7 ms·

Could you point to something happening in the UK you think is similar to this? Edit: I guess there's this [1] which free-speach maximalists would probably disa

Could you point to something happening in the UK you think is similar to this? Edit: I guess there's this [1] which free-speach maximalists would probably disagree with. Personally I think there's a line between free speech and calls to violence at which point its reasonable to prosecute people. She tweeted calling for people to set fire to buildings where migrants were being housed. [1] https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cx2910vrrygo https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cx2910vrrygo

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
throw10920 2y ago
[flagged]
- AlexSW 2y ago
  Could you link to the particular case you're referring to?
- eigenket 2y ago
  Are you lying or misinformed? He didn't get 3 years in prison for telling people to go out and protest, he told people to “set fire to all the fucking hotels full of the bastards”. Setting fire to a building full of people isn't a protest, it's attempted murder. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/northampton-bbc-news-southport-defence-reform-b2594106.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/northampton-bbc-...
  - emmet 2y ago
    They always try to be vague when the truth is difficult to defend.
    - throw10920 2y ago
      You both are actively lying. I'm not talking about Tyler Kay, I'm talking about Wayne O’Rourke, whose tweets did not advocate for murder at all, let alone “set fire to all the fucking hotels full of the bastards”. Not once did I mention Tyler. That's something you fabricated to deceive and mislead. It's people like you that enable authoritarianism around the world by gaslighting others and justifying suppression of speech.
      - eigenket 2y ago
        Oh, that guy posted "Today was a terror attack by a Muslim...heads must roll" which again sounds like a call to violence to me. Sorry I picked the wrong guy calling for racial violence, my mistake.
        throw10920 2y ago
        You actively lied about the person that was jailed to further a political agenda of suppressing free speech, protest, and democracy. That's not a mistake, that's malice. Your bad indeed. Moreover, it's pretty clear that "heads must roll" is a euphemism used for people being punished or losing their job, and is almost always used in a non-violent context: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/heads%20will%20roll https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/heads%20will%20ro... There's no clear call to violence here. You are actively trying to justify tyranny.
        eigenket 2y ago
        I didn't lie, I got the wrong guy because you weren't specific. In the context of his tweet I think it was clearly a call to violence. Almost always is not the same as always.
        throw10920 2y ago
        > I got the wrong guy because you weren't specific That doesn't make it any less of a lie - you said something factually false about the person I was referring to. You also made an assumption that you knew could be false in order to push a political agenda and deceive others. > Almost always is not the same as always. This is grasping for straws, and has the tyrannical premise of "guilty until proven innocent" behind it. I really hope that you're not in a position of power in my country, or any one for that matter.
ClumsyPilot 2y ago
Well we are working it. In these riots we have charged a 12 year old orphan, sentenced 13 year old girl, jailed a guy for being “a curious observer”, and some woman for throwing water. Previously, we have sentenced a teenager for reposting a rap song, some guy for filming his pug doing nazi salute, and charged two guys for possession of a book ‘Anarchist cookbook’ Also we have charged a woman for silent prayer. So now I understand why a book about ‘thoughtcrime’ was written in Britain, it’s a local idea that was in the air for some time
- throw10920 2y ago
  The UK judges have stated that they will jail passive observers of the riots as a matter of policy, so it's not just that one guy: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/08/09/judge-refuses-bail-riot-bystanders-belfast/ https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/08/09/judge-refuses-ba...
  - eigenket 2y ago
    More specifically they're jailing people who were at the riots but who claim they were only passive observers. This is standard pre-trial detention because pretty serious crimes were committed. Obviously if its found at their trial that they didn't commit any crime then they won't be going to prison.
- eigenket 2y ago
  I don't know the details of the other cases but the UK didn't jail anyone for being a "curious observer". They jailed him in advance of his trial where it is alleged he took part in criminal acts (setting fire to shops and other standard riot stuff). He claims he was a curious observer, but frankly he can claim whatever he likes. Like everyone in pre-trial detention he is innocent until proven guilty so his claim doesn't really change anything.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

throw10920 2y ago

[flagged]

AlexSW 2y ago
Could you link to the particular case you're referring to?
eigenket 2y ago
Are you lying or misinformed? He didn't get 3 years in prison for telling people to go out and protest, he told people to “set fire to all the fucking hotels full of the bastards”. Setting fire to a building full of people isn't a protest, it's attempted murder. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/northampton-bbc-news-southport-defence-reform-b2594106.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/northampton-bbc-...
- emmet 2y ago
  They always try to be vague when the truth is difficult to defend.
  - throw10920 2y ago
    You both are actively lying. I'm not talking about Tyler Kay, I'm talking about Wayne O’Rourke, whose tweets did not advocate for murder at all, let alone “set fire to all the fucking hotels full of the bastards”. Not once did I mention Tyler. That's something you fabricated to deceive and mislead. It's people like you that enable authoritarianism around the world by gaslighting others and justifying suppression of speech.
    - eigenket 2y ago
      Oh, that guy posted "Today was a terror attack by a Muslim...heads must roll" which again sounds like a call to violence to me. Sorry I picked the wrong guy calling for racial violence, my mistake.
      - throw10920 2y ago
        You actively lied about the person that was jailed to further a political agenda of suppressing free speech, protest, and democracy. That's not a mistake, that's malice. Your bad indeed. Moreover, it's pretty clear that "heads must roll" is a euphemism used for people being punished or losing their job, and is almost always used in a non-violent context: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/heads%20will%20roll https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/heads%20will%20ro... There's no clear call to violence here. You are actively trying to justify tyranny.
        eigenket 2y ago
        I didn't lie, I got the wrong guy because you weren't specific. In the context of his tweet I think it was clearly a call to violence. Almost always is not the same as always.
        throw10920 2y ago
        > I got the wrong guy because you weren't specific That doesn't make it any less of a lie - you said something factually false about the person I was referring to. You also made an assumption that you knew could be false in order to push a political agenda and deceive others. > Almost always is not the same as always. This is grasping for straws, and has the tyrannical premise of "guilty until proven innocent" behind it. I really hope that you're not in a position of power in my country, or any one for that matter.

ClumsyPilot 2y ago

Well we are working it. In these riots we have charged a 12 year old orphan, sentenced 13 year old girl, jailed a guy for being “a curious observer”, and some woman for throwing water. Previously, we have sentenced a teenager for reposting a rap song, some guy for filming his pug doing nazi salute, and charged two guys for possession of a book ‘Anarchist cookbook’ Also we have charged a woman for silent prayer. So now I understand why a book about ‘thoughtcrime’ was written in Britain, it’s a local idea that was in the air for some time

throw10920 2y ago
The UK judges have stated that they will jail passive observers of the riots as a matter of policy, so it's not just that one guy: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/08/09/judge-refuses-bail-riot-bystanders-belfast/ https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/08/09/judge-refuses-ba...
- eigenket 2y ago
  More specifically they're jailing people who were at the riots but who claim they were only passive observers. This is standard pre-trial detention because pretty serious crimes were committed. Obviously if its found at their trial that they didn't commit any crime then they won't be going to prison.
eigenket 2y ago
I don't know the details of the other cases but the UK didn't jail anyone for being a "curious observer". They jailed him in advance of his trial where it is alleged he took part in criminal acts (setting fire to shops and other standard riot stuff). He claims he was a curious observer, but frankly he can claim whatever he likes. Like everyone in pre-trial detention he is innocent until proven guilty so his claim doesn't really change anything.