|
Post by gadreel on May 3, 2017 1:23:34 GMT
www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/tim-burton-radio-host-tell-mama-jailed-racist-islamophobic-fiyaz-mughal-a7707256.htmlSo after many people saying that Islamophobia would eventually be made a criminal offence in the UK here we have a man jailed for 12 weeks for exactly that. In the last two days one Muslim was arrested in possession of knives near the Houses of Parliament intent on committing another terror attack,another Muslim was convicted of planting a bomb on a train which failed to detonate(his brother had previously committed a terrorist attack). 6 Muslims were arrested on terror offences including one women who the police shot. And we're locking up this idiot because some Muslim had his feelings hurt.
This country is fucked. Says the guy who looks up personal information on any poster that disagrees with him. I have disagreed with him, and in fact called him out on doxxing, he does not look up my personal information. So I guess this means you just got caught out in a lie.
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on May 3, 2017 1:32:13 GMT
Not when it infringes on other people's lives. Harm caused to others is a legit reason to stop the speech and this was not about hurting someone's feelings which was a stupid way to phrase it. If speech can cause harm, that's the sort of harm that should be allowed. With the caveat that I realise I am breaking Godwins law, are you aware that the third reich arose from the effects of some little weirdo speaking?
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on May 3, 2017 4:11:54 GMT
If speech can cause harm, that's the sort of harm that should be allowed. With the caveat that I realise I am breaking Godwins law, are you aware that the third reich arose from the effects of some little weirdo speaking? What doesn't arise in relation to someone speaking, though? The speaking part isn't the problem. Some non-speaking, nonconsensual, violent actions are a problem, though.
|
|
|
Post by thorshairspray on May 3, 2017 5:00:34 GMT
If speech can cause harm, that's the sort of harm that should be allowed. With the caveat that I realise I am breaking Godwins law, are you aware that the third reich arose from the effects of some little weirdo speaking? The problem is who decides what speech is acceptable and what isn't? Lets be honest, we have seen private companies like Twitter allow people to call for genocide of white people whilst banning people for making jokes about Islam. I'm even less comfortable with governments getting involved. The Mayor of London has apparently just allocated £1,700,000 for a police group to target online hate crimes. You can bet anything you like that this police group will not investigate the media, who will continue to defame people, it is only the public that will get arrested for shitposting. I know an MP in the UK who has brazenly lied about the government. The lie has been pointed out, yet remains on Twitter. Today on Youtube, somebody told me to "kill myself" Which is actually more harmful?
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on May 3, 2017 9:15:00 GMT
With the caveat that I realise I am breaking Godwins law, are you aware that the third reich arose from the effects of some little weirdo speaking? What doesn't arise in relation to someone speaking, though? The speaking part isn't the problem. Some non-speaking, nonconsensual, violent actions are a problem, though. I guess, the issue for me is perhaps small minded people, I see people preaching for the eradication of homosexuals on the street and I think "oh my what a fuck head, think I will go drink a pint" whereas others may be beguiled by the words, and goaded into committing crime, whatever, actually the person that goaded them into it has some responsibility for that, if you don't try to stop them then you will have this issue. As thor says though where do you draw the line? I dont know, I just know that at some point people can be swayed to do things they ordinarily would not through words. One important thing though in this thread, it is wrong to say mocking Islam is bad, but mocking Christianity is ok, if any religion (or whatever) is off limits, all examples of that thing are off limits, and vice versa, if one is ok, all are ok. treat all same not islam, religion
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on May 3, 2017 9:19:45 GMT
With the caveat that I realise I am breaking Godwins law, are you aware that the third reich arose from the effects of some little weirdo speaking? The problem is who decides what speech is acceptable and what isn't? Lets be honest, we have seen private companies like Twitter allow people to call for genocide of white people whilst banning people for making jokes about Islam. I'm even less comfortable with governments getting involved. The Mayor of London has apparently just allocated £1,700,000 for a police group to target online hate crimes. You can bet anything you like that this police group will not investigate the media, who will continue to defame people, it is only the public that will get arrested for shitposting. I know an MP in the UK who has brazenly lied about the government. The lie has been pointed out, yet remains on Twitter. Today on Youtube, somebody told me to "kill myself" Which is actually more harmful? Sure I agree, it is a hard thing to call, and the issue is that it creeps in, one moment that midget is saying lets tell the Jews off for ruining our lives, then next minute you've invaded Poland and started gassing the homosexuals. I just see that people can be swayed to do things, and while I believe they should be punished I think someone that goaded them to it should be too. Yeah the Media can be a bit sacrosanct can't it? And sure there are assholes out there, but I would hope most people could shake off internet trolls.
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on May 3, 2017 9:58:24 GMT
What doesn't arise in relation to someone speaking, though? The speaking part isn't the problem. Some non-speaking, nonconsensual, violent actions are a problem, though. I guess, the issue for me is perhaps small minded people, I see people preaching for the eradication of homosexuals on the street and I think "oh my what a fuck head, think I will go drink a pint" whereas others may be beguiled by the words, and goaded into committing crime, whatever, actually the person that goaded them into it has some responsibility for that, if you don't try to stop them then you will have this issue. As thor says though where do you draw the line? I dont know, I just know that at some point people can be swayed to do things they ordinarily would not through words. One important thing though in this thread, it is wrong to say mocking Islam is bad, but mocking Christianity is ok, if any religion (or whatever) is off limits, all examples of that thing are off limits, and vice versa, if one is ok, all are ok. treat all same not islam, religion What I think is of the utmost importance is that we teach people that/we promote a culture where (a) you don't do something just because someone asks or orders you to do it (including but not limited to authorities--parents, law enforcement, military commanders, political leaders, etc.), and (b) you don't believe something just because someone claimed it (including but not limited to experts--professors, doctors, etc.). That doesn't imply that you necessarily don't do something or believe something when someone asks/tells you to or claims whatever they do, either. You rather think about the request or claim, assess it on its merit, its context, its veracity, etc. and realize that you take responsibility for your own actions and beliefs. Promoting a culture instead where saying some things is off limits because following those requests/orders or believing those things is considered morally wrong, at least implicitly suggests that following the requests/orders and believing the claims that are allowed is safe, if not morally recommended, if not obligatory, etc. And there's no way to make every dangerous, asinine, etc. manipulation or disposition off-limits.
|
|
|
Post by thorshairspray on May 3, 2017 12:36:01 GMT
The problem is who decides what speech is acceptable and what isn't? Lets be honest, we have seen private companies like Twitter allow people to call for genocide of white people whilst banning people for making jokes about Islam. I'm even less comfortable with governments getting involved. The Mayor of London has apparently just allocated £1,700,000 for a police group to target online hate crimes. You can bet anything you like that this police group will not investigate the media, who will continue to defame people, it is only the public that will get arrested for shitposting. I know an MP in the UK who has brazenly lied about the government. The lie has been pointed out, yet remains on Twitter. Today on Youtube, somebody told me to "kill myself" Which is actually more harmful? Sure I agree, it is a hard thing to call, and the issue is that it creeps in, one moment that midget is saying lets tell the Jews off for ruining our lives, then next minute you've invaded Poland and started gassing the homosexuals. I just see that people can be swayed to do things, and while I believe they should be punished I think someone that goaded them to it should be too. Yeah the Media can be a bit sacrosanct can't it? And sure there are assholes out there, but I would hope most people could shake off internet trolls. The thing is you can't really compare 1930's Germany with the Western World now. Germany was broken back then, the economy was broken and the reparations it was paying were killing it. On top of that , Germany was smarting from the humiliation of the confiscated lands under French and Polish control. The unemployment rate in Germany in 1932 was 30% and Germany had been economically screwed since the end of the Great War. And Hitler didn't ride to power on a wave of popular support, in spite of the economic crisis and despite using intimidation and violence to influence voters, the Nazi's didn't gain a majority. It isn't really a free speech issue. This kind of thing happens when large groups of society feel that the ruling classes have forgotten them. IT is what happened with Brexit and Trump. The more affluent Urban areas voted for the establishment, the rural and less affluent areas voted for change. With Brexit, mass migration depressed the wages of the poorest of the working class and placed a strain on local services. In just four years the UK saw 2,400,000 people move there. Thats 2,400,000 people needing GP's and dentists. These people were not living in London, they were moving to working class areas, competing with Britons poorest people for jobs and school places. Then the media and such come along and call everyone racist for voting to leave the EU. Why are people surprised that masses of people don't seem to want to toe the line? And then we get told that the issue is free speech, that if we simply stop people shitposting on Twitter all the problems will resolve themselves. This is a baffling misunderstanding of how humans work. If you tell a person they cannot express a political view, you will simply entrench that view. They will believe that they are silenced because they are right and the establishment fears it. Europe is seeing a rise in far right populism mainly due to migration. In Sweden the Sweden Democrats got 6% of the vote in 2010. In 2014 they got 13%. Polls now have them on an average of 21% Same thing in Holland, France, Italy....And is anyone trying to address it? Nope, simply calling them racist appears to be enough for current political leaders.
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on May 3, 2017 13:22:04 GMT
If speech can cause harm, that's the sort of harm that should be allowed. With the caveat that I realise I am breaking Godwins law, are you aware that the third reich arose from the effects of some little weirdo speaking? I don't necessarily have a problem with a little weirdo speaking. That wasn't the issue regarding this particular case.
When someone is speaking hate speech to a group, as despicable and misguided as it may be, they aren't targeting an individual. Of course, they may incite their listeners to target individuals, but overall I tend to think the individual's actions are paramount. The exception to this would be if they if the speaker is telling people to go out and harm others.
In this case, the individual who clearly was not in trouble just for hating Muslims, went above the call of duty to specifically harass a particular individual after being told specifically to stop doing it, so I have no reason to think of him as a victim.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2017 13:46:09 GMT
Sure I agree, it is a hard thing to call, and the issue is that it creeps in, one moment that midget is saying lets tell the Jews off for ruining our lives, then next minute you've invaded Poland and started gassing the homosexuals. I just see that people can be swayed to do things, and while I believe they should be punished I think someone that goaded them to it should be too. Yeah the Media can be a bit sacrosanct can't it? And sure there are assholes out there, but I would hope most people could shake off internet trolls. The thing is you can't really compare 1930's Germany with the Western World now. Germany was broken back then, the economy was broken and the reparations it was paying were killing it. On top of that , Germany was smarting from the humiliation of the confiscated lands under French and Polish control. The unemployment rate in Germany in 1932 was 30% and Germany had been economically screwed since the end of the Great War. And Hitler didn't ride to power on a wave of popular support, in spite of the economic crisis and despite using intimidation and violence to influence voters, the Nazi's didn't gain a majority. It isn't really a free speech issue. This kind of thing happens when large groups of society feel that the ruling classes have forgotten them. IT is what happened with Brexit and Trump. The more affluent Urban areas voted for the establishment, the rural and less affluent areas voted for change. With Brexit, mass migration depressed the wages of the poorest of the working class and placed a strain on local services. In just four years the UK saw 2,400,000 people move there. Thats 2,400,000 people needing GP's and dentists. These people were not living in London, they were moving to working class areas, competing with Britons poorest people for jobs and school places. Then the media and such come along and call everyone racist for voting to leave the EU. Why are people surprised that masses of people don't seem to want to toe the line? And then we get told that the issue is free speech, that if we simply stop people shitposting on Twitter all the problems will resolve themselves. This is a baffling misunderstanding of how humans work. If you tell a person they cannot express a political view, you will simply entrench that view. They will believe that they are silenced because they are right and the establishment fears it. Europe is seeing a rise in far right populism mainly due to migration. In Sweden the Sweden Democrats got 6% of the vote in 2010. In 2014 they got 13%. Polls now have them on an average of 21% Same thing in Holland, France, Italy....And is anyone trying to address it? Nope, simply calling them racist appears to be enough for current political leaders. That's a pretty good summing up of where we find ourself today Thorshairspray. Let's revisit the OP and talk about the "victim" of this crime Fiyaz Mughal and his group Tell Mama. In 2013 when soldier Lee Rigby was hacked to death by Muslim terrorists,Mughal and his group claimed that this led to a "sustained wave of attacks and intimidation and "Islamophobic incidents" against "British Muslims" he claimed there were 212 incidents against British Muslims and he saw "no end to this cycle of violence" it as "unprecedented". Here's the problem it was all a lie,most media swallowed it without question except the Daily Telegraph who did some actual fact checking. Of those 212 reports(115 of them took place online in the form of twitter and facebook postings.,at least 35 reports were unverified. Only 17 of those incidents were actual physical confrontations and no of those attacks left any victim requiring medical attention. The Met please who kept actual figures indicated that Islamic attacks had decreased by 8% not increased as tell Mama claimed The group then branded the Daily Telegraph journalism better suited to 1930s Germany for having the temerity to expose their lies,the group lost all government funding as a result of those lies. In 2014 Mughal claimed the most abuse he received was from the Islamists and extreme Muslims who were dead set against his agenda. Here's the problem he and his group have taken many people and groups to court and threatened court proceedings against several others,not one of them has been an Jihadist or extremist Muslim.In fact he hasn't named one Muslim who has attacked him or his group. Instead he has used government money to issue libel orders against people who he disagrees with,mainly right wing people and groups. This included in May 2013 monitoring the EDL twitter account and harassing people who said negative things about Islam,when the pro Israel activitist Ambrosine Chetrit tweeted about their behavior she was threatened with legal action through their solicitors. Of course Mughal wanted damages for these libels,he also sued the Daily Telegraph and lost . This man and group have one purpose and one purpose only and that is to shutdown any negative comments or criticisms of Islam,and they will use any means to do so. When Tim Burton described this guy as a liar he was in fact telling the truth. No all I've posted are easily verifiable facts,which paint this whole incident in a different light.
|
|
|
Post by thorshairspray on May 3, 2017 14:16:25 GMT
The thing is you can't really compare 1930's Germany with the Western World now. Germany was broken back then, the economy was broken and the reparations it was paying were killing it. On top of that , Germany was smarting from the humiliation of the confiscated lands under French and Polish control. The unemployment rate in Germany in 1932 was 30% and Germany had been economically screwed since the end of the Great War. And Hitler didn't ride to power on a wave of popular support, in spite of the economic crisis and despite using intimidation and violence to influence voters, the Nazi's didn't gain a majority. It isn't really a free speech issue. This kind of thing happens when large groups of society feel that the ruling classes have forgotten them. IT is what happened with Brexit and Trump. The more affluent Urban areas voted for the establishment, the rural and less affluent areas voted for change. With Brexit, mass migration depressed the wages of the poorest of the working class and placed a strain on local services. In just four years the UK saw 2,400,000 people move there. Thats 2,400,000 people needing GP's and dentists. These people were not living in London, they were moving to working class areas, competing with Britons poorest people for jobs and school places. Then the media and such come along and call everyone racist for voting to leave the EU. Why are people surprised that masses of people don't seem to want to toe the line? And then we get told that the issue is free speech, that if we simply stop people shitposting on Twitter all the problems will resolve themselves. This is a baffling misunderstanding of how humans work. If you tell a person they cannot express a political view, you will simply entrench that view. They will believe that they are silenced because they are right and the establishment fears it. Europe is seeing a rise in far right populism mainly due to migration. In Sweden the Sweden Democrats got 6% of the vote in 2010. In 2014 they got 13%. Polls now have them on an average of 21% Same thing in Holland, France, Italy....And is anyone trying to address it? Nope, simply calling them racist appears to be enough for current political leaders. That's a pretty good summing up of where we find ourself today Thorshairspray. Let's revisit the OP and talk about the "victim" of this crime Fiyaz Mughal and his group Tell Mama. In 2013 when soldier Lee Rigby was hacked to death by Muslim terrorists,Mughal and his group claimed that this led to a "sustained wave of attacks and intimidation and "Islamophobic incidents" against "British Muslims" he claimed there were 212 incidents against British Muslims and he saw "no end to this cycle of violence" it as "unprecedented". Here's the problem it was all a lie,most media swallowed it without question except the Daily Telegraph who did some actual fact checking. Of those 212 reports(115 of them took place online in the form of twitter and facebook postings.,at least 35 reports were unverified. Only 17 of those incidents were actual physical confrontations and no of those attacks left any victim requiring medical attention. The Met please who kept actual figures indicated that Islamic attacks had decreased by 8% not increased as tell Mama claimed The group then branded the Daily Telegraph journalism better suited to 1930s Germany for having the temerity to expose their lies,the group lost all government funding as a result of those lies. In 2014 Mughal claimed the most abuse he received was from the Islamists and extreme Muslims who were dead set against his agenda. Here's the problem he and his group have taken many people and groups to court and threatened court proceedings against several others,not one of them has been an Jihadist or extremist Muslim.In fact he hasn't named one Muslim who has attacked him or his group. Instead he has used government money to issue libel orders against people who he disagrees with,mainly right wing people and groups. This included in May 2013 monitoring the EDL twitter account and harassing people who said negative things about Islam,when the pro Israel activitist Ambrosine Chetrit tweeted about their behavior she was threatened with legal action through their solicitors. Of course Mughal wanted damages for these libels,he also sued the Daily Telegraph and lost . This man and group have one purpose and one purpose only and that is to shutdown any negative comments or criticisms of Islam,and they will use any means to do so. When Tim Burton described this guy as a liar he was in fact telling the truth. No all I've posted are easily verifiable facts,which paint this whole incident in a different light. We live in a country where this happened. www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-17515992Two month custodial sentence for a 21 year old being a dick. Its just wrong. How do we as a society justify this if that kid had gotten raped, or hooked on substance? It's words online, get over it. Yet this: www.thesun.co.uk/news/2918885/man-spat-babys-face-shouted-white-people-should-breed/Recieves no custodial sentence. So offensive words, prison. Spitting on a baby while having two previous convictions for "race hate crimes" suspended sentence. The Justice system does not reflect any kind of realty. Abuse me online all you want, I couldn't care less, spit at my child and we are going to fight.
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on May 3, 2017 15:29:34 GMT
tpfkar Right or wrong, mental illness usually leads to some mitigation in legal proceedings. As for the first bit, it wouldn't happen/prevail here. I say with some confidence. Nobody should be allowed to burn the American flag -- if they do, there must be consequences -- perhaps loss of citizenship or year in jail!
|
|