Tip jar

If you like CaB and wish to support it, you can use PayPal or KoFi. Thank you, and I hope you continue to enjoy the site - Neil.

Buy Me a Coffee at ko-fi.com

Support CaB

Recent

Welcome to Cook'd and Bomb'd. Please login or sign up.

March 28, 2024, 11:32:29 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Man guilty of owning racist dog [merged]

Started by Paulie Walnuts, March 20, 2018, 01:11:41 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Flouncer

Quote from: bgmnts on March 25, 2018, 04:03:13 PM
I dont want to stop you spouting your idiotic bile, I just dont want to read it anymore personally.

He's giving himself a bit too much credit there, isn't he? His bullshit isn't offensive - it's just boring.

Replies From View

Quote from: king_tubby on March 22, 2018, 10:08:15 PM
Funny.



Translation:  "I DID IT FIRST THOUGH!  I DID IT FIRST!!  LOOK AT ME EVERYONE!!"

Sebastian Cobb

"Ephraim Borowski, 66, director of the Scottish Council of Jewish Communities (SCoJeC), told Airdrie Sheriff Court that the Holocaust should not be joked about and that doing so normalised anti –Semitism.

Mr Borowski also told the court that sections of the Jewish community in Scotland felt threatened by the video's contents and that the SCoJeC's website was bombarded with abusive comments after it was published.

He added: "The threat is against the Jewish community and there is an echo chamber effect with people trying to be more offensive. 160 pages of messages about this were collected by us in a day, they supported it and it was extremely anti-Semitic."
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/pug-nazi-salute-video-youtube-jewish-community-mark-meecham-buddha-gas-holocaust-sieg-heil-ephraim-a7943241.html

Seems like the video did on an objective level manage to incite hatred.

j_u_d_a_s

Quote from: Sebastian Cobb on March 25, 2018, 04:42:58 PM
"Ephraim Borowski, 66, director of the Scottish Council of Jewish Communities (SCoJeC), told Airdrie Sheriff Court that the Holocaust should not be joked about and that doing so normalised anti –Semitism.

Mr Borowski also told the court that sections of the Jewish community in Scotland felt threatened by the video's contents and that the SCoJeC's website was bombarded with abusive comments after it was published.

He added: "The threat is against the Jewish community and there is an echo chamber effect with people trying to be more offensive. 160 pages of messages about this were collected by us in a day, they supported it and it was extremely anti-Semitic."
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/pug-nazi-salute-video-youtube-jewish-community-mark-meecham-buddha-gas-holocaust-sieg-heil-ephraim-a7943241.html

Seems like the video did on an objective level manage to incite hatred.

Yeah, that.

Ironic bigotry can be a mask that eats into your face. Meechan comes from an echo chamber that's constantly trying to outdo itself for shock value for no reason other than because it can. And in that void, yer actual Nazis can sweep in and spread their influence while acting as one of them. We saw it happen with Gamergate being leapt on by the far right and with Pewdiepie being praised by the Daily Stormer. And now Tommy Robinson, Wallmap and Carl of Benjamin are cosying up to a pedestrian shock merchant who's been thrust into the limelight.

Flouncer

To be fair I think that there's a good chance that the abuse you're referring to there is a reaction to the reaction his video got, rather than to the video itself, whose influence would have declined pretty quickly if it hadn't been for this massive shitstorm.

Sebastian Cobb

Quote from: Flouncer on March 25, 2018, 05:02:36 PM
To be fair I think that there's a good chance that the abuse you're referring to there is a reaction to the reaction his video got, rather than to the video itself, whose influence would have declined pretty quickly if it hadn't been for this massive shitstorm.

Quite probably. But the video is the root cause in this instance innit? The way the law is written doesn't really take intention into it.

I think there's parallels to that sexist Google wally here in that someone has done something stupid then has been adopted and bigged up by some terrible people and made worse. Ironically this recruitment process is similar to the groups these hate groups hate.

j_u_d_a_s

Quote from: Flouncer on March 25, 2018, 05:02:36 PM
To be fair I think that there's a good chance that the abuse you're referring to there is a reaction to the reaction his video got, rather than to the video itself, whose influence would have declined pretty quickly if it hadn't been for this massive shitstorm.

Even so, reactionary anti-semitism is still anti-semitism. Same as when Anita Sarkeesian wanted to talk about sexism in games and was met with a flood of misogyny which uh... totally showed her right?

Bhazor

People also seem to be ignoring that the video was monetised (which was one of the main arguments made by the judge), that it only became a court case because of edgelord continuing to escalate it rather than demonitising and apologizing as the original claim wanted and now everyone is claiming he is definitely going to go to jail when by far the most likely sentence will be an asbo and a fine (to cover court expenses).

Large Noise

#248
This is the legislation he was prosecuted under: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/21/section/127

Quote127Improper use of public electronic communications network

(1)A person is guilty of an offence if he—
(a)sends by means of a public electronic communications network a message or other matter that is grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character; or
(b)causes any such message or matter to be so sent.

(2)A person is guilty of an offence if, for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety to another, he—
(a)sends by means of a public electronic communications network, a message that he knows to be false,
(b)causes such a message to be sent; or
(c)persistently makes use of a public electronic communications network.

(3)A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable, on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale, or to both.

(4)Subsections (1) and (2) do not apply to anything done in the course of providing a programme service (within the meaning of the Broadcasting Act 1990 (c. 42)).

There's no mention of inciting racial hatred (though his crime was religiously aggravated). He wouldn't have committed the same crime if he'd been making a tv programme or a stage show. It's a crime specifically because he put it on the internet. This law was passed in 2003, before YouTube was invented. I'm not sure that it was written with the idea in mind that the internet would become the primary place where DIY comedians and performance artists would produce their work.

I agree with Judas' point that this type of irony is a mask that can eat your face. I can well believe that Meechan is secretly anti-Semitic, despite his denial in the video. But the trial wasn't about whether he meant what he said, it was about whether he broke that law. If that law remains in place unchanged it's a threat to artistic expression because it bans certain words/topics from being used for humour online. It wouldn't be tolerated if it applied to stand-up comedians or people making tv shows, and it shouldn't be imposed upon YouTubers either.

The right wingers who're jumping on this as an example of the 'authoritarian left' are obviously hypocrites; they'd destroy all kinds of civil liberties if they had their way. But it disturbs me to see so many on the left so willing to sell-out the idea of free speech and embrace draconian policing of the internet so readily.

Sebastian Cobb

I consider myself 'quite left-wing' and I agree that there is definitely an authoritarian 'you're free to say and do what you like so long as we agree with it' type thing.

I think the spirit of "The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all." gets forgotten.

Of course the right bollock on about freedom of speech being sacrosanct and ridicule 'safe spaces' yet construct their own ones when public opinion shouts them down.

Quote from: j_u_d_a_s on March 25, 2018, 03:57:42 PM
Yeah, well reasoned argument there.

I wasn't making an argument

TBH, if you have to qualify your support for free speech as you have then there would be no point us discussing anything, other than maybe the Aussie ball tampering row

What's your thoughts on that?

j_u_d_a_s

Quote from: Large Noise on March 25, 2018, 05:33:45 PM
This is the legislation he was prosecuted under: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/21/section/127

There's no mention of inciting racial hatred (though his crime was religiously aggravated). He wouldn't have committed the same crime if he'd been making a tv programme or a stage show. It's a crime specifically because he put it on the internet. This law was passed in 2003, before YouTube was invented. I'm not sure that it was written with the idea in mind that the internet would become the primary place where DIY comedians and performance artists would produce their work.

I agree with Judas' point that this type of irony is a mask that can eat your face. I can well believe that Meechan is secretly anti-Semitic, despite his denial in the video. But the trial wasn't about whether he meant what he said, it was about whether he broke that law. If that law remains in place unchanged, it's a threat to artistic expression because it bans certain words/topics from being used for humour online. It wouldn't be tolerated if it applied to stand-up comedians or people making tv shows, and it shouldn't be imposed upon YouTubers either.

The right wingers who're jumping on this as an example of the 'authoritarian left' are obviously hypocrites; they'd destroy all kinds of civil liberties if they had their way. But it disturbs me to see so many on the left so willing to sell-out the idea of free speech and embrace draconian policing of the internet so readily.

I started thinking his conviction was good because quite frankly, I'm tired of mediocre white men treating the supposed right to offend as if it's a toy. I'd even go as far to say that they don't really care about free speech at all and just want to shut down any discussion or criticism. Because really those who keep beating the FREE SPEECH drum rarely have anything of worth to say. And lately it's always, ALWAYS, white men who shout the loudest about the right to offend. A few years back, my uni banned a proposed talk by an Islamic cleric who called homosexuality a scourge - https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2015/02/26/uni-postpones-visit-by-anti-gay-cleric-hours-after-jihadi-john-revelation/ Strangely no free speech defenders leapt to that challenge.

Anyway I've since softened my stance. I don't think Meechan should go to prison but if he had his internet access revoked for a while I wouldn't shed any tears. This has hardened my stance though that social media networks like Twitter and Youtube should do more to moderate their services, which I'm well aware is an impossible task to do effectively. But as we've seen in the recent Logan Paul fiasco, they'll only ever give a slap on the wrist as long as they can take their cut of monetisation.

j_u_d_a_s

Quote from: Paulie Walnuts on March 25, 2018, 05:52:15 PM

TBH, if you have to qualify your support for free speech as you have then there would be no point us discussing anything, other than maybe the Aussie ball tampering row

What's your thoughts on that?

I think you're being purposely reductive and avoiding everything I said because you have no cogent argument against it but still want to "win".

manticore

Quote from: j_u_d_a_s on March 25, 2018, 04:56:46 AM
Few things that keep being missed in the discussion:

- The Scottish Council of Jewish Communities had a ton of antisemitic abuse posted at them after Markus Meechan (no fucking way am I typing his username) was arrested.
- Still yet to be sentenced.

So he shouldn't have been arrested and given those bastards an excuse to post their abuse.

His punishment isn't the point. He's been convicted of a crime and he shouldn't have.

Quote
- Meechan has tweeted this:
Source: https://twitter.com/CountDankulaTV/status/962446615381467136

Good chance this is just "bants" of course. But then he RTs this pic...


A quick look as his TL shows he's happily RTing far right types like Peter Sweden and that "muslim" throwing a stick (who later turned out to be an Irish barman) and of course there's his palling around with Tommy Robinson.

What Meechan does is the same as mediocrities like Carl "Sargon of Akkad" Benjamin and Milo do. Treads the line carefully and cloak shitty opinions in polite language. And when challenged over them, falls back to tired bad faith arguments.

He's a right wing jerk. What's this got to do with the fact that he's been found guilty of a crime for posting a video explicitly designed to humourously how that a dog isn't as cute as his girlfriend claims, in part because the sheriff decided that context was irrelevant to the question of whether saying 'gas the jews' was 'grossly offensive' or not? Can you not see how dangerous that is?

QuoteThe wider effect though is that the far right are feeling emboldened right now thanks to white mens almost slavish devotion to a version of free speech that will selflessly let the nazis speak but if you challenge or call them out on it then you're no better than the nazis yourselves.

Who has claimed that there's anything wrong with challenging or calling them out? Really, who? The question is whether using the law to surpress them, or for instance trying to break up right-wing meetings is the right way to challenge them.

QuoteThe last 2 years alone we've seen a madman become leader of the free world and the UK commit economic suicide based on nothing but absurd faith in British (or more accurately white) exceptionalism. This has all happened because we gave the far right a seat at the table.

How was Brexit based on 'white exceptionalism'? I don't understand.

Sebastian Cobb

I reckon there's definitely some validity in when you start invoking the 'free speech' argument you're starting to argue that what you've said is probably worthless and that you're saying it only holds validity because you're legally prevented from saying it.

At the same time I think curbing speech often gets abused and the definitions of 'what's bad' get bent out of shape by whover's in charge, look at abuse of terror legislation or D notices in the past.

manticore

Quote from: Large Noise on March 25, 2018, 05:33:45 PM
The right wingers who're jumping on this as an example of the 'authoritarian left' are obviously hypocrites; they'd destroy all kinds of civil liberties if they had their way. But it disturbs me to see so many on the left so willing to sell-out the idea of free speech and embrace draconian policing of the internet so readily.

The right-wing authoritarian hypocrites are strenghtened and emboldened by left authoritarianism.

On the whole I prefer the approach of the black American bloke Barry posted about who goes and gets to know Klan members and sometimes changes their minds.


Paul Calf

Quote from: Sebastian Cobb on March 25, 2018, 04:42:58 PM
"Ephraim Borowski, 66, director of the Scottish Council of Jewish Communities (SCoJeC), told Airdrie Sheriff Court that the Holocaust should not be joked about and that doing so normalised anti –Semitism.

Mr Borowski also told the court that sections of the Jewish community in Scotland felt threatened by the video's contents and that the SCoJeC's website was bombarded with abusive comments after it was published.

He added: "The threat is against the Jewish community and there is an echo chamber effect with people trying to be more offensive. 160 pages of messages about this were collected by us in a day, they supported it and it was extremely anti-Semitic."
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/pug-nazi-salute-video-youtube-jewish-community-mark-meecham-buddha-gas-holocaust-sieg-heil-ephraim-a7943241.html

Seems like the video did on an objective level manage to incite hatred.


I agree with his specific point, but the general idea that

Quotethe Holocaust should not be joked about and that doing so normalised anti –Semitism.

Is surely one that shouldn't go unchallenged.

Sebastian Cobb

Yes, I also disagreed with that bit, but I guess given his position as a spokesperson and that it's understandable.

j_u_d_a_s

Quote from: manticore on March 25, 2018, 06:03:40 PM
So he shouldn't have been arrested and given those bastards an excuse to post their abuse.#

"an excuse". How about they don't post it at all?

Quote
His punishment isn't the point. He's been convicted of a crime and he shouldn't have.

He's a right wing jerk. What's this got to do with the fact that he's been found guilty of a crime for posting a video explicitly designed to humourously how that a dog isn't as cute as his girlfriend claims, in part because the sheriff decided that context was irrelevant to the question of whether saying 'gas the jews' was 'grossly offensive' or not? Can you not see how dangerous that is?

As said earlier, he doubled down when there were complaints made and pushed his luck refusing to apologise. There's been similar convictions, such as Azhar Ahmed (https://wiki.openrightsgroup.org/wiki/Communications_Act_2003/Section_127#Azhar_Ahmed ) Why does Meechan's case deserve the benefit of the doubt over Ahmeds?

Quote
Who has claimed that there's anything wrong with challenging or calling them out? Really, who? The question is whether using the law to surpress them, or for instance trying to break up right-wing meetings is the right way to challenge them.

Said all this earlier but the response to Anita Sarkeesian from masses of gamers and the sceptic youtubers like Thunderf00t and Carl "fucking" Benjamin was an attempt to silence feminist leaning criticism of video games. Then there's the recent outcry over no platforming policies by the right wing press, too many examples to name but it's lead to the government telling universities that they must accept controversial speakers or be fined. https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/dec/26/jo-johnson-universities-no-platforming-freedom-of-speech

Quote
How was Brexit based on 'white exceptionalism'? I don't understand.

Britain is predominantly a white country, the arrogant assumption that we could leave without paying a thing and all trade deals would be served to us on a silver platter is rooted in white privilege and entitlement.

Quote from: manticore on March 25, 2018, 06:12:58 PM
The right-wing authoritarian hypocrites are strenghtened and emboldened by left authoritarianism.

On the whole I prefer the approach of the black American bloke Barry posted about who goes and gets to know Klan members and sometimes changes their minds.

Firstly, left wing authoritarianism doesn't actually exist in a meaningful way. The UK and US are under conservative governments.

Secondly, what is it that makes you prefer that approach? Why should their bigotry be treated as a curable disease rather than a set of active choices?

I always think of MLK Jr's lesser known quote about the white moderate. It's all well and good to be anti-racism on paper but if you're not putting it into active practice then your silence is complicity.

Quote"First, I must confess that over the last few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in the stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Council-er or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I can't agree with your methods of direct action;" who paternalistically feels he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by the myth of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait until a "more convenient season."

Shallow understanding from people of goodwill is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection."

Funcrusher

Quote from: j_u_d_a_s on March 25, 2018, 06:45:39 PM

Britain is predominantly a white country, the arrogant assumption that we could leave without paying a thing and all trade deals would be served to us on a silver platter is rooted in white privilege and entitlement.


Given that the Union the UK is leaving is made up entirely of white majority countries, it's not really white exceptionalism.

j_u_d_a_s

Quote from: Funcrusher on March 25, 2018, 06:59:24 PM
Given that the Union the UK is leaving is made up entirely of white majority countries, it's not really white exceptionalism.

I'm not sure what you're getting at? It's the assumption that WE'D be able to just quietly leave with no fuss and all would be swell as if the rules wouldn't apply to us that I was referring to.

Sebastian Cobb

#261
I think a bigger sticking point on that is the (I don't honestly know how accurate this rumour is) accusation that quite a few Asian people were pro-brexit because they reckoned it'd make it easier for Indian/Pakistani people to move to Britain.

Err, re-reading that I mean the contradiction to the point that it's 'white privilege' to blame for brexit. I'm in no way suggesting that Asian people are to blame for brexit.

I don't think 'white privilege' is an appropriate term here, sounds like someone's retroactively trying to use North American social justice terms. I don't disagree with the sentiment but there's a very special British 'we used to have an empire!' privilege at play I reckon.

Funcrusher

Quote from: j_u_d_a_s on March 25, 2018, 07:02:23 PM
I'm not sure what you're getting at? It's the assumption that WE'D be able to just quietly leave with no fuss and all would be swell as if the rules wouldn't apply to us that I was referring to.

That's not really to do with being white, given that the people the Brexiters are sticking two fingers up to are also white. WE means the English, who are better than Frogs, Krauts etc.

j_u_d_a_s

Quote from: Sebastian Cobb on March 25, 2018, 07:08:19 PM
I don't think 'white privilege' is an appropriate term here, sounds like someone's retroactively trying to use North American social justice terms. I don't disagree with the sentiment but there's a very special British 'we used to have an empire!' privilege at play I reckon.

To-may-to, to-mah-to. White privilege and entitlement is rooted in colonialism anyhow.

Quote from: Funcrusher on March 25, 2018, 07:21:55 PM
That's not really to do with being white, given that the people the Brexiters are sticking two fingers up to are also white. WE means the English, who are better than Frogs, Krauts etc.

But so much of Brexit was about the myth that Britain was being held back by the other countries. The perception that we'd be better going it alone because they were sucking up all our precious money with nothing given back went unchallenged for so long. And as said above, the whole "we used to have an empire" thing fed into it.

Large Noise

Quote from: j_u_d_a_s on March 25, 2018, 07:37:14 PM
To-may-to, to-mah-to. White privilege and entitlement is rooted in colonialism anyhow.

Britain's first colony was Ireland. Colonialism and "white privilege" might be related concepts but they're not interchangeable.

j_u_d_a_s

Quote from: Large Noise on March 25, 2018, 08:04:25 PM
Britain's first colony was Ireland. Colonialism and "white privilege" might be related concepts but they're not interchangeable.

It's not that big a leap to see how colonialism could lead to white privilege being entrenched as "just the norm" tho.

Twed

You're all hitting on terms I saw a lot in something interesting I read the other day but haven't fully processed yet:

https://twitter.com/BlackSocialists/status/976950986618081280

Sebastian Cobb

Quote from: Twed on March 25, 2018, 08:09:48 PM
You're all hitting on terms I saw a lot in something interesting I read the other day but haven't fully processed yet:

https://twitter.com/BlackSocialists/status/976950986618081280

Bit much for me half-cut on a sunday night. Bookmarked though.

Howj Begg

It's definitely "anglo saxon exceptionalism", which is of course another strain of white privilege.

j_u_d_a_s

#269
Quote from: Sebastian Cobb on March 25, 2018, 08:13:20 PM
Bit much for me half-cut on a sunday night. Bookmarked though.

Fascinating reading and yes, needs some time to process. Thanks for sharing this.

My bad, meant to quote this.
Quote from: Twed on March 25, 2018, 08:09:48 PM
You're all hitting on terms I saw a lot in something interesting I read the other day but haven't fully processed yet:

https://twitter.com/BlackSocialists/status/976950986618081280