal batons
-Combat manuals

It is alleged that was taking terrorist materials to Islamabad..

Investigators then followed the trail from Anjum, back to Malik. Allegedly, she had a number of publications on her computer from what look to be a narrow range of interests:

The al-Qaeda Manual,
The Terrorists Handbook
The Mujahideen Poisons Handbook
How To Win Hand-To-Hand Fighting
The Firearms and RPG Handbook
Dragunov sniper rifle manual
9mm pistol manual
Anti-tank mine manual

(Fascinating reading for a 22 year old woman, isn't it? Do you think her goal was to be the life of the party?)

She was allegedly filling a writing pad full of handwritten notes, which led to one of the charges against her. (Any bets about what those notes were about? Hmmmm... Heathrow... Pakistan... Al Qaeda....)

No doubt there are other aspects of this that we don't know about. As it is, you have to scour several news reports to get this much.

Woman charged in terror investigation [inthenews.co.uk]
Female terror book suspect in the dock [scotsman.com]
Airport worker on terror handbook charges is remanded [scotsman.com]
Woman charged under UK terrorism act [theage.com.au]
Too many terrorist plots to name, say MI5 [scotsman.com]
Woman charged under anti-terror laws [reuters.co.uk]

Now, I very much doubt that she is in trouble simply for having those document in and of themselves. What is likely the case is that it is the combination of what she was doing, involving herself with some sort of terrorist cell, AND having those documents. That is trouble in the same sense that having a crowbar in the garage means you have a crowbar in your garage, whereas having a crowbar in your hands at 3:00 AM in back of somebody's house in the next town over means you have a burglar tool, which will make you subject to heavy penalties.

I doubt that the authorities have much interest in trying to arrest people for simply having those publications. Everything I've seen seems to indicate that their hands are more than full simply trying to cope with the small percentage of people that both have those publications and are trying to use them in attempts to kill large numbers of people. You may also want to keep in mind that the more false signals you generate, the less effective the police will be in tracking down those who are trying to kill you for being, take your pick: an infidel, British

Re:HANG THE FILTHY WHORE

Don't be silly. Just because someone claims they are a Muslim doesn't mean they are automatically follow all the rules. You could also say that assuming a woman is a Christian she should would definitely not be filthy or a whore as well. You could also note that Christians are great neighbors because they won't envy anything of yours, commit adultery, or steal.

Let me give you a hint: the woman is a human being first and foremost. Whether she claims to be a Muslim or Christian (or other religion), she must first reconcile her normal human 'vices.'

I know it is politically correct nowadays to compensate for negative biases against Muslims by providing positive ones. This counteracts the reality in most Muslim countries where most Muslims are no more virtuous than most Christians are in Christian countries. The negative biases aren't generally true nor are the positive biases. This also applies to Buddhists, Jews, etc.

Re:HANG THE FILTHY WHORE

And by a better life you mean being arrested for reading books? She is probably thinking she was better off in her native country where at least she knew what she wasn't allowed to do. Not in a country that claims she is free to read what ever she want then arrest her for it. Besides how is reading or being in the possession of those books showing ingratitude to the country she is in. Maybe she simply wants to educate herself about terrorist tactic so that she can more readily identify and report them to the police?

I myself have downloaded and partially read some of these books and similar books out of sheer interest.

I'm sure there is more to this story than we are getting, and that the official that arrested her probably have a half way decent reason for arresting her. If they were in the habit of arresting anyone who had downloaded or shared those books via a peer to peer network then they would seriously have their hands full arresting thousands of people.