Access
This article is part of Nature's premium content.
Published online 30 July 2008 | Nature 454, 557 (2008) | doi:10.1038/454557b
News
School chemistry off-limits to terrorism suspect
UK judge blocks access to high-school-level courses.
A British judge has ruled that a terrorism suspect cannot take secondary-school level courses in chemistry and human biology.
In a first-of-a-kind ruling, High Court judge Stephen Silber said that the courses would put the suspect — who is referred to as A.
To read this story in full you will need to login or make a payment (see right).
Comments
Reader comments are usually moderated after posting. If you find something offensive or inappropriate, you can speed this process by clicking 'Report this comment' (or, if that doesn't work for you, email redesign@nature.com). For more controversial topics, we reserve the right to moderate before comments are published.
"The ruling paints a “misleading image of school chemistry being a subject of particular value to potential terroristsâ€, says Richard Pike, chief executive of the Royal Society of Chemistry. “There is nothing on the AS-level chemistry course that cannot be found easily on the web and through other means,†he says." I assume that this is obvious to most people, so one wonders what the real motivation was behind denying the suspect access to highschool classes. Could it be similar to some conservative calls for limiting higher education to prisoners, under the remit that this is supposed to be punative...?
I could see it. The high school courses could be a bridge to college-level courses. Would you let a convicted sex felon study human deviant behavior for abnormal psych?
Could be. But they say he's already medically trained, so our sex offender would already have a psych-degree... but perhaps the refresher is the fear...
This is just silly. If you asked any college-level student to make "dangerous material X" in large quantities, they would turn not to any knowledge gained in coursework, but to the internet, the library, or many other sources of information. Perhaps coursework could speed along the search, but it would be of little material value. Denying this person access to higher education is just as likely to result in greater hostility toward the society, as he has now been barred from participating in it. We must recall that we are speaking about a suspect, and not a criminal. I think the court's response is cowardly, short-sighted, and ignorant.
There is the expression "Fear makes you stupid". I can think of no better illustration of this principle that this ruling. A shorter route than a course in school to this kind of "dangerous knowledge" is to be found in libraries or on line. Next thing you know, they'll be requiring security clearance before they'll let anyone study chemistry or biology. If you think that's impossible, you haven't been paying attention to the trends.
all it takes to become a terrorist is the will.
First in Holland, now in England, which will be next? Could school level Chemistry and Biology knowledge be essential or the prerequisite for carrying out a terrorist attack? How many of the suicidal bombers worldwide possess a good science background? Furthermore, A.E. is under constant surveillance. Why bar him from his fundamental right of learning the rudiments of science? In this context, all scientists suspicious of pro-terrorism would have to be closely scrutinized in their everyday activity. Could this be possible if not advisable? (Tan Boon Tee)
Well, that's one way to drive up interest in studying the sciences and address the skill shortage... "Hey the government is banning terrorists from studying chemistry and biology so there must be something useful in it that they don't want us to know..."
In my opinion, denying the right to basic scientific knowledge is not compatible with our society claiming to be democratic. I fully agree with Mr. L.Meehan. This looks like a dangerous trend towards an extreme situation where kids will be separated into "potential terrorists" (note that A.E. is still only a suspect) and "safe" ones, with only safe ones being allowed to follow highschool classes. In combination with the current broad definition of "potential terrorists" -- see the recent news headline about the U.S. terrorist watch list topping one million -- this is profoundly frightening.
This is so ridiculous. During this hearing did the judge ask for the opinion of chemistry AS level teachers? Isn't it ignorant to presume that some medical training coupled with basic chemistry equates to bomb-making skills? Are we in a democracy or are we well truly going back to the age of fear, conspiracy theories and propaganda? To make a bomb all you need is the internet. This is a sad day for education and democracy in our society.
The ruling is certainly ridiculous, but it also puts some 'coolness' factor back into the high-school sciences. Maybe it'll even attract more kids to take science subjects.
Do you suppose that all what A.E misses to act 'terroristically' are some technical hints from the catalogue of chemistry. What is called terrorism denotes a way thinking, a concept to hate and harm the one who doesn't go with the proper beliefs. It is hate till death (the opposite extreme of what Jesus did and taught us to do, to love and serve till death). Terrorism (the thinking, which i understand in the case of A.E) is to be fought by love and acceptance concepts and prohibiting AS level attendance doesn't do much for the purpose.
To be honest I think it has little to do with the highschool courses giving him the ability to make WMD. It's a political move (PC extreme) to stop the Daily Mail reading middle-class of middle-England calling foul. Which they would... picture the headlines... "Govt. Allows Terrorist to Study in Our Schools!" "What Next? Practical Bomb Making in Physics?" These are the folks the Govt. fear because they hold the vote...
I was raised to believe that knowledge was a valuable commodity and should not be restricted or censored. To prevent a person from obtaining an education because it may someday be used inappropriately is preposterous. The posession of knowledge which could be used to commit a crime is not in itself a criminal act. The subject of this news story is under close surveilance which should prevent the commission of any crime. Let us all keep the "war on terror" in perspective and avoid prosecuting individuals for crimes that they have not yet committed.
When I was teaching high school chemistry in Florida the most common question students asked, after "Why do we have to take chemistry?" was "How do we make bombs?" Perhaps the judge is depending upon memories of his own sloppy experiences in high school. That said, if the subject is truly a terrorist suspect, whatever that means, why is that person even in public schools and not in jail?
This is the type of thing which drives folks in the US, UK or other facist state to doing something of this nature. (Trust me I know) It is, as I hate to say, very 1984 based, and like the book which was partially banned in its time, the people in power will do anything to keep the inigmatic "enemy" going forever to promote a world agenda and dynamics dependent on a police state to maintain power. They should make it illegal for intelligence agents to take high school chemistry and ban the real terrorist from every place else. Most deaths now and for a long time come from power strugles utilizing such people for one of the big five governments, whom like the RAND publication in 2000 points out on paper, finance 99% of all terrorist activity in the world directly or inderectly. My main fear of such things however, is academians and intellectuals sit around talking about it forever but when they have things in their hands to stop or prevent the world from becoming what it is, they turn to their hippie values. These in turn allow those whom hold the finances to continue to change things in this manner, and freedoms slowly fade away and are replaced by a police ant like society. In the end, it is the people such as my self only complaining and not taking action whom are the greater threat, albeit words are powerfull tools. In the final stages however, it might actually do more good to throw a brick at a Nazi when there are only a few. Stephan Lloyd Watkins