No more freedom of speech in the UK

[Crypto2015]

It seems that the UK is no longer a free country. At least it is fair to say that there is no freedom of speech there any more. The terrorist sympathizers from The Guardian, have published this article today, on the front page:

Man charged after tweet 'confronting Muslim woman' on Brussels attacks

A man who allegedly claimed on Twitter that he had confronted a Muslim woman to ask her to “explain Brussels” has been charged under the Public Order Act.

Matthew Doyle is accused of posting allegedly racist comments.

A statement from the Metropolitan police issued in the early hours of Friday morning said Doyle, 46, “has been charged under section 19 of the Public Order Act 1986; publishing or distributing written material which is threatening, abusive or insulting, likely or intended to stir up racial hatred.

“This follows an investigation by officers at Croydon police community safety unit.”

The statement said he would appear in court on Saturday.

Doyle, a partner at a south London-based talent and PR agency, was arrested in Croydon on Wednesday after allegedly posting a number of tweets.

As you see they posted a lot of his personal information, so that now any Jihad fighter can go there and kill him and all his family. Way to go The Guardian! You have reached a whole new level of infamy.

 

[Godobeyer]

It seems that the UK is no longer a free country. At least it is fair to say that there is no freedom of speech there any more. The terrorist sympathizers from The Guardian, have published this article today, on the front page:

Man charged after tweet 'confronting Muslim woman' on Brussels attacks

A man who allegedly claimed on Twitter that he had confronted a Muslim woman to ask her to “explain Brussels” has been charged under the Public Order Act.

Matthew Doyle is accused of posting allegedly racist comments.

A statement from the Metropolitan police issued in the early hours of Friday morning said Doyle, 46, “has been charged under section 19 of the Public Order Act 1986; publishing or distributing written material which is threatening, abusive or insulting, likely or intended to stir up racial hatred.

“This follows an investigation by officers at Croydon police community safety unit.”

The statement said he would appear in court on Saturday.

Doyle, a partner at a south London-based talent and PR agency, was arrested in Croydon on Wednesday after allegedly posting a number of tweets.

As you see they posted a lot of his personal information, so that now any Jihad fighter can go there and kill him and all his family. Way to go The Guardian! You have reached a whole new level of infamy.

Is racist comments allowed by your religion (Christianity) or in your country ?

In France if you deny the Holocaust , you will pay taxe for that , what do you think ?

 

[Deathbydefault]

her to “explain Brussels” has been charged under the Public Order Act.

He said explain?
Not "it's your fault" or "I knew all Muslims were terrorists"?
could I have a link to the article? This isn't enough for me to discern if he was being racist.

Even if he did post racist comments he shouldn't be fined or jailed, it's his freedom to voice his opinion.
If you silence him then consistency will entail, and other groups, perhaps even other types of Christians will have freedom of speech obstructed.
The only real radical Islam sympathizer I know of in this situation is twitter, as they have repeatedly proven themselves to be.

Anyways, if he was racist then civil debate was the best option.
If he couldn't handle that, ignoring or shouting back is the next option.
Arresting someone for something so idiotic is in itself idiotic, perhaps those without freedom of speech wont understand that.

 

[SomeRandom]

Is racist comments allowed by your religion (Christianity) or in your country ?

In France if you deny the Holocaust , you will pay taxe for that , what do you think ?

Well, freedom of speech in most Western countries includes racist remarks. If you incite violence then you can be charged with a crime typically. Can't comment on Christianity's involvement one way or the other.
Also I have to agree that the Guardian was very unprofessional and it's decision to name the accused publicly like this is unethical imo.

 

[Valjean]

I think the charge was not for being racist, but for stirring up hatred.

--off to look for tweet text...

 

[Flankerl]

Just your Anglosphere things.


Hope it stays off the continent.

 

[Valjean]

http://metro.co.uk/2016/03/24/by-al...ly-mouthed-tweet-but-dont-arrest-him-5772151/

 

[Crypto2015]

Is racist comments allowed by your religion (Christianity) or in your country ?

In France if you deny the Holocaust , you will pay taxe for that , what do you think ?

Since when is Islam a race? Do you even know what race is?

 

[Crypto2015]

I think the charge was not for being racist, but for stirring up hatred.

--off to look for tweet text...

As far as I know he didn't incite hatred. He didn't say: "Let's go and kill these or that people". He simply asked a Muslim woman to explain why terrorism happens. I actually think that this question must be asked more often.

 

[Godobeyer]

Since when Islam is a race? Do you even know what race is?

don't you dare to answser ?
Why you reply to my questions by questions ?
This is had nothing to do with my direct questions !

 

[Crypto2015]

don't you dare to answser ?
Why you reply to my questions by questions ?
This is had nothing to do with my direct questions !

Because Islam is a not a race. Even a three-year-old child knows this. Islam is an ideology. No ideology should be above criticism.

 

[Godobeyer]

Because Islam is a not a race. Even a three-year-old child knows this. Islam is an ideology. No ideology should be above criticism.

My questions had nothing to do with Islam lol

 

[Valjean]

Would you be arrested if you tweeted that David Cameron was a poopy-head?

 

[David1967]

Haven't read the article, but my thoughts according to your statement is (1) Why would this person assume that this woman would be able to explain the Belgium bombing simply because she was a Muslim? Was he insinuating that due to her religion that she was somehow responsible? As far as being arrested, that is going overboard. The man was, it seems, being rude perhaps but arrest seems silly. I mean look at some of the posts on this forum. How many of us would be in trouble for such as this? Cant speak for England but here in the USA we have a first amendment right to free speech as long as it is not inciting violence. So in this case I think the man was being rude but arresting him was ridiculous.

 

[Crypto2015]

Haven't read the article, but my thoughts according to your statement is (1) Why would this person assume that this woman would be able to explain the Belgium bombing simply because she was a Muslim? Was he insinuating that due to her religion that she was somehow responsible? As far as being arrested, that is going overboard. The man was, it seems, being rude perhaps but arrest seems silly. I mean look at some of the posts on this forum. How many of us would be in trouble for such as this? Cant speak for England but here in the USA we have a first amendment right to free speech as long as it is not inciting violence. So in this case I think the man was being rude but arresting him was ridiculous.

Because it is more than reasonable to surmise that there is a link between Islamic terrorism and Islam. If people shouting "Jesus is Lord" were killing civilians on an almost daily basis, everyone would immediately conclude that there is a link between Christianity and terrorism. However, since these terrorists shout "Allahu Akbar (Allah is greater)" instead of "Jesus is Lord", no one is able to see any connection between their actions and the religion that they themselves claim to represent. Why would that be? Perhaps because if you dare to even ask if there is a link between Islam and terrorism, the police will arrest you and the newspapers will publish your name, picture, and contact details on their front pages. The next question would be: why is the government and the media so afraid of this question? Is it because they know the answer and they don't like it?

 

[Father Heathen]

Is racist comments allowed by your religion (Christianity) or in your country ?

In France if you deny the Holocaust , you will pay taxe for that , what do you think ?

Censoring and punishing people for beliefs/ideas, even stupid ones, is a form of tyranny. Why would anyone want the government to dictate what to think or how to feel, like subservient automatons?

 

[Father Heathen]

Just your Anglosphere things.


Hope it stays off the continent.

As if the rest of Europe didn't already have ridiculous speech laws.

 

[Father Heathen]

Since when is Islam a race? Do you even know what race is?

That's a pet peeve of mine; people's inability to differentiate between race, religion, and nationality.

 

[icehorse]

Is racist comments allowed by your religion (Christianity) or in your country ?

In France if you deny the Holocaust , you will pay taxe for that , what do you think ?

I'm not an expert in Christianity, but as far as I know racist comments are not illegal in the US. But please remember that your question appears to be off-topic because Islam is not a race.

As far as the few countries in Europe that make holocaust denial a crime, that's a mistake. Holocaust denial is horrible, but it should be protected speech.

 

[icehorse]

Because it is more than reasonable to surmise that there is a link between Islamic terrorism and Islam. If people shouting "Jesus is Lord" were killing civilians on an almost daily basis, everyone would immediately conclude that there is a link between Christianity and terrorism. However, since these terrorists shout "Allahu Akbar (Allah is greater)" instead of "Jesus is Lord", no one is able to see any connection between their actions and the religion that they themselves claim to represent. Why would that be? Perhaps because if you dare to even ask if there is a link between Islam and terrorism, the police will arrest you and the newspapers will publish your name, picture, and contact details on their front pages. The next question would be: why is the government and the media so afraid of this question? Is it because they know the answer and they don't like it?

And doesn't this approach by the authorities also seem to be soft bigotry? In other words, are Muslims so delicate and fragile that they can't tolerate legitimate criticism? Apparently the authorities think of Muslims as being delicate and fragile?

I think Muslims are not delicate and fragile, and they can handle it when they receive legitimate criticism.