Disgusterous

Author Topic: Riverway Law  (Read 130 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Grumpmeister

  • Power Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 36801
  • Reputation: -24
  • Prankmeister General
Riverway Law
« on: April 12, 2025, 10:50:08 AM »
Just out of interest what is the penalty for being in contact with and following instructions from an illegal terrorist organisation?

A law firm based in London, acting under instructions from Hamas is suing the government in order to have them removed from the list of proscribed organisations. So apparently under national and international law there is an argument that a group that has been responsible for numerous terror attacks over the years including the largest massacre of Jews since the Holocaust aren't terrorists?

Interestingly in order to examine the legal application you have to agree to a disclaimer that none of the contents can be understood as supporting, or expressing support for proscribed terrorist organisations under the Terrorism Act 2000.

The cynic in me is pretty sure I can see the overall plan here, remove the block from the Hamas leadership being able to come here and plot in relative safety while being paid benefits not to mention the catastrophic damage it would to to relationships with America and Israel.

https://x.com/riverwaylaw/status/1909951298885001553

https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/jenrick-lambasts-law-firm-over-sickening-hamas-application/5122964.article
The universe is run by the complex interweaving of three elements. Energy, matter, and enlightened self-interest.

Offline Steve

  • Power Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 64877
  • Reputation: -4
Re: Riverway Law
« Reply #1 on: April 12, 2025, 11:06:41 AM »
Just out of interest what is the penalty for being in contact with and following instructions from an illegal terrorist organisation?

A law firm based in London, acting under instructions from Hamas is suing the government in order to have them removed from the list of proscribed organisations. So apparently under national and international law there is an argument that a group that has been responsible for numerous terror attacks over the years including the largest massacre of Jews since the Holocaust aren't terrorists?

Interestingly in order to examine the legal application you have to agree to a disclaimer that none of the contents can be understood as supporting, or expressing support for proscribed terrorist organisations under the Terrorism Act 2000.

The cynic in me is pretty sure I can see the overall plan here, remove the block from the Hamas leadership being able to come here and plot in relative safety while being paid benefits not to mention the catastrophic damage it would to to relationships with America and Israel.

https://x.com/riverwaylaw/status/1909951298885001553

https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/jenrick-lambasts-law-firm-over-sickening-hamas-application/5122964.article

Another hopeless misguided legal case from people who dishonestly only consider paragraph 1 of article 10 of the ECnHR (also in Schedule 1 of the HRA) and not paragraph 2.

With luck any barrister that takes this to court will be disbarred for contempt of court.
Well, whatever, nevermind