POLICE STATE BRITAIN
3 YEARS PRISON - TWITTER TROLL |
Much online outrage about this ... or Daily Mail would have us believe.
Of course, Daily Mail controls the comments that get published (or not), so the corporate media also controls the perception of 'public response' in relation to this (and other issues and events).
While I think this is unsavoury behaviour and somewhat sick to have a collection of mutilated baby photos, police raiding Twitter trolls with a taste for trolling and a taste for the macabre, and imprisoning Twitter trolls for several years for the 'hurt feelings' of those that may elect to block undesirable users/messages in the online public domain, is, in my view, taking things to police state extremes.
Does anyone think that the state authorities will stop at raiding and prosecuting merely those with bizarre online pursuits, or will these same state authorities use their powers to harass and shut down freedom of speech in general, when it comes to political positions and opinions the state disapproves of?
SAMPLE
DAILY MAIL
PUBLISHED COMMENT
[CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE]
|
Watch the corporate media give its blessing and encouragement to hefty imprisonment and public vilification of a native British internet troll.
Meanwhile, actual crimes (ie crimes in the physical realm, not acts leading to hurt feelings or moral outrage) committed by those in protected groups (and groups prone to violently riot) are handled with kid gloves by the media, that often shuts down public comments — entirely.
These 'morally outraged' clowns that come out of the woodwork to attack the likes of this woman are nasty trolls themselves, and they ought to be ashamed of themselves for vilifying (likely) mentally disturbed persons, who are already being targeted by state law-enforcement punitive overkill.
What amounts to global media scapegoating and pillory of what you might call a 'differently abled' (or perhaps even psychologically disturbed) young white woman by this lot of Daily Mail reader sheep, reminds me of the Monty Python films, where the baying crowds demand stoning. LOL ... and the white working class is deemed fair game for this abuse and exploitation by the corporate media and the police state.
More 'Blasphemy' Charges ...
CHECK OUT THE HEADLINE
"Vile Twitter troll who called young Celtic supporter 'disabled piece of s***' banned from football"
16:01, 6 Jan 2016
Updated 16:05, 6 Jan 2016
By Charlotte Thomson
... he was forced to shut down his account a few hours after the offence because his tweets caused outrage across the country.
Gibson was later charged and admitted acting in a threatening and abusive manner by sending sectarian messages online ...
... offence was aggravated by prejudice of religion and disability.
... the AFC fan escaped jail when he was sentenced at Aberdeen Sheriff Court and was ordered to carry out a community payback order.
... offender had been drinking while watching the Aberdeen v Celtic game before posting the "poorly judged" messages on the social networking sit
... messages would have been on for a very short time, perhaps a period of 20 minutes.
... court heard that one of the tweets referred to Celtic skipper Scott Brown's sister Fiona, who lost a battle with skin cancer in 2008 aged just 21.
... stated that she was "in hell" along with Celtic legend Tommy Burns, who passed away just two weeks before her death due to the same disease.
... ordered to carry out 200 hours of unpaid work in the community and banned from attending football matches - both professional and junior games - for a year.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/vile-twitter-troll-who-called-7127793
http://archive.is/cKW5E
However unsavoury the drunk rantings of some guy on Twitter, that the British state is aggressively (and selectively) policing remarks that are merely unpleasant, 'offensive' or whatever, ostensibly on behalf of the 'offended' and 'morally indignant' (and the 'vulnerable' that the state exploits as a shield for ever-widening incursions upon individual liberties), is worse (in my opinion) than the remarks that are being policed.
Look at the amount of state power that is being projected onto the realm of the individual who made a public utterance that was not approved of (be it by the state, by the football fans, the 'morally sound' public, the media or whoever): there's what sounds like online mobbing and harassment of the indignant 'moral' Twitter crusaders that shalt not be 'offended'; there's police intervention and charges; there's a court case; there's 200 hours of ordered state slavery (yes, modern-day slavery is what this is); and there is a year's restriction on this blasphemer's activities imposed by the state.
On top of that there is the publicity surrounding the drama that was made of some drunk guy's inconsequential remarks and the media and public condemnation, that have put this individual in the spotlight on a national and on a worldwide basis, as a result of the media hyping that would have taken place.
Yes, More 'Blasphemy' Charges ...
The drunk football fan Twitter 'outrage' scenario is much like the drama that recently ensued over some other British football fan wearing a t-shirt of an 'offensive' slogan related to the Hillsborough football deaths.
First the offensive t-shirt guy was thrown out of a pub. Then his photo was taken and posted on Twitter. Then he was mobbed by a Twitter 'campaign' of what amounts to mob abuse. Then he was arrested for his 'offensive' behaviour, using broadly written, ridiculous laws that infringe upon individual liberty.
The Blasphemous T-Shirt
Worcester man arrested on suspicion of public order offence
A man from Worcester has been arrested by police today (Monday 30 May) after reports were received of a man wearing a t-shirt printed with offensive comments relating to the Hillsborough disaster.
The man, aged 50, was arrested by officers this morning, under Section 4a of the Public Order Act 1986, on suspicion that with intent he displayed writing which was threatening, abusive, insulting and caused harassment, alarm or distress.
Members of the public called police after the man was seen wearing the t-shirt at the Brewers Arms pub in the St Johns area of Worcester yesterday (Sunday 29 May) he was asked to leave by the landlord.
Superintendent Kevin Purcell said: "I understand the alarm and distress the offensive language shown on this t-shirt will have caused to both the people in and around the pub and further afield.
"I would like to thank the landlord of the pub for his support and all the members of the public who were in the pub at the time and came forward to report it.
"Police acted very quickly to arrest the individual and he remains in police custody at this time."
Issued: 11.50am Monday 30 May 2016 Helen Blake, Corporate Communications
https://www.westmercia.police.uk/article/19213/Worcester-man-arrested-on-suspicion-of-public-order-offence
Once again, this is beyond absurd. The guy is wearing a t-shirt with a message people don't LIKE. He was asked to leave the pub by the landlord, which is fair enough if it is going to be a security problem on premises. That should have been the end of it.
The way the police carry on about 'understanding' about the 'alarm and distress' at 'offensive language' comes across as comedy when you consider what is going on here: it's a guy in a t-shirt that might be considered 'rude' or something, but it's merely a t-shirt. Grow up, Britain.
Are these the same people that defended Satanic Verses in the face of religious outrage and the same people that pay lip service to 'Western values', when feeling the blow-back from Western capitalist interventions in the affairs of the Middle East?
Is 'offensive language' 'British Sharia's' very own 'Satanic Verses' or is it the 'blasphemy' of biblical times, or the heretic burning and witch-hunting of the Middle Ages, or something?
I cannot believe what I am looking at here. Is British society so fragile and are the British so spineless that they cannot withstand to hear or see expressions they simply do not approve of or consider 'civil'?
It is beyond comprehension that the sheeple are so daft that they get on-board with the 'offence' and 'offended' melodrama and histrionics that are inflamed by the media, and that the sheeple let themselves live in an oppressive and absurd POLICE STATE, as a result of their 'offended' bleating and demand for a nanny state that is policed on behalf of wolves.
Observation: it looks like the dead have become yet another Western victim group. At this rate, the West is going to run out of 'victims'.
So that's two lots of incursions on civil liberties in the 'enlightened' and ostensibly 'secular' West, based on things that do not exist: (1) 'god' (yet religion is granted special protections and privileges) and (2) the dead.
Wonder where that places my recent criticism of Boris Johnson (re The Spectator's Liverpool offending article)? LOL ... this is getting complicated.
I still thing he's horrible for trying to dismiss a city's grief for a captive that had recently been barbarically slaughtered in Iraq (especially, as I believe the basis for that attempt to dismiss is political).
The Spectator opens
with a statement that is true in general of Western media influenced
and manipulated society, in which there is an institutionally and
otherwise entrenched victimhood (and accompanying state incursions on liberties)
promoting agenda and propaganda:
" ... mawkish sentimentality of a society that has become hooked on grief and likes to wallow in a sense of vicarious victimhood..." [2004]
But then the article unfairly attempts to single out the Liverpudlians in an attempt to dismiss the mourning for the Liverpudlian captive murdered in Iraq, so as to push what I guess is the (1) 'kissing up' and (2) suppression establishment two-step political move. Actually, that's the standard move. But 2004 would have been a special time for the British political establishment and their media mouthpieces: a time of making sure that illegal British military presence in Iraq continued undisrupted by public opinion (at British capitalist investment, by taxpayer slavery, of £9.24 billion). So that would have been the agenda of the BRITISH CORPORATE PRESS, acting in the interests of an elite that is ripping off, enslaving, dispossessing and deliberately victimising the common man.
Yet it is the politicians and media that have endorsed this culture of victimhood promotion and of political suppression, that's reached an absurd and institutionalised point, while members of their rank (such as The Spectator) have the audacity to seek to twist that around for immediate political ends, in an attempt to gain political advantage over the very people that are victims of the ideology of divestment and suppression that was promoted by them in the first place.
Stepping back from the 2004 article, I think The Spectator definitely has a point in general terms about society (not related to the murder in Iraq) and that maybe it would be better to resist that mentality and the effects of that ideology in society, as it leads to nothing but political impotence, suppression and divestment of rights of European working classes.
*Hoping this makes sense ... I've stayed up a ridiculous amount of time and I may not make any sense at all. LOL
|
EU-NATO IMPERIALISM ❌ 
