It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The UK has hit rock bottom - detaining a US citizen because she was to interview Tommy Robinson

page: 5
79
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 12 2018 @ 08:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: Reydelsol

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: DISRAELI

originally posted by: UKTruth
What is this country coming to when we detain people for opinions???

I would like to see the official reason for the detention. It might not have been put in those terms.


I suspect it will have been under the public safety remit where they believe there is a risk of incitement of violence.

People can argue about the right or wrong of that, but I suspect many of those complaining would be the first to applaud if it was an Islamic preacher detained for the same reason.


Well one is just a journalist, with whom one can agree or disagree with. The other leads a group of people along their line of thinking. Should that Imam believe in Jihad against the west, at least some might develop those same beliefs. Of course in both instances proof is required before detainment. Its really apples to oranges, but nice try.


Nope completely comparable preaching hate is preaching hate


How the holy F**K is giving a lecture on free speech anything to do with hate preaching?


When it is the "WRONG" kind of free speech, obviously...You can say whatever you like as long as it is sanctioned by the fascistic overlords in charge of our MSM




posted on Mar, 12 2018 @ 08:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: Reydelsol

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: DISRAELI

originally posted by: UKTruth
What is this country coming to when we detain people for opinions???

I would like to see the official reason for the detention. It might not have been put in those terms.


I suspect it will have been under the public safety remit where they believe there is a risk of incitement of violence.

People can argue about the right or wrong of that, but I suspect many of those complaining would be the first to applaud if it was an Islamic preacher detained for the same reason.


Well one is just a journalist, with whom one can agree or disagree with. The other leads a group of people along their line of thinking. Should that Imam believe in Jihad against the west, at least some might develop those same beliefs. Of course in both instances proof is required before detainment. Its really apples to oranges, but nice try.


Nope completely comparable preaching hate is preaching hate


How the holy F**K is giving a lecture on free speech anything to do with hate preaching?


noo yawk .noo yawk
edit on 05pMon, 12 Mar 2018 08:30:05 -050020182018-03-12T08:30:05-05:00kAmerica/Chicago31000000k by SprocketUK because: double post



posted on Mar, 12 2018 @ 08:36 AM
link   
The UK is lost. There is no hope for it. Don’t bother.



posted on Mar, 12 2018 @ 08:38 AM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

Aye count Dankula was charged bcause his dog is a #in nazi



posted on Mar, 12 2018 @ 09:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: oddnutz
a reply to: ScepticScot

well they can call it what ever they want but I call it Blasphemy.
she was refused entry for handing out racist (anti islam) literature at a rally in Luton in February.


Blasphemy Blasphemy is the act of insulting or showing contempt or lack of reverence to a deity, to religious or holy persons or sacred things, or toward something considered sacred or inviolable.



Racism Racism is the belief in the superiority of one race over another, which often results in discrimination and prejudice towards people based on their race or ethnicity.




I think you’re right. In the UK a religion is a race, and to demean the religion is racist. Their hate speech laws are essentially blasphemy laws.



posted on Mar, 12 2018 @ 09:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: UKTruth


Not sure how that is relevant.


Why am I not surprised.
Maybe because you didn't put anything relevant in your post? That would sure be a good reason why you aren't surprised.



posted on Mar, 12 2018 @ 09:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: DISRAELI

originally posted by: UKTruth
What is this country coming to when we detain people for opinions???

I would like to see the official reason for the detention. It might not have been put in those terms.


I suspect it will have been under the public safety remit where they believe there is a risk of incitement of violence.

People can argue about the right or wrong of that, but I suspect many of those complaining would be the first to applaud if it was an Islamic preacher detained for the same reason.


Well one is just a journalist, with whom one can agree or disagree with. The other leads a group of people along their line of thinking. Should that Imam believe in Jihad against the west, at least some might develop those same beliefs. Of course in both instances proof is required before detainment. Its really apples to oranges, but nice try.


Nope completely comparable preaching hate is preaching hate


Prove that the journalist was preaching hate. And by that I mean the general standard of hate, not your own personal standard, because that would be nonsense in a debate.


I don't have to prove anything as I am not a lawyer involved in the case. I do know the rules for detaining someone require more than just they are going to interview someone.

Ok. Then do you think it is possible for the police (or even a government) to detain someone for reasons that violate those rules? Or are those rules never abused or broken?



posted on Mar, 12 2018 @ 09:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: Box of Rain

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: DISRAELI

originally posted by: UKTruth
What is this country coming to when we detain people for opinions???

I would like to see the official reason for the detention. It might not have been put in those terms.


I suspect it will have been under the public safety remit where they believe there is a risk of incitement of violence.

People can argue about the right or wrong of that, but I suspect many of those complaining would be the first to applaud if it was an Islamic preacher detained for the same reason.


Well one is just a journalist, with whom one can agree or disagree with. The other leads a group of people along their line of thinking. Should that Imam believe in Jihad against the west, at least some might develop those same beliefs. Of course in both instances proof is required before detainment. Its really apples to oranges, but nice try.


Nope completely comparable preaching hate is preaching hate


Prove that the journalist was preaching hate. And by that I mean the general standard of hate, not your own personal standard, because that would be nonsense in a debate.


I don't have to prove anything as I am not a lawyer involved in the case. I do know the rules for detaining someone require more than just they are going to interview someone.

Ok. Then do you think it is possible for the police (or even a government) to detain someone for reasons that violate those rules? Or are those rules never abused or broken?



Absolutely possible and if someone can provide any evidence, or even a compelling reason why they would in this case, then it would be worth discussing.

So far not happened.



posted on Mar, 12 2018 @ 09:30 AM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

sadly i have to agree. self-destruct mode is in full swing here.



posted on Mar, 12 2018 @ 09:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: oddnutz
a reply to: ScepticScot

well they can call it what ever they want but I call it Blasphemy.
she was refused entry for handing out racist (anti islam) literature at a rally in Luton in February.


Blasphemy Blasphemy is the act of insulting or showing contempt or lack of reverence to a deity, to religious or holy persons or sacred things, or toward something considered sacred or inviolable.



Racism Racism is the belief in the superiority of one race over another, which often results in discrimination and prejudice towards people based on their race or ethnicity.




I think you’re right. In the UK a religion is a race, and to demean the religion is racist. Their hate speech laws are essentially blasphemy laws.


Laws on inciting hatred against people based on their religion is not even remotely like laws on blasphemy.



posted on Mar, 12 2018 @ 09:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Box of Rain

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: DISRAELI

originally posted by: UKTruth
What is this country coming to when we detain people for opinions???

I would like to see the official reason for the detention. It might not have been put in those terms.


I suspect it will have been under the public safety remit where they believe there is a risk of incitement of violence.

People can argue about the right or wrong of that, but I suspect many of those complaining would be the first to applaud if it was an Islamic preacher detained for the same reason.


Well one is just a journalist, with whom one can agree or disagree with. The other leads a group of people along their line of thinking. Should that Imam believe in Jihad against the west, at least some might develop those same beliefs. Of course in both instances proof is required before detainment. Its really apples to oranges, but nice try.


Nope completely comparable preaching hate is preaching hate


Prove that the journalist was preaching hate. And by that I mean the general standard of hate, not your own personal standard, because that would be nonsense in a debate.


I don't have to prove anything as I am not a lawyer involved in the case. I do know the rules for detaining someone require more than just they are going to interview someone.

Ok. Then do you think it is possible for the police (or even a government) to detain someone for reasons that violate those rules? Or are those rules never abused or broken?



Absolutely possible and if someone can provide any evidence, or even a compelling reason why they would in this case, then it would be worth discussing.

So far not happened.


I's rather hear a reason FOR someone being detained by the police.

What you seem to be saying is that you don't know the reason, but since the police must follow rules, that means there probably was a good reason. If that's the case, I'd like to hear the specific reason (i.e., under suspicion of what crime was she detained against her will?).


edit on 2018/3/12 by Box of Rain because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2018 @ 09:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: Box of Rain

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Box of Rain

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: DISRAELI

originally posted by: UKTruth
What is this country coming to when we detain people for opinions???

I would like to see the official reason for the detention. It might not have been put in those terms.


I suspect it will have been under the public safety remit where they believe there is a risk of incitement of violence.

People can argue about the right or wrong of that, but I suspect many of those complaining would be the first to applaud if it was an Islamic preacher detained for the same reason.


Well one is just a journalist, with whom one can agree or disagree with. The other leads a group of people along their line of thinking. Should that Imam believe in Jihad against the west, at least some might develop those same beliefs. Of course in both instances proof is required before detainment. Its really apples to oranges, but nice try.


Nope completely comparable preaching hate is preaching hate


Prove that the journalist was preaching hate. And by that I mean the general standard of hate, not your own personal standard, because that would be nonsense in a debate.


I don't have to prove anything as I am not a lawyer involved in the case. I do know the rules for detaining someone require more than just they are going to interview someone.

Ok. Then do you think it is possible for the police (or even a government) to detain someone for reasons that violate those rules? Or are those rules never abused or broken?



Absolutely possible and if someone can provide any evidence, or even a compelling reason why they would in this case, then it would be worth discussing.

So far not happened.


I's rather hear a reason FOR someone being detained by the police.

What you seem to be saying is that you don't know the reason, but since the police must follow rules, that means there probably was a good reason. If that's the case, I'd like to hear the specific reason (i.e., under suspicion of what crime was she detained against her will?).



I believe a specific reason has been given (incitement to racial hatred) , although I have not seen it verified.

The claim that its because of an interview she planned to do is the speculation.



posted on Mar, 12 2018 @ 09:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Box of Rain

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Box of Rain

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: DISRAELI

originally posted by: UKTruth
What is this country coming to when we detain people for opinions???

I would like to see the official reason for the detention. It might not have been put in those terms.


I suspect it will have been under the public safety remit where they believe there is a risk of incitement of violence.

People can argue about the right or wrong of that, but I suspect many of those complaining would be the first to applaud if it was an Islamic preacher detained for the same reason.


Well one is just a journalist, with whom one can agree or disagree with. The other leads a group of people along their line of thinking. Should that Imam believe in Jihad against the west, at least some might develop those same beliefs. Of course in both instances proof is required before detainment. Its really apples to oranges, but nice try.


Nope completely comparable preaching hate is preaching hate


Prove that the journalist was preaching hate. And by that I mean the general standard of hate, not your own personal standard, because that would be nonsense in a debate.


I don't have to prove anything as I am not a lawyer involved in the case. I do know the rules for detaining someone require more than just they are going to interview someone.

Ok. Then do you think it is possible for the police (or even a government) to detain someone for reasons that violate those rules? Or are those rules never abused or broken?



Absolutely possible and if someone can provide any evidence, or even a compelling reason why they would in this case, then it would be worth discussing.

So far not happened.


I's rather hear a reason FOR someone being detained by the police.

What you seem to be saying is that you don't know the reason, but since the police must follow rules, that means there probably was a good reason. If that's the case, I'd like to hear the specific reason (i.e., under suspicion of what crime was she detained against her will?).



I believe a specific reason has been given (incitement to racial hatred) , although I have not seen it verified.

The claim that its because of an interview she planned to do is the speculation.



If planning an interview is "incitement to racial hatred", then they need to redefine what that means. Was she planning to herself (not the person she was interviewing) incite racial hate?

I'm a socially liberal person myself, so I don't usually agree with the details of most Pettibone's message (although I agree with other details). However, I do agree that she has a right to speak her message, because while she (IMO) does speak racist rhetoric, as far as I know her message is not criminally inflammatory -- and that is the important distinction here.

Do I agree with her? In general, No (although whether or not I agree with her message is not relevant in the slightest).
Is her message so inflammatory it rises to the definition of criminal behavior? No.


edit on 2018/3/12 by Box of Rain because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2018 @ 09:57 AM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

Good. We don't need a parasite from another troubled country.

edit on 12-3-2018 by mekhanics because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2018 @ 10:03 AM
link   

edit on 12-3-2018 by LesMisanthrope because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2018 @ 10:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: oddnutz
a reply to: ScepticScot

well they can call it what ever they want but I call it Blasphemy.
she was refused entry for handing out racist (anti islam) literature at a rally in Luton in February.


Blasphemy Blasphemy is the act of insulting or showing contempt or lack of reverence to a deity, to religious or holy persons or sacred things, or toward something considered sacred or inviolable.



Racism Racism is the belief in the superiority of one race over another, which often results in discrimination and prejudice towards people based on their race or ethnicity.




I think you’re right. In the UK a religion is a race, and to demean the religion is racist. Their hate speech laws are essentially blasphemy laws.


Laws on inciting hatred against people based on their religion is not even remotely like laws on blasphemy.


Sure they are. They just disguise it in the multi-culti language of social justice.



posted on Mar, 12 2018 @ 10:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: oddnutz

originally posted by: Hazardous1408
But secondly, and even more incredibly, Colnbrook Detention Centre is a male-only holding Centre...
So either she is mistaken as to where they kept her, or is totally full of bollocks.
en.m.wikipedia.org...



It includes a Short Term Holding Centre, where both women and men are held, usually for a few days. There is also a unit for women called ‘Sahara Unit’ with a capacity of twenty women.

detentionaction.org.uk...

i hope no one took what you wrote as gospel or they would be misinformed.


He's been caught lying. Thank you.


I don’t know if you are stupid, ignorant or just trying to be insulting...
But if you read both posts (mine and odd’s), we used two completely different sources and that which I used says “male only”.

So how on Earth do you come to the conclusion that I was lying?


And that’s a laugh in of itself to be honest, because you fully believe people are “locked up for interviews” in the UK solely on the basis of one person’s word. Get a grip.

edit on 12-3-2018 by Hazardous1408 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2018 @ 10:14 AM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Blasphemy - Sacrilegious rhetoric against God or what is sacred...

Not Blasphemy - Inciting hatred against someone/a group solely because of their personal Faith...




Please stop this bullsh*t.
No one has been locked up or detained for Blasphemy in the UK.

It would be worldwide news.



posted on Mar, 12 2018 @ 10:22 AM
link   
Ridiculous.

Or as they say in London, سخيف.



posted on Mar, 12 2018 @ 10:23 AM
link   
this piece of legislation is absolute rubbish , as its based on a logical fallacy , that if person 1 says a,b, or c online or in public , then x, y or z will happen ! and if that x,y, or z happens then person 1 is directly responsible for the actions of others!



new topics

top topics



 
79
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join