-
@majorrage said in British Politics:
@jc thanks - educational.
Out of interest, do you think these things were done on purpose as part of a govt conspiracy or just a good old fashioned cock up?
Cock up. But let’s be clear, nobody in authority were in any hurry to correct the cock up even when it became clear that something had gone very wrong. How come nobody in the police or prison service ever asked why someone jailed for contempt had effectively ended up in solitary confinement?
My guess is it’s because his cause was unsympathetic and very few people were prepared to stick their head above the parapet because they knew there would be a political price to pay for supporting a “racist” “islamophobe”. They know that, just like in Auckland this week, it cuts no ice among the hard leftists and the media that, forgetting TR for a moment, it’s important to stand up for the rule of law. They’ll get branded a racist and an islamophobe themselves. So better to say “nothing to see here”, at best, or “who cares, screw him” at worst.
Sorry, but I’m still a part time UK resident and this is not the country I know.
As an aside, the judiciary in the UK took some fearful stick after the recent Brexit court case for applying the law, and it would have been simple for the CoA to duck this one, because the Canterbury and Leeds appeal applications were late. I tip my hat to the Lord Chief Justice himself for taking this one on when there’s really no upside for him other than seeing justice done. And his judgement is beautifully written.
-
Remember the 'Secret Barrister' many were referring to as proof of Tommy's guilt? Well he has admitted he was wrong.
This is another good summary of the situation including some earlier clips showing the extreme persecution of Tommy by the British state.
-
@rembrandt said in British Politics:
Remember the 'Secret Barrister' many were referring to as proof of Tommy's guilt? Well he has admitted he was wrong.
This is another good summary of the situation including some earlier clips showing the extreme persecution of Tommy by the British state.
As much as I hope this was all just a cock up and down to incompetence, TR's past treatment (provided he is indeed telling the truth) would suggest otherwise. Ultimately the authorities have deemed TR to be the easier of the naughty children to deal with and will punish him while indulging and placating the other.
-
-
Holy shit. That ruling is appalling. "...appear to share the appellant's racist views."
What the fuck is going on in the UK?
-
It certainly looks like they're out to get him. All the way along this has been a disturbing prosecution. It also seems pretty stupid to me in that the way the case is being prosecuted just looks so bad. Can they not see this?
-
@catogrande I know what you mean. It's so bad it's barely believable. The fear of being labelled racist clearly is stronger than logic or even in this case actual law.
Scary to consider this and Chelsea Russel are the only examples that have had any real notice and that is mostly due to grassroot movements like the Liberalists and alt-media like the now deleted InfoWars. Mainstream media did everything they could to either not report on or to go out of their way misrepresent the accused. There are many more cases that have had zero attention at all.
-
I had to Google Chelsea Russel.
Got 1 article on the first page.
Her crime is posting the "n" word on an Instagram rap tribute for a 13 year old who died in an accident while riding his bike.
She's 19 years old.
I've long wondered the uniform insanity the world has with reference to the "n" word.
While writing this I can confirm that all readers will know in detail what the word is, it's historical content, various spellings, the reason for it's excommunication and most alarmingly where and how to find footage of it being "appropriately" sung or recited in a movie in under 5 minutes.
A 19 year old has a criminal conviction, a receipt for 850 quid, a curfew and an ankle bracelet beacause she **wrote a word **.
She even misspelled it 😀
It blows my little mind. Modern day emporer with no clothes.
It all started with KFC you know 😉
Don't read this story if you're not in the mood to process complete fuckwittery
-
@rembrandt said in British Politics:
@catogrande I know what you mean. It's so bad it's barely believable. The fear of being labelled racist clearly is stronger than logic or even in this case actual law.
Scary to consider this and Chelsea Russel are the only examples that have had any real notice and that is mostly due to grassroot movements like the Liberalists and alt-media like the now deleted InfoWars. Mainstream media did everything they could to either not report on or to go out of their way misrepresent the accused. There are many more cases that have had zero attention at all.
See, the first part of that has validity. The second part verges on conspiracy theory.
-
@crucial said in British Politics:
@rembrandt said in British Politics:
@catogrande I know what you mean. It's so bad it's barely believable. The fear of being labelled racist clearly is stronger than logic or even in this case actual law.
Scary to consider this and Chelsea Russel are the only examples that have had any real notice and that is mostly due to grassroot movements like the Liberalists and alt-media like the now deleted InfoWars. Mainstream media did everything they could to either not report on or to go out of their way misrepresent the accused. There are many more cases that have had zero attention at all.
See, the first part of that has validity. The second part verges on conspiracy theory.
What are your views on the latest Dankula ruling?
-
@siam said in British Politics:
I had to Google Chelsea Russel.
Got 1 article on the first page.
Her crime is posting the "n" word on an Instagram rap tribute for a 13 year old who died in an accident while riding his bike.
She's 19 years old.
I've long wondered the uniform insanity the world has with reference to the "n" word.
While writing this I can confirm that all readers will know in detail what the word is, it's historical content, various spellings, the reason for it's excommunication and most alarmingly where and how to find footage of it being "appropriately" sung or recited in a movie in under 5 minutes.
A 19 year old has a criminal conviction, a receipt for 850 quid, a curfew and an ankle bracelet beacause she **wrote a word **.
She even misspelled it 😀
It blows my little mind. Modern day emporer with no clothes.
It all started with KFC you know 😉
Don't read this story if you're not in the mood to process complete fuckwittery
That punishment is beyond incredible. If that kind of language doesn't belong in civil discourse then shouldn't they be targetting the artists themselves and banning those lyrics? If unacceptable on a private Instagram post then surely playing the music in any public place should be absolutely beyond the pale.
There is absolutely no thinking or sense behind these rulings.
-
@rancid-schnitzel said in British Politics:
@crucial said in British Politics:
@rembrandt said in British Politics:
@catogrande I know what you mean. It's so bad it's barely believable. The fear of being labelled racist clearly is stronger than logic or even in this case actual law.
Scary to consider this and Chelsea Russel are the only examples that have had any real notice and that is mostly due to grassroot movements like the Liberalists and alt-media like the now deleted InfoWars. Mainstream media did everything they could to either not report on or to go out of their way misrepresent the accused. There are many more cases that have had zero attention at all.
See, the first part of that has validity. The second part verges on conspiracy theory.
What are your views on the latest Dankula ruling?
Que?
-
@crucial said in British Politics:
@rancid-schnitzel said in British Politics:
@crucial said in British Politics:
@rembrandt said in British Politics:
@catogrande I know what you mean. It's so bad it's barely believable. The fear of being labelled racist clearly is stronger than logic or even in this case actual law.
Scary to consider this and Chelsea Russel are the only examples that have had any real notice and that is mostly due to grassroot movements like the Liberalists and alt-media like the now deleted InfoWars. Mainstream media did everything they could to either not report on or to go out of their way misrepresent the accused. There are many more cases that have had zero attention at all.
See, the first part of that has validity. The second part verges on conspiracy theory.
What are your views on the latest Dankula ruling?
Que?
What was difficult about that question? Scroll up. His appeal didn't even get a hearing. What are your views on that?
-
Those rulings are absolutely insane and clearly infringe on people's basic human rights as part of a free society. The weakest people in all of this are those that disagree with these people politically so go along with whatever ridiculous justifications are put forward. This kind of thing will hurt everyone if it continues - the great man Thomas Sowell put it best:
"What is ominous is the ease with which some people go from saying that they don't like something to saying that the government should forbid it. When you go down that road, don't expect freedom to survive very long".
-
@rancid-schnitzel said in British Politics:
@crucial said in British Politics:
@rancid-schnitzel said in British Politics:
@crucial said in British Politics:
@rembrandt said in British Politics:
@catogrande I know what you mean. It's so bad it's barely believable. The fear of being labelled racist clearly is stronger than logic or even in this case actual law.
Scary to consider this and Chelsea Russel are the only examples that have had any real notice and that is mostly due to grassroot movements like the Liberalists and alt-media like the now deleted InfoWars. Mainstream media did everything they could to either not report on or to go out of their way misrepresent the accused. There are many more cases that have had zero attention at all.
See, the first part of that has validity. The second part verges on conspiracy theory.
What are your views on the latest Dankula ruling?
Que?
What was difficult about that question? Scroll up. His appeal didn't even get a hearing. What are your views on that?
I'm questioning why you are directly asking me for my views about one thing while quoting my post about something else.
But, seeing as how it is apparently important to reiterate my view on the Dankula case, here goes..
I disagree somewhat that his case is primarily about free speech and that it has been latched onto by political groups as an agenda push. The case is about interpretation and application of the communications act changes and is also about setting the level of breach.
My opinion is that his 'brand' of humour isn't funny and has opened him up to a spurious prosecution from other fuddy duddies that also don't 'get him'.
I think that the prosecution was within the law but had elements of oversensitive opinions. I also think that the conviction was a poor decision when taking in all of the facts. As this was a test case for the laws it is important that a high level assessment is done and handed down to set precedent. I think the original Sherriff looked to pass the buck hoping it would fade away or be taken up the chain.
As for the latest development, it appears he is now trapped in a legal nightmare where the system is digging the hole deeper in hope that it will go away. This isn't rare in courts and is something that happens all the time to 'minor' offences.
I do hope that he keeps fighting this otherwise his 'level of offending' becomes record toward the level for conviction.
I also hope that the use of his case as 'evidence' of some kind of extreme left wing bias throughout the system stops. His situation is one of non partisan bureaucracy and bullshit that needs fixing for everyone despite political slant.
-
@crucial said in British Politics:
@rancid-schnitzel said in British Politics:
@crucial said in British Politics:
@rancid-schnitzel said in British Politics:
@crucial said in British Politics:
@rembrandt said in British Politics:
@catogrande I know what you mean. It's so bad it's barely believable. The fear of being labelled racist clearly is stronger than logic or even in this case actual law.
Scary to consider this and Chelsea Russel are the only examples that have had any real notice and that is mostly due to grassroot movements like the Liberalists and alt-media like the now deleted InfoWars. Mainstream media did everything they could to either not report on or to go out of their way misrepresent the accused. There are many more cases that have had zero attention at all.
See, the first part of that has validity. The second part verges on conspiracy theory.
What are your views on the latest Dankula ruling?
Que?
What was difficult about that question? Scroll up. His appeal didn't even get a hearing. What are your views on that?
I'm questioning why you are directly asking me for my views about one thing while quoting my post about something else.
But, seeing as how it is apparently important to reiterate my view on the Dankula case, here goes..
I disagree somewhat that his case is primarily about free speech and that it has been latched onto by political groups as an agenda push. The case is about interpretation and application of the communications act changes and is also about setting the level of breach.
My opinion is that his 'brand' of humour isn't funny and has opened him up to a spurious prosecution from other fuddy duddies that also don't 'get him'.
I think that the prosecution was within the law but had elements of oversensitive opinions. I also think that the conviction was a poor decision when taking in all of the facts. As this was a test case for the laws it is important that a high level assessment is done and handed down to set precedent. I think the original Sherriff looked to pass the buck hoping it would fade away or be taken up the chain.
As for the latest development, it appears he is now trapped in a legal nightmare where the system is digging the hole deeper in hope that it will go away. This isn't rare in courts and is something that happens all the time to 'minor' offences.
I do hope that he keeps fighting this otherwise his 'level of offending' becomes record toward the level for conviction.
I also hope that the use of his case as 'evidence' of some kind of extreme left wing bias throughout the system stops. His situation is one of non partisan bureaucracy and bullshit that needs fixing for everyone despite political slant.
I'm sorry that I made it so difficult for you. And I never once asked you to reiterate your views on the Dankula case, I asked for your views on the latest ruling. Have you read any of the grounds? You don't think there is a political slant there?
-
You didn't make it difficult, I just wondered why I was being approached by a microphone in the street asking for an opinion on something.
Now I'm being questioned on why I disagree with the interviewers opinion.
It's borderline trolling, but I'll take it as baiting.I haven't watched the posted video as I can't at the moment and google searches aren't coming up with any detail. I'm happy to read anything you can supply as fact around what has happened.
-
@crucial said in British Politics:
You didn't make it difficult, I just wondered why I was being approached by a microphone in the street asking for an opinion on something.
Now I'm being questioned on why I disagree with the interviewers opinion.
It's borderline trolling, but I'll take it as baiting.I haven't watched the posted video as I can't at the moment and google searches aren't coming up with any detail. I'm happy to read anything you can supply as fact around what has happened.
You offered a very contrarian opinion to the vast majority of posters and I was interested to hear your views on the latest development. I'm not sure how that's trolling in any way shape or form. The only thing weird is the way you're responding to a perfectly reasonable and legitimate question.
Watch the video if you want the info, he puts it on screen.
-
@rancid-schnitzel said in British Politics:
@crucial said in British Politics:
You didn't make it difficult, I just wondered why I was being approached by a microphone in the street asking for an opinion on something.
Now I'm being questioned on why I disagree with the interviewers opinion.
It's borderline trolling, but I'll take it as baiting.I haven't watched the posted video as I can't at the moment and google searches aren't coming up with any detail. I'm happy to read anything you can supply as fact around what has happened.
You offered a very contrarian opinion to the vast majority of posters and I was interested to hear your views on the latest development. I'm not sure how that's trolling in any way shape or form. The only thing weird is the way you're responding to a perfectly reasonable and legitimate question.
Watch the video if you want the info, he puts it on screen.
Ha! Entering these threads is like walking into an evangelist church and trying to explain about sky fairies. Pretty easy to be a contrary opinion to other posters.
My original comment was about the conspiracy theories around MSM.
What is wrong with the way I am responding? I am answering your questions around a topic I didn't directly approach and doing so in a clear and unemotive manner. Would you rather I started some name calling and making sweeping statements?
I also explained that I can't watch the video at the moment or did that part skip past you? As I said, I'm happy to read detail about the latest development and make additional comment. I just can't find any at the moment.
British Politics