Fabrice Muamba: Racist Twitter user jailed for 56 days (Right or Wrong)

page: 15
13
<< 12  13  14   >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 29 2012 @ 05:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Cythraul
 


Although we disagree about the OT I do agree with you that our political parties are rubbish, but I hope that one day one of them will step up and sort a lot of things out.
Hey it could be you

But I disagree with your attitude that one man/woman can not change anything, it always starts with one then it grows.

One idea can change the world I just wish someone thought of it lol




posted on Mar, 29 2012 @ 05:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by YipMan
at the end of the day its the LAW

No it's not!


Originally posted by YipMan
do you have to like it?no you dont
do you have 2 abide by that law? yes you do

And when it was the law for Jews to submit themselves to the Nazi authorities should they have all abided by them?


Originally posted by YipMan
i get the feeling the supporters of this "i want to and will say what i want to whoever" have never been faced with blatant racism on a daily basis

Racism is not the only form of verbal abuse - in fact, I'd say it can be of the least hurtful.



posted on Mar, 29 2012 @ 05:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by something wicked

Originally posted by InfoKartel

Originally posted by judus
reply to post by Rising Against
 

People Die all the time what makes this case so special ? Why should the MSM hype this as a national tragedy.


Football player. Dropped on live tv watched by millions at the time. Did you really need to ask? What with the godlike status that's given to sport players...


But if a grown skinhead spouts all kinds of racist diatribe to some poor fellow on the street, it's no problem. Fine? What fine? Let alone jail...
edit on 27-3-2012 by InfoKartel because: (no reason given)


There's a difference isn't there? If said skinhead (my, talk about stereotyping by the way) makes the same comments this guy did and police are able to apprehend and there are reliable witnesses then he would, or should face the same charges. Twitter provides that witnessing and also effectively a confession by default.


This is all about the fact that the target was a footballer, and that it was a dramatic event which caused a public outpouring of grief.

That's the only reason any of this happened.

It has nothing to do with the fact that it was hate-speech, or racist opinion. It has everything to do with masses of people getting so worked up about it they all reported it to the police.

In the UK, hate speech is a criminal offense. If someone verbally attacks you in the street based on your race, religion, sexuality or gender etc they can be charged.
That's fine by me, I'm happy with that, we shouldn't live in a society where one person thinks they have the right to attack another in public.
But they wouldn't face national humiliation, public flogging, hanging in the town square. They wouldn't be imprisoned, and they probably wouldn't be fined either.
They'd get a warning, and they'd be told that if they are caught doing it again then they will face harsher punishment.

This guy made some stupid attention-seeking rants while he was drunk (something many millions of others are guilty of all across the country every single day), and instead of getting a knock at the door and warned about the consequences of his actions by the local police, he was dragged out and broadcast across the nation, made a target for the hatred of millions of idiots, lost his career and his education...

This is just not on. The police and judge in this case should be ashamed and outed for the damage they have done needlessly.

We live in a society where people praise hollow celebrity, demand blood through media attack, gang up like rabid dogs when it suits their sense of personal outrage - and now we have JUDGES placating them!

This is sick, people should not be tried by public opinion and moral perception. If law comes down to who shouts loud enough we are in a very bad way.

I said it before, but there have been thousands of tweets since this suggesting that people hope he's raped in prison. All of those people should now be arrested, charged and locked up for expressing support for a violent crime. That's far worse than someone mouthing off about how they hate someone.

And like I said before, nothing will happen to those making vile statements like that because there isn't a footballer being threatened with it, and there isn't a large enough crowd of neanderthals demanding it.

People should have some common sense, especially a freakin' judge! The guy was already a national target of hatred, that should have been punishment enough.

What will all those people think if this kid takes his own life? Will they be proud that they were part of the baying mob of pitchfork-wielding lunatics? Or will they have calmed down by then and realize that they just participated in a hunt that cost a young man his life for the sake of something that deserved nothing more than a quiet word in an ear.
edit on 29-3-2012 by detachedindividual because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 29 2012 @ 05:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by boymonkey74
But I disagree with your attitude that one man/woman can not change anything, it always starts with one then it grows.

One idea can change the world I just wish someone thought of it lol

I do agree with you there. But we must face the fact that that one man/woman is fighting against a mighty tide of mainstream media propaganda and government corruption, and that they cannot affect their change through the Democratic system (which is completely rigged). Change will come, but the person bringing it will be demonised and - no offense - people like you will probably fight against him/her.

For example, we must acknowledge that multiculturalism and Political Correctness are tools of the Establishment, so any true anti-Establishment figure would not adhere to them.



posted on Mar, 29 2012 @ 06:29 AM
link   
I'm a long time forum lurker and never a poster... But I HAD to jump in and comment on this thread after what l've just seen in the paper; as it's totally unjust!

I think it was Voltaire who said "I may disagree with what you have to say, but I shall defend to the death your right to say it" which IMHO is a pretty logical thing to say and something I agree with.

Whilst what was said was wrong (and I by no means endorse it), the only things that were hurt were people's feelings and sensibilities - NOT bones!

But as punishment for his opinion, he has lost his education (degree), now has a criminal record and in effect his future is f**ked! Thats pretty harsh for having an opinion.

NOW... On the train today, I read to following article which made my blood boil at the outright injustice!

From the Metro newspaper, 29 March, Page 23. - I'm typing this verbatim as the content on metro's site is paraphrased. Metro Link

A Driver mowed down a young woman on a pedestrian crossing and left her in the road because he was rushing to sign on for his job-seeker's allowance, a court heard.

Learner driver Balram Singh, 21, was running late when he drove through a red light and hit 23-year old Kate Allan.

The uninsured motorist, whio was driving a relative's car without permission, sent her crashing into his windscreen and on to the road.

He then ignored witnesses' pleas to stop and drove off, narrowly missing the victim's head.

Singh was spared prison on Tuesday after admiting aggrivated vehicle taking, failing to stop, driving without insurance and driving alone while on a provisional licence...........
_________________

Sorry, but WTF!? He stole a car, ran a red light, ran someone down, left the scene of a crime, wasnt insured and wasnt licenced! And to top it off, he was on his way to get his benefit money that my tax pays for (forgive my palpable anger here).

So he injured someone and get a slap on the wrist, someone says something nasty and has the rest of his life ruined.

Can someone please explain how this makes sense?



posted on Mar, 29 2012 @ 07:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by jimbo1977
Sorry, but WTF!? He stole a car, ran a red light, ran someone down, left the scene of a crime, wasnt insured and wasnt licenced! And to top it off, he was on his way to get his benefit money that my tax pays for (forgive my palpable anger here).

So he injured someone and get a slap on the wrist, someone says something nasty and has the rest of his life ruined.

Can someone please explain how this makes sense?


This kind of proves that this case was all about the public sentiment. It was nothing to do with justice and proportion, it was about satisfying a rabid public who were too ignorant and stupid to be able to take a deep breath and look at this case with sensible objectivity.

The worst person in all of this is the judge. He has destroyed a young mans life to satisfy the ignorance and rage of a baying mob. He should be struck off.
edit on 29-3-2012 by detachedindividual because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 29 2012 @ 08:22 AM
link   
reply to post by detachedindividual
 



It was nothing to do with justice and proportion, it was about satisfying a rabid public who were too ignorant and stupid to be able to take a deep breath and look at this case with sensible objectivity.


Ignorant stupid people - rabid public? Or is it moral outrage? Isn't this just an example of society policing itself?

Yeah - maybe they are making an example out of him - and maybe it is wrong, but there's always the first case

Maybe our definition of 'place' and 'public' needs to be redefined - legally. It's interesting that England and the United States looks at freedom of speech as differently as they do. Recently Rush Limbaugh said some very nasty things over here - and he got slapped big time. But not by the law - in the court of public opinion. Some defended him when all his sponsors started pulling out - freedom of speech was being reexamined

People punished him for what he said - oh, absolutely they did - but it never became a legal issue

He was free to say it - we were free to disagree - and we did

What we will or won't tolerate changes with the times - and so do the laws. So - as extreme as this all seems - did he or didn't he break the law?

The laws in England are different from here in America - so, whether or not he broke your laws - I don't really know. Is Twitter public or private? Is posting remarks the way he did in such a public way any different from standing on the corner and shouting them out to anyone that passes by?

And - more importantly - is this something he can appeal? That's where all this is heading - and the laws will be tested and reevaluated - and probably changed
edit on 3/29/2012 by Spiramirabilis because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 29 2012 @ 09:16 AM
link   
Some excerpts from a great blog commentary on this issue:


And what was his crime? He did not steal, he did not defraud anyone, he did not rape or kill, he did not draw blood, he did not bruise, he did not lay a finger on anyone. His only crime was to say things which we are not supposed to say, and which offended those who passionately seek offence.

[...]

There was a time when what we found most frightening about states such as those beneath the totalitarian fist of Soviet Russia or which were tin pot dictatorships, run by brutal despots, was that people could be locked away because of what they said.

We now live under such terror.

More chilling still are the shrill cheers of those who support the prosecution. To merely read the approving comments beneath the news report of the young man's trial is to hear echoes from another darker place we once thought had disappeared long ago.

“Finally the sentence fits the crime!” Snarls brain dead Olivia from Swindon

“hahahahhahahahhahaha i love it..... u vile rascist little pig ” crowed Arshad from Worster – (clearly enjoying seeing a white man brought low)

“Good, scum like this should have the book thrown at them. ….. He made racist comments” squeaked Anthony from London, the sort of person who, in another life would have sold his mother to the Stasi for misspeaking.

As would Denise from Chelmsford who shrieked with the pride of a Khmer Rouge guerrilla with a baby on her bayonet “The racial comments were disgusting. I'm glad that I was one of the many people who reported him to the police.”
How low has out country sunk that the likes of Olivia, Arshad, Denise and Anthony now tell us how to think.

We are told that this is a free country, that is a joke, we are becoming the terrorist state of which others once warned us, and most frightening is the fact that there are many who welcome it.


More at the Source



posted on Mar, 29 2012 @ 01:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by neformore
I think that anyone who is stupid enough to make racially motivated abohrrent comments on a public forum deserves everything they get.

Freedom of speech is not freedom to hate.


Freedom - as in free will, is the ability to make choices, so actually it is... hate, as is love, is an opinion of someone or something... since when are opinions illegal?

You have a freedom to hate just as much as you have freedom to love... it's how you use your feelings that matters...

In this case I would say probation AT MOST, if anything. BUT... going off your way of thinking... back when Whitney Houston died... if someone would of posted something like "Just another dead black crackhead" that would be reason to put them in jail?

In that case I would not be able to go on a Kraft site and say I hate mac and cheese... because as you said, freedom of speech is not freedom to hate...
edit on 29-3-2012 by SmArTbEaTz because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 29 2012 @ 05:11 PM
link   
How can they sue him using a local law: the internet is where the crime was and it is international and so he should have been sued in international law. However I very much doubt if international law bothers about bigotry. I do not know what he said but eugenics is still a science and is still researched he could have quoted a few papers and then they would have to sue a few Profs. Also does anyone think putting a person with a lot of lab training in to a place with lots of drug dealers after destroying his career or at least trying, isn't a good idea. I believe in free speech although us in the U.K. have no such law. Incidently he was not sued because of race or because of illness but because the other person was famous. FAME TRUMPS EVERYTHING IN MODERN SOCIETY.

If he was sued under the wrong law then technically some probably lots of people should go in front of an international court as war criminals do.If they stretched the law to put him in jil they are idiots:the law must apply to the letter to everyone, or it applies to no one.
edit on 29-3-2012 by s12345 because: (no reason given)





top topics
 
13
<< 12  13  14   >>

log in

join