Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will get me arrested

Freedom of speech in the West seems to be a dying concept. ?When governments make bad decisions and the citizens complain, they have two choices. Rectify the bad decision or shut down their citizens’ freedom of speech.

In another chilling example of how free speech is being criminalized, police in Scotland arrested a man after he made an ?offensive? Facebook post about Muslim migrants arriving in his area.
Police Scotland confirmed today that they had arrested a 40-year-old man under the Communications Act for a post in which was critical of 12 Syrian families who recently arrived in the seaside town of Rothesay.
?I hope that the arrest of this individual sends a clear message that Police Scotland will not tolerate any form of activity which could incite hatred and provoke offensive comments on social media,? remarked Insp Ewan Wilson from Dunoon police office.

There was a time when speech that incited violence, or called for harm to be done to someone, was censored. ?Now, ‘offensive’ comments, which are totally subjective and comments that ?someone else considers hateful, are not only being censored: they are being criminalised.

That ?message? is a shot across the bow for the 6,000 residents of the tiny Isle of Bute in the Firth of Clyde, who are about to be inundated with around 1,000 migrants. Negative opinions about the influx will not be tolerated, despite a nationwide rape and crime epidemic that has followed the migrants to countries like Germany.
Citizens across Europe are now facing fines and imprisonment for speaking out against the millions of Muslim migrants flooding into the continent.

As we reported last week, a Danish man was convicted and fined for a Facebook post in which he compared the religion of Islam to Nazism.
Facebook has also teamed up with the German government and an ex-member of the Stasi to track down and punish Germans who make anti-migrant posts on social media.
A Dutch man also received a home visit from the police after he criticized his country?s open borders refugee policy as a ?bad plan? on Twitter.
?You tweet a lot. We have orders to ask you to watch your tone. Your tweets may seem seditious,? the man was told.
Broadening online definitions of ?harassment? and ?hate speech? are now being met with real world consequences.


If all this isn’t scary enough, in Britain people are getting arrested for what they wear because someone, somewhere has arbitrarily decided that it is a political uniform.

Britain First

Britain First

The leaders of the political group Britain First, have been arrested under a law from the 1930s that bans the wearing of ?’political uniforms’.

Paul Golding, 34, and Jayda Fransen, 29, were questioned by police after the pair led a “Christian patrol” through Luton on 23 January.

They were detained on Monday (15 February) under the Public Order Act 1936, which was originally passed to control far-right political movements like Oswald Mosley’s British Union of Fascists (also known as the Blackshirts). It was also used against IRA and Sinn Fein demonstrations in the 1970s, even fining them from wearing berets in Hyde Park’s Speaker’s Corner.
…They are both banned from entering Luton and have been ordered to present themselves at a police station every Saturday. Fransen, who also had her Britain First lapel badge confiscated by detectives, claimed they were being harassed by the police and vowed to challenge the bail conditions in the courts.

She told IBTimes UK: “It begs the question as to whether Bedfordshire police will be taking similar action against Labour party activists wearing ‘Vote Labour’ T-shirts or those wearing a Conservative party rosette.”

An IBTimes UK interview saw Fransen warn “civil war” between British Muslims and Christians was coming to the UK…

Fransen said: “The bail conditions are inordinately restrictive and state that, not only are myself and Paul banned from entering Luton but we must also report to a specific police station every Saturday between 12noon and 14:00.

“The former of those conditions illustrates an unbridled desire to appease the Muslim community of Luton, several of whom attacked Britain First activists when we last visited the town. The latter exposes the utter contempt that Bedfordshire Police have for Britain First as a political party; by demanding that the leader and deputy leader must report to a police station on the most common day for political activity.”

Britain First …?policies include wanting to bring back national service, completely halting immigration and reinstating the death penalty for paedophiles, terrorists and murderers.

…Fransen said: “The indigenous people in Britain don’t want their towns turned into Muslim ghettos. It doesn’t look like Britain anymore. Dewsbury has Islamic extremists coming out of the woodwork so we want to march through the town centre. I’m not concerned about any negative reaction, I’m concerned about my country. We always behave impeccably on the marches, it’s the opposition to us that’s the problem.”

…It was uncertain whether the arrest meant the group would be banned from wearing their branded clothing in the future.


I wonder how many journalists get death threats?

The media love to motivate the public against ?politicians.

They think that they are holier than thou and don’t think for a minute of the effects of their attacks.

The pay may be good, but many of our MPs face death threats and attacks on their homes, staff and families.

A study based on an anonymous survey of 102 sitting MPs found nearly all of them had been subjected to unwanted harassment. More than one in 10 had been assaulted, and a similar number had been stalked, or had received deaths threats.

One in three had suffered property damage at the hands of angry constituents, and half had been physically confronted by their harassers. Most had been harassed more than once.

Sue Bradford received two death threats during the passage of the so-called anti-smacking bill.

One received 1080 poison in the mail, another had their back door smashed and a bullet thrown through the window of their family home, terrifying their daughter and partner.

Attacks have involved a gun, a molotov cocktail, sticks and placards.

The authors of the study have called for better monitoring of threats to MPs, warning they are often lightning rods for a small group of severely mentally ill people who pose a serious risk to the public at large.

Read more »


Using an anti-bullying law to bully someone lawfully

A Bill to curb the growing incidence of cyberbullying and its devastating effects passed its second reading in Parliament last night.

The Harmful Digital Communications Bill introduces a range of measures to address damaging online communications and ensure perpetrators are held to account for their actions.

Justice Minister Amy Adams says the Bill will prevent and reduce the harm caused by cyberbullying and harassment.

?Harmful digital communications include emails, texts and social media posts that people use to intimidate others, spread damaging or degrading rumours and publish invasive and distressing photographs,? says Ms Adams.

?This Bill has the potential to stop cyberbullies and reduce the devastating impact their actions can have. Importantly, our proposals also empower victims, by providing a quick, low-cost and effective way to right the wrongs done to them.

Ms Adams said recent events, such as the Roast Busters case, highlighted the need for legislation to help prevent victims from being re-traumatised on the internet and hold perpetrators to account. Read more »

People are Stupid,Ctd

This guysshould have more time added to his sentence, for wasting the court’s time and for being a cock.

New Zealand’s most notorious stalker has appealed his latest prison sentence saying he got confused about who he was stalking and lavished undue attention on the wrong woman.

Glenn Green is serving a 30-month sentence for two counts of criminal harassment, offending he began three weeks after getting out of prison in 2011.

Green, 42, aka Glenn Corleone, Goldberg, Carlionne, Casellano and Holden, appealed his sentence at the High Court in Auckland yesterday saying the judge had erred by giving him the same sentence for both his victims, when he had actually stalked one of the women much worse than the other.

Oh FFS, what a creep. Why can’t we have inventive sentences like a good beating with a golfball inside a sock?

No mocking Parekura then

The Telegraph

It sounds like calling someone fatty could well become a hate crime in the UK. It could be worse though, at least they aren’t banning the abuse of Gingas.

Ridiculing?someone as ‘fat’ or ‘obese’ could become a hate crime under an idea being floated by a group of MPs and a leading charity.

A report by the All Party Parliamentary Group on Body Image and the Central YMCA recommended MPs should investigate putting “appearance-based discrimination” on the same legal basis as race and sexual discrimination.

Under the Equalities Act 2010, it is illegal to harass, victimise or discriminate against anyone on the basis of a number of ‘protected’ characteristics, such as their race, gender, sexual orientation, age, or disability.

The parliamentary group, supported by the charity Central YMCA, has today published a report, Reflections on Body Image, recommending “a review into the scale of the problem of appearance-based discrimination and how this would be best tackled”.

It goes on: “This may include exploring whether an amendment to the Equalities Act would be the most appropriate way of tackling such discrimination.”

Under the current act, people can and are prosecuted for verbal abuse if it is deemed serious enough.

Yet another reason why Name Suppression should go

On Saturday the NZ Herald ran an article about NZ’s most dangerous stalker. It named him and the details of his crimes.

If this man had name suppression then what has happened since could never have happened:

More women have come forward complaining of harassment by the man described as New Zealand’s “most dangerous stalker” since his release from prison last month.

In three weeks of freedom, Glenn Green is now a suspect in at least one new case – and possibly more – of alleged harassment, on top of the case involving a 19-year-old woman that put him back in custody last week.

Some of the new women are said by police to have a “public profile” – it is understood they have appeared on television.

Green, 41, appeared in North Shore District Court on Friday on a charge of harassment of a teenager and was remanded in custody until January 12.

Green denied the charge and his lawyer said that “as soon as he was told to desist, he did desist”.

Detective Sergeant James Watson, of North Shore, said a young Devonport woman had come forward with a further complaint against Green at the weekend after seeing his photo in the Weekend Herald. “Every person that comes and makes a complaint we can go and lay more charges,” Mr Watson said.

“He’s got 227 convictions.”

The woman had been “freaked out” by constant harassment similar to what was alleged for the 19-year-old, he said. The court heard that teen had left her family home and changed her phone number to avoid Green.

He had been out of prison for only a week when he started contacting her, said the police prosecutor in court.