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.

 

Man sentenced over racist post

page: 1
13
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 8 2021 @ 10:14 PM
link   
Everybody can sleep more soundly tonight. A criminal was put to justice today. This man's crime? Daring to criticize 3 soccer players in a social media post blaming them for losing the game.

Yes this man, who dared criticize some folks for playing poorly in a soccer game and used a poor choice of words has been sentenced to 14 weeks imprisonment, then must undergo 30 days rehabilitation and wear an electronic tag and collar for 40 weeks.

Yup, all because this guy dared criticize 3 soccer players and used certain words on social media.

www.theguardian.com...


A man has been given a 14-week suspended sentence and must wear an electronic tag for 40 weeks over a racist comment directed towards black England footballers after the team’s defeat in the Euro 2020 final in July.

Scott McCluskey, 43, posted a status update on his Facebook profile shortly after England lost to Italy on 11 July, Warrington magistrates court heard. He blamed “three ethnic players” for the defeat and then used a racial slur calling for them to be sacked.

Marcus Rashford, Bukayo Saka and Jadon Sancho all missed their penalties and were deluged with racist posts in the aftermath of the game, prompting a political debate about racism in football and wider society.

McCluskey, from Runcorn, Cheshire, pleaded guilty to a single charge of sending an offensive or abusive message by a public communication network.

Describing it as a “foul offence which has far-reaching consequences”, district judge Nicholas Sanders sentenced McCluskey to 14 weeks’ imprisonment, suspended for 18 months, after the CPS successfully applied for the sentence to be strengthened because of the hate crime element.

McCluskey must complete 30 days of rehabilitation and wear an electronic tag on Saturdays from 9am to midnight and Sundays from 12pm to midnight for 40 weeks.

edit on 8/9/2021 by dug88 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 8 2021 @ 10:21 PM
link   
Probably won't be long before the word "sheep" is the new n-word.



posted on Sep, 8 2021 @ 10:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: dug88
Everybody can sleep more soundly tonight. A criminal was put to justice today. This man's crime? Daring to criticize 3 soccer players in a social media post blaming them for losing the game.

Yes this man, who dared criticize some folks for playing poorly in a soccer game and used a poor choice of words has been sentenced to 14 weeks imprisonment, then must undergo 30 days rehabilitation and wear an electronic tag and collar for 40 weeks.

Yup, all because this guy dared criticize 3 soccer players and used certain words on social media.

www.theguardian.com...


A man has been given a 14-week suspended sentence and must wear an electronic tag for 40 weeks over a racist comment directed towards black England footballers after the team’s defeat in the Euro 2020 final in July.

Scott McCluskey, 43, posted a status update on his Facebook profile shortly after England lost to Italy on 11 July, Warrington magistrates court heard. He blamed “three ethnic players” for the defeat and then used a racial slur calling for them to be sacked.

Marcus Rashford, Bukayo Saka and Jadon Sancho all missed their penalties and were deluged with racist posts in the aftermath of the game, prompting a political debate about racism in football and wider society.

McCluskey, from Runcorn, Cheshire, pleaded guilty to a single charge of sending an offensive or abusive message by a public communication network.

Describing it as a “foul offence which has far-reaching consequences”, district judge Nicholas Sanders sentenced McCluskey to 14 weeks’ imprisonment, suspended for 18 months, after the CPS successfully applied for the sentence to be strengthened because of the hate crime element.

McCluskey must complete 30 days of rehabilitation and wear an electronic tag on Saturdays from 9am to midnight and Sundays from 12pm to midnight for 40 weeks.


Well, what the hell did he say!? Is it so bad that they refused to place it in the article?



posted on Sep, 8 2021 @ 10:27 PM
link   


‘Don’t you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought? In the end we shall make thoughtcrime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it.’




‘We do not destroy the heretic because he resists us. . . . We convert him, we capture his inner mind, we reshape him.’




Whether he wrote DOWN WITH BIG BROTHER, or whether he refrained from writing it, made no difference. Whether he went on with the diary, or whether he did not go on with it, made no difference. The Thought Police would get him just the same. He had committed – would still have committed, even if he had never set pen to paper – the essential crime that contained all others in itself. Thoughtcrime, they called it. Thoughtcrime was not a thing that could be concealed for ever. You might dodge successfully for a while, even for years, but sooner or later they were bound to get you.


~Geo. Orwell, 1984
:
edit on 2021 9 08 by incoserv because: just a thought.



posted on Sep, 8 2021 @ 10:31 PM
link   
What did he say?



posted on Sep, 8 2021 @ 10:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheMirrorSelf
Well, what the hell did he say!? Is it so bad that they refused to place it in the article?



originally posted by: dandandat2
What did he say?


You people still don't get it. It has nothing to do with anything he said; it's all about what he and you are allowed to think. He clearly committed Thoughcrime. He allowed expression of a thought that fell outside of the range of thoughts allowed by those in "authority." He has been corrected. And you who want to know "what he said" are clueless.

His words expressed some kind of thought process that was not approved. He's learned his lesson, and those who hear about what happened to him will learn theirs. It may not happen immediately but it'll be just another brick in that wall, just another step down that long descending path. We'll all learn that we just should not think certain things.

Oh, we'll learn to not express them first, but then once we stop expressing them, we'll learn to squelch the thoughts, then kill the thoughts so that they don't even pop up. We'll be good little citizens, making sure to no upset Big Brother. They will not destroy you because you resist them; they will convert you, capture your inner mind, reshape you.

You see, the whole aim is to narrow the range of thought. In the end thoughtcrime will become impossible because there will be no words in which to express it. Just be patient.



posted on Sep, 8 2021 @ 10:41 PM
link   
What terrible words he used really should be clearly stated and easy to find. What would be the purpose of not including such information in the article? Strange.



posted on Sep, 8 2021 @ 10:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: incoserv

originally posted by: TheMirrorSelf
Well, what the hell did he say!? Is it so bad that they refused to place it in the article?



originally posted by: dandandat2
What did he say?


You people still don't get it. It has nothing to do with anything he said; it's all about what he and you are allowed to think. He clearly committed Thoughcrime. He allowed expression of a thought that fell outside of the range of thoughts allowed by those in "authority." He has been corrected. And you who want to know "what he said" are clueless.

His words expressed some kind of thought process that was not approved. He's learned his lesson, and those who hear about what happened to him will learn theirs. It may not happen immediately but it'll be just another brick in that wall, just another step down that long descending path. We'll all learn that we just should not think certain things.

Oh, we'll learn to not express them first, but then once we stop expressing them, we'll learn to squelch the thoughts, then kill the thoughts so that they don't even pop up. We'll be good little citizens, making sure to no upset Big Brother. They will not destroy you because you resist them; they will convert you, capture your inner mind, reshape you.

You see, the whole aim is to narrow the range of thought. In the end thoughtcrime will become impossible because there will be no words in which to express it. Just be patient.


You are the second person to refer to me as "you people" in as many minutes, and I'll say the same thing to you as I did to them...screw you buddy! Don't you dared call me or that other fellow that for asking a simple question, get the hell off of your high horse, and quit pretending like you know it all, most of all what is in our hearts. Your arrogance proceeds you. YOU still don't get it!



posted on Sep, 8 2021 @ 10:46 PM
link   
a reply to: incoserv

That book was written in the 50's, taught in highschool, or at least it was, yet...people are so oblivious to its messages.

a reply to: TheMirrorSelf

No he's right. What the guy said isn't important. He was given a criminal sentence for words. Word less terrible 100% than things i've said on the internet, i can guarantee you without even reading what that guy said. It was on facebook, the kinda # they find controversial is nothing.
edit on 8/9/2021 by dug88 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 8 2021 @ 10:47 PM
link   
Did you even read what he said you zealot?

Lol self righteous indignation indeed.
a reply to: TheMirrorSelf



posted on Sep, 8 2021 @ 10:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: incoserv

originally posted by: TheMirrorSelf
Well, what the hell did he say!? Is it so bad that they refused to place it in the article?



originally posted by: dandandat2
What did he say?


You people still don't get it. It has nothing to do with anything he said; it's all about what he and you are allowed to think. He clearly committed Thoughcrime. He allowed expression of a thought that fell outside of the range of thoughts allowed by those in "authority." He has been corrected. And you who want to know "what he said" are clueless.

His words expressed some kind of thought process that was not approved. He's learned his lesson, and those who hear about what happened to him will learn theirs. It may not happen immediately but it'll be just another brick in that wall, just another step down that long descending path. We'll all learn that we just should not think certain things.

Oh, we'll learn to not express them first, but then once we stop expressing them, we'll learn to squelch the thoughts, then kill the thoughts so that they don't even pop up. We'll be good little citizens, making sure to no upset Big Brother. They will not destroy you because you resist them; they will convert you, capture your inner mind, reshape you.

You see, the whole aim is to narrow the range of thought. In the end thoughtcrime will become impossible because there will be no words in which to express it. Just be patient.


I'd be good if racist thought stopped popping up.

But I agree we do have to debate how much it should cost.



posted on Sep, 8 2021 @ 10:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: Athetos
Did you even read what he said you zealot?

Lol self righteous indignation indeed.
a reply to: TheMirrorSelf



It doesn't matter what he said at all. He invalidated his position with his first words.



posted on Sep, 8 2021 @ 10:51 PM
link   
a reply to: TheMirrorSelf

You people with your word semantics...

edit on 8/9/2021 by dug88 because: Just kidding.



posted on Sep, 8 2021 @ 10:53 PM
link   
And you have invalided everything you have ever said and ever will say.

Gotchya!

a reply to: TheMirrorSelf



posted on Sep, 8 2021 @ 11:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: dandandat2



originally posted by: incoserv

originally posted by: TheMirrorSelf
Well, what the hell did he say!? Is it so bad that they refused to place it in the article?



originally posted by: dandandat2
What did he say?


You people still don't get it. It has nothing to do with anything he said; it's all about what he and you are allowed to think. He clearly committed Thoughcrime. He allowed expression of a thought that fell outside of the range of thoughts allowed by those in "authority." He has been corrected. And you who want to know "what he said" are clueless.

His words expressed some kind of thought process that was not approved. He's learned his lesson, and those who hear about what happened to him will learn theirs. It may not happen immediately but it'll be just another brick in that wall, just another step down that long descending path. We'll all learn that we just should not think certain things.

Oh, we'll learn to not express them first, but then once we stop expressing them, we'll learn to squelch the thoughts, then kill the thoughts so that they don't even pop up. We'll be good little citizens, making sure to no upset Big Brother. They will not destroy you because you resist them; they will convert you, capture your inner mind, reshape you.

You see, the whole aim is to narrow the range of thought. In the end thoughtcrime will become impossible because there will be no words in which to express it. Just be patient.


I'd be good if racist thought stopped popping up.

But I agree we do have to debate how much it should cost.


So you don’t think that after these certain words are no longer thought that they will not come up with a new set of racist words to eliminate next? The dictionary will be shrinking slowley.

Racism was going away a few years ago and they did not like it because they were getting less money to fight racism. This caused them to stir things up the way they are now.



posted on Sep, 8 2021 @ 11:04 PM
link   
England your courts are a bunch of idiots.

Instead of jail time why didn’t they sentence him to say it to all three of their faces in an empty parking garage?



posted on Sep, 8 2021 @ 11:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: beyondknowledge

originally posted by: dandandat2



originally posted by: incoserv

originally posted by: TheMirrorSelf
Well, what the hell did he say!? Is it so bad that they refused to place it in the article?



originally posted by: dandandat2
What did he say?


You people still don't get it. It has nothing to do with anything he said; it's all about what he and you are allowed to think. He clearly committed Thoughcrime. He allowed expression of a thought that fell outside of the range of thoughts allowed by those in "authority." He has been corrected. And you who want to know "what he said" are clueless.

His words expressed some kind of thought process that was not approved. He's learned his lesson, and those who hear about what happened to him will learn theirs. It may not happen immediately but it'll be just another brick in that wall, just another step down that long descending path. We'll all learn that we just should not think certain things.

Oh, we'll learn to not express them first, but then once we stop expressing them, we'll learn to squelch the thoughts, then kill the thoughts so that they don't even pop up. We'll be good little citizens, making sure to no upset Big Brother. They will not destroy you because you resist them; they will convert you, capture your inner mind, reshape you.

You see, the whole aim is to narrow the range of thought. In the end thoughtcrime will become impossible because there will be no words in which to express it. Just be patient.


I'd be good if racist thought stopped popping up.

But I agree we do have to debate how much it should cost.


So you don’t think that after these certain words are no longer thought that they will not come up with a new set of racist words to eliminate next? The dictionary will be shrinking slowley.

Racism was going away a few years ago and they did not like it because they were getting less money to fight racism. This caused them to stir things up the way they are now.


Ok; but do you know what he said?



posted on Sep, 8 2021 @ 11:23 PM
link   
a reply to: dandandat2

Facetiousness is unbecoming in adults. Use your imagination. It was probably something involving the word 'n-word' and some slurs about their penalties and inability to play soccer.

Use your common sense dude...

Given the context, what is it most likely to be?
edit on 8/9/2021 by dug88 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 9 2021 @ 12:07 AM
link   
It was probably something like: "it woz our time to bring fotball home but them three black c**ts from bongo bongo land ruined it for us. sack them gareth m8. i'm propa fumin and now going to race home from the pub in my vauxhall vectra and beat the wife senseless"

Doubt it was the n-word as that would be taken down instantly by fb.

The UK justice system is an absolute joke. Police knew gangs of a certain ethnicity were abducting and grooming white girls, but turning a blind eye for 'fear' of being called racist/x-phobic. Yet a random nobody says a naughty word on the internet, which very few people would even see, and instantly investigated and sentenced.



posted on Sep, 9 2021 @ 12:52 AM
link   
He called them monkeys.



new topics

top topics



 
13
<<   2 >>

log in

join