The authorities, by telling these lies, are themselves likely to be stirring up racial hatred - a crime... What do you think the chance of any prosecutions against the police or press are? Nill? Yes I think so too.
A bloke has a grudge against your church, he publishes messages on facebook genuinely calling for people to join him in killing members of your church and burning down their properties.
A bloke runs a burger van, he takes an order for food from a passing member of the public then insists on discussing divisive political issues, the innocent customer is taken by surprise, but disagrees with the burger man who argues, is rude, refuses to serve the food they have ordered and implies they should leave the area quickly.
Most people would agree that neither of these scenarios is acceptable. The first is very serious the second is less so, but rather thuggish.
Well something similar to both of these scenarios did actually happen. The first resulted in a jail sentence, the second in a fine.
The next bit is why I am blogging this...
The issue behind both of these situations in reality was Islam/Muslims. And in both cases the information given to the public by the police/press has been deliberately misrepresented by them to cause the public to think that it was the individuals thoughts/words that were illegal, not their intentions/actions. These two events would be crimes regardless of who the 'targets' were, but as it was a protected minority they are both called 'hate crime' and this is the headline that is presented.
In the first case the police issued a crowing advert saying the pepetrator was jailed 'for expressing his islamophobic hate online' - clearly a lie, as it was the call to violence that got him jailed, not the specific target of his call to violence.
In the second the headline was 'Burgerman convicted for hateful racist rant', again misleading as it was the threat/intimidation to the customer that got him in to trouble, not the subject of the rant.
The police and media are lying to the public. Their purpose is make people think that the UK has laws that make certain thought and words illegal - so certain views can be silenced even though, in fact, the UK has no such laws.
When these lies are believed one reaction is for the public to comply, and so self censor the free speech they are entitled to as British citizens. A second reaction is to create public resentment towards the authorities and/or the 'protected groups' believing that they are respnsible for taking away a right that many believe is one of the most British if values (free speech) - while it is a complete lie that the right had been taken away.
The authorities, by telling these lies, are themselves likely to be stirring up racial hatred - a crime... What do you think the chance of any prosecutions against the police or press are? Nill? Yes I think so too.
**update October 2017**
While the police have continued their reign of terror against our free speech, with a huge number of arrests, but few justifying prosecution (http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/10/14/british-police-arrest-at-least-3395-people-for-offensive-online-comments-one-year/ and https://www.rt.com/uk/406467-hate-crime-twitter-troll/)
But both the CPS and Met have accepted that they are misleading by back-peddling slightly on one occasion each, the Met admitting that opinion is not abuse.
I have never been of the opinion that a 'Right' can be taken away. If it's a right then it is mine and that is the end of it. I suppose I could voluntarily give the right away but I'm sure that authorities can't take it.
ReplyDeleteHate crime is a nonsense as well. Hate is an emotion surely and there's not much that I, or anybody else, can do to stop it occurring. I can certainly choose not to act against the subject of my hatred but if I did it wouldn't be hate crime? It would be murder, assault or whatever, which are crimes anyway.
To be a hate crime the act must first be a crime, then the motivation must have been a bias (however slight) against a protected minority. Even motivated by (or be perceived to have been motivated by) a 'dislike' would qualify as a hate crime.
Delete