• Military
• WMD
• Intelligence

• Security Menu                     

• Systems
• Industry
• Operations
• Hot Documents
• News
• Reports
• Policy
• Budget
• Congress
• Links

• Space

Blair Defends Anti-Terror Law

By Michael Drudge
London
15 February 2006

British Prime Minister Tony Blair is defending legislation that would outlaw the "glorification" of terrorism from critics who say it is an unneeded curb on free speech.

The controversy over a law that would make it a crime to glorify terrorist acts has flared up in the British parliament during Mr. Blair's weekly appearance to answer lawmakers' questions.

The acting leader of the opposition Conservative Party, William Hague, accused Mr. Blair of political grandstanding in order to appear tough on terror with an unneeded law.

"Wouldn't it be better to have a water-tight law designed to catch the guilty than a press release law designed to catch the headlines," he asked.

Mr. Blair responded by saying opposition amendments to remove the phrase "glorification of terror" could jeopardize British security.

"If we take out the words glorification, we are sending a massive counter-productive signal. It is a word that I think members of the public readily know and understand and juries would understand. And it is to send completely the wrong signal to take it out," he said.

The House of Commons approved a Terrorism Bill in November making it a crime to glorify terrorism, but the House of Lords rejected the bill. The Lords removed the word "glorification" and inserted language that would criminalize speech that encourages people to copy terrorist acts. The amended bill was then returned to the Commons for reconsideration.

The Lords amendment is supported by the Conservatives and Britain's third major party, the Liberal Democrats. A Commons vote was planned for late Wednesday.

Opponents of the "glorification" clause say it is vague and limits free speech. They point out that radical Muslim cleric Abu Hamza al-Masri recently was convicted under current laws that criminalize incitement to murder and racial hatred.

Proponents say the word "glorification" is needed against those who issue images and written statements that could inspire terrorist acts, and that the Lords amendment would apply only to the spoken word.