Freedom of speech officially dead in Scotland

[unknownsample]

We're talking about a shitposter on YouTube not a political leader.

Um... Free speech for political leaders only? That can't be what you meant.

No I was pointing out how ridiculous you are for making a martyr out of this cunt, If your so concerned about the freedom to speech why aren't you so concerned about what's happening in Russia, Hungary, Slovakia, Turkey or China to name a few countries, countries where freedom of speech is generally under threat, where opponents of the government there are arrested or murdered.

It's actually more concerning to see Freedom of Speech undermined in a place where it is assumed to exist as opposed to a place you don't expect it to exist. It doesn't matter if he is a ''cunt'' or a ''shitposter'', he is a citizen of the United Kingdom and Scotland and has been found guilty of grossly offensive speech by a judge (no jury) after being brought by the police service itself without a complaint.

As for more fascist than the fascists, already linked was a case in WWII Finland brought by the Reich against someone who had named his dog Hitler and trained it to salute. They eventually dropped the case but not before damaging his business and after a defense was entered that while it may have happened a few times in 1933, it was in private at home. Not a whole lot of social media in the 30's and 40's so not exactly the same but similar.

Are you telling me you are more concerned about the fate of this prick than opponents of Putin many of whom have ended being on the receiving of "accidents" or are imprisoned. Also let's get something clear the reason why he was convicted was because he got the pug to respond to the phrase gas the Jews.

[Fixer]

As for more fascist than the fascists, already linked was a case in WWII Finland brought by the Reich against someone who had named his dog Hitler and trained it to salute. They eventually dropped the case but not before damaging his business and after a defense was entered that while it may have happened a few times in 1933, it was in private at home. Not a whole lot of social media in the 30's and 40's so not exactly the same but similar.

Thanks. I was going say that it had already been linked in the thread.

The problem is of course that the law governing this is so vague it can be applied to anything. For example, previously it had been applied to tweets from a woman pretending to be a man threatening another woman. The conventional law for governing what classifies a legitimate threat requires the plaintiff prove that they had a realistic belief of the threat being carried out. The 2003 communication law does not.

The slippery slope had already started back then. In 2012 there was an attempt to curb free speech with new legislation. This was successfully fought by a campaign which included Rowan Atkinson.

youtu.be/gciegyiLYtY

However the new precedent on the 2003 communication act means that was all for nought. It can be applied to anything the government deems offensive. Since this can mean literally anything, the government can use this law to imprison anyone.

Are you telling me you are more concerned about the fate of this prick than opponents of Putin many of whom have ended being on the receiving of "accidents" or are imprisoned. Also let's get something clear the reason why he was convicted was because he got the pug to respond to the phrase gas the Jews.

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/defin ... ataboutism

The answer to your question had already been made earlier in this thread. Along with all the others which you have demanded but have thus far been ignored by yourself. The rest is an angry collection of insults, guilt by association and slander all based on weak premise or logical fallacy.

If you want to engage in a debate, you need to read and understand the arguments of the opposing side.

[unknownsample]

The answer to your question had already been made earlier in this thread. Along with all the others which you have demanded but have thus far been ignored by yourself. The rest is an angry collection of insults, guilt by association and slander all based on weak premise or logical fallacy.

If you want to engage in a debate, you need to read and understand the arguments of the opposing side.

Well since the arguments seem to be freedom of speech hmmkay, there's not a lot to understand, I have seen not one mention of Putin on this thread, until I mentioned him. You accused me of being a fascist based on seem pretty weak thinking yourself so don't accuse me of failing to understand opposing arguments. Let me tell you what my problem is, the far-right are abusing freedom of speech to normalise hate speech, they are trying to make their noxious views acceptable under the guise of humour, if you don't believe me they admit to it

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/ ... 3b344492f2

There conning you and you are falling for it and let me tell you something once they've dealt with all the minorities and opponents, there going to come for you and they will be one to help you.

Tell me Fixer do you think this is acceptable?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/c ... 43241.html

He added: "The threat is against the Jewish community and there is an echo chamber effect with people trying to be more offensive. 160 pages of messages about this were collected by us in a day, they supported it and it was extremely anti-Semitic.

"I did not find anything about the video humorous. Repeating over and over and over again in a positive and enthusiastic tone of voice to 'gas the Jews' is what this trial is all about, an offensive video and whether it is offensive or threatening."

[Robovski]

We're talking about a shitposter on YouTube not a political leader.

Um... Free speech for political leaders only? That can't be what you meant.

No I was pointing out how ridiculous you are for making a martyr out of this cunt, If your so concerned about the freedom to speech why aren't you so concerned about what's happening in Russia, Hungary, Slovakia, Turkey or China to name a few countries, countries where freedom of speech is generally under threat, where opponents of the government there are arrested or murdered.

It's actually more concerning to see Freedom of Speech undermined in a place where it is assumed to exist as opposed to a place you don't expect it to exist. It doesn't matter if he is a ''cunt'' or a ''shitposter'', he is a citizen of the United Kingdom and Scotland and has been found guilty of grossly offensive speech by a judge (no jury) after being brought by the police service itself without a complaint.

As for more fascist than the fascists, already linked was a case in WWII Finland brought by the Reich against someone who had named his dog Hitler and trained it to salute. They eventually dropped the case but not before damaging his business and after a defense was entered that while it may have happened a few times in 1933, it was in private at home. Not a whole lot of social media in the 30's and 40's so not exactly the same but similar.

Are you telling me you are more concerned about the fate of this prick than opponents of Putin many of whom have ended being on the receiving of "accidents" or are imprisoned. Also let's get something clear the reason why he was convicted was because he got the pug to respond to the phrase gas the Jews.

I don't care for the man, I don't find him funny. It isn't relevant. Free speech isn't free if you can't say offensive things. And yes, I am more concerned about a country that is more a part of my world than one that is less so. Russia is far far away and not as engaged in cultural exchange when compared to Scotland, where I lived for 15 years. The phrase ''gas the jews'' is offensive but by merely typing it out (as context has NO bearing on this judgement) we are now both potentially in violation of Scottish law. Do you see how that is a bit of a problem yet?

[unknownsample]

I don't care for the man, I don't find him funny. It isn't relevant. Free speech isn't free if you can't say offensive things. And yes, I am more concerned about a country that is more a part of my world than one that is less so. Russia is far far away and not as engaged in cultural exchange when compared to Scotland, where I lived for 15 years. The phrase ''gas the jews'' is offensive but by merely typing it out (as context has NO bearing on this judgement) we are now both potentially in violation of Scottish law. Do you see how that is a bit of a problem yet?

Well for a starters the law applies across the UK, it been active for 15 years and funnily enough comedy hasn't ceased to exist and the UK hasn't become a totalitarian police state.

[Darth Wedgius]

Well for a starters the law applies across the UK, it been active for 15 years and funnily enough comedy hasn't ceased to exist and the UK hasn't become a totalitarian police state.

Nobody has said that comedy has ceased to exist or that the UK has become a totalitarian police state. Do you really think either of those would be necessary for the denial of free speech to be a bad thing?

To my knowledge, no one has found a connection between Count Dankula and the Daily Stormer.

[Antiboyscout]

I don't care for the man, I don't find him funny. It isn't relevant. Free speech isn't free if you can't say offensive things. And yes, I am more concerned about a country that is more a part of my world than one that is less so. Russia is far far away and not as engaged in cultural exchange when compared to Scotland, where I lived for 15 years. The phrase ''gas the jews'' is offensive but by merely typing it out (as context has NO bearing on this judgement) we are now both potentially in violation of Scottish law. Do you see how that is a bit of a problem yet?

Well for a starters the law applies across the UK, it been active for 15 years and funnily enough comedy hasn't ceased to exist and the UK hasn't become a totalitarian police state.

yet...

[Antiboyscout]

The answer to your question had already been made earlier in this thread. Along with all the others which you have demanded but have thus far been ignored by yourself. The rest is an angry collection of insults, guilt by association and slander all based on weak premise or logical fallacy.

If you want to engage in a debate, you need to read and understand the arguments of the opposing side.

Well since the arguments seem to be freedom of speech hmmkay, there's not a lot to understand, I have seen not one mention of Putin on this thread, until I mentioned him. You accused me of being a fascist based on seem pretty weak thinking yourself so don't accuse me of failing to understand opposing arguments. Let me tell you what my problem is, the far-right are abusing freedom of speech to normalise hate speech, they are trying to make their noxious views acceptable under the guise of humour, if you don't believe me they admit to it

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/ ... 3b344492f2

There conning you and you are falling for it and let me tell you something once they've dealt with all the minorities and opponents, there going to come for you and they will be one to help you.

Tell me Fixer do you think this is acceptable?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/c ... 43241.html

He added: "The threat is against the Jewish community and there is an echo chamber effect with people trying to be more offensive. 160 pages of messages about this were collected by us in a day, they supported it and it was extremely anti-Semitic.

"I did not find anything about the video humorous. Repeating over and over and over again in a positive and enthusiastic tone of voice to 'gas the Jews' is what this trial is all about, an offensive video and whether it is offensive or threatening."

And Communist are "abusing" free speech to indoctrinate young people into thinking communism is great, Capitalism is evil, and people like Castro, Che, Lenin, ect. did nothing wrong and should be celebrated. They are not censored. They should not be.

[Karha of Honor]

I don't care for the man, I don't find him funny. It isn't relevant. Free speech isn't free if you can't say offensive things. And yes, I am more concerned about a country that is more a part of my world than one that is less so. Russia is far far away and not as engaged in cultural exchange when compared to Scotland, where I lived for 15 years. The phrase ''gas the jews'' is offensive but by merely typing it out (as context has NO bearing on this judgement) we are now both potentially in violation of Scottish law. Do you see how that is a bit of a problem yet?

Well for a starters the law applies across the UK, it been active for 15 years and funnily enough comedy hasn't ceased to exist and the UK hasn't become a totalitarian police state.

It was a stupid law 15 years ago and it is stupid now.

If it was not stupid we would have heard of it more often because it would had been used more often.

[Fixer]

Well since the arguments seem to be freedom of speech hmmkay, there's not a lot to understand, I have seen not one mention of Putin on this thread, until I mentioned him. You accused me of being a fascist based on seem pretty weak thinking yourself so don't accuse me of failing to understand opposing arguments. Let me tell you what my problem is, the far-right are abusing freedom of speech to normalise hate speech, they are trying to make their noxious views acceptable under the guise of humour, if you don't believe me they admit to it

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/ ... 3b344492f2

There conning you and you are falling for it and let me tell you something once they've dealt with all the minorities and opponents, there going to come for you and they will be one to help you.

Tell me Fixer do you think this is acceptable?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/c ... 43241.html

He added: "The threat is against the Jewish community and there is an echo chamber effect with people trying to be more offensive. 160 pages of messages about this were collected by us in a day, they supported it and it was extremely anti-Semitic.

"I did not find anything about the video humorous. Repeating over and over and over again in a positive and enthusiastic tone of voice to 'gas the Jews' is what this trial is all about, an offensive video and whether it is offensive or threatening."

No, I said you hold fascist principles. Which you do. You are in support of laws to supress the freedom of individuals that hold views the states deems offensive. You have shown support for a group that seeks to silence their political opponents through intimidation and violence.

Quod erat demonstrandum.

The principle of free speech holds that universal rights are granted to everyone. This means allowing individuals to say anything no matter how offended any other party may become. If it becomes a threat of intimidation or violence, libel or slander it then comes covered under other law.

Allowing distasteful views to be expressed allows them to be exposed and countered with debate, discussion or protest. You yourself have just shown this to be the case. If the daily stormer page had been banned you wouldn't have been able to find their statements to oppose them. You have demonstrated again the benefit of allowing those with which you disagree the right to free speech.

What's more. Silencing opposition rather than refuting their points lends to them an air of credence. It makes people think that you cannot oppose them with words and ideas but only with force.

Allowing others to express views with which you disagree, offends you greatly or directly oppose is a sign of intellectual strength and tolerance. The core of this is why some many people have quoted "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

The far right cannot abuse free speech any more than you or I, since any content they produce will be countered. Calm reason, decency and consistency will defeat ignorance and irrational hate every time.

As of this very moment there are peaceful protests against Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour party's alleged culture of anti-semitism.

Meanwhile, a joke that may be in bad taste but has to be taken out of context because to be found offensive is now cause for arrest. A wilful misinterpretation of a joke that had the judge explicitly say context did not matter, where the point of the joke was making a cute animal become the worst thing he can imagine. The joke was not not "gas the jews" is funny, it's that the statement was bad.

So it doesn't matter what offence they have taken at it. They're free to express whatever opinions they like. What's wrong is that have prosecuted a man for thought crime.

A lot of hard left bloggers have been pushing this "weaponising irony" idea but it's a justification for authoritarianism. Nothing more.
https://twitter.com/JonathanPieNews/sta ... 5907506176

Well for a starters the law applies across the UK, it been active for 15 years and funnily enough comedy hasn't ceased to exist and the UK hasn't become a totalitarian police state.

The law has existed for 15 years but as mentioned has not been applied. UK law is base off of case law and precedent. Which means that the Count Dankula case will apply to following prosecutions.

As I linked from Pie's twitter a moment ago, here's something else from his feed. With a request to find out whether it was real or not.


If legitimate, someone just contacted the Met to see what would happen. Jokes that may cause offence are now cause for police investigation.