Rozzer twitter censors are upping the ante.

http://home.bt.com/news/uk-news/man-behind-mealy-mouthed-brussels-tweet-arrested-11364047913432

“He was arrested tonight at an address in Croydon and remains in custody[/u] at a south London police station.”

😯

What a load of bollox. The MPC should be ashamed and hounded for being such authoritarian hoodlums. Two acts of dickishness do not cancel each other out FFS.

Hmmm… I dunno.

Publicly tweeting about confronting a random Muslim woman in the street and accusing her of being a terrorist sympathiser does sound a bit like “inciting racial hatred on social media” to me.

(apart from the obvious, “Islam is not a race” argument that I’m sure someone will shortly make)

Just to clarify, do you support the original tweet or are you just annoyed with the heavy handed tactics. Genuine question as it isn’t clear to me in your post.

Publicly tweeting about confronting a random Muslim woman in the street and accusing her of being a terrorist sympathiser does sound a bit like “inciting racial hatred on social media” to me.

But he does not appear to have done that.

How dare the police take action against innocent white people

If you read the other stuff he’d put on facebook it may be that it’s not the original tweet that might be the reason he’s been arrested.

Joe Heenan wrote: “I confronted my 5 yr old son yesterday. I asked him to explain the mortgage rates. He said ‘I dunno, I like Batman’. A mealy mouthed reply.”

Brilliant.

Perhaps this chaps other tweets are of more concern?

But he does not appear to have done that.

I’m only going from what the article says:

A message posted on his Twitter profile on Wednesday morning stated: “I confronted a Muslim woman yesterday in Croydon. I asked her to explain Brussels. She said ‘Nothing to do with me’. A mealy mouthed reply.”

I’d expect a similar police response if, for example, I tweeted about the mealy mouthed reply I got when I confronted a German woman about the holocaust.

Especially if I had a history of posting various anti-German stuff etc.

I’m only going from what the article says

‘cos newspapers are always in possession of (and print) all the facts around someone’s arrest?

Although it comes from the Telegraph, this appears to show a slightly alternative view. He is blaming the 140 character limit for it being misconstrued. I’m still a bit uncomforable with the whole episode even as he describes it but it does confirm my own admitted prejudice against Twitter as it seems to cause so may foot in mouth moments

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/12202181/Angry-backlash-against-Croydon-man-who-confonted-Muslim-woman-and-told-her-to-explain-Brussels.html

I don’t agree with the guy but I struggle to see how he is inciting anyone.

I’m not sure how else to put this;

It’s not just that tweet. He was putting some stuff on facebook that was specifically anti-muslim and included suggestions of bad things being done to muslim people

The original tweet was daft but it wasn’t posted in isolation, there 10-15 other posts that were more specifically anti-islamic and would (imo) fall into a far more serious category.

A riposte on Twitter:
“I confronted a woman in Croydon and asked her to explain shredless marmalade. ‘Nothing to do with me’. A peely-mouthed reply.”

He is blaming the 140 character limit for it being misconstrued

Anyone using the term ‘towelhead’ or ‘Britain is for Britains’ is going to struggle to convince people they aren’t racist

Someone from my home town got actual JAIL TIME over “inciting violence” during the London riots via a Facebook status

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-18536940

The status itself was pretty benign I guess, but his history of being a general chav certainly didn’t help (although thats not mentioned in the article on the BBC – local knowledge.)

It’s not just that tweet. He was putting some stuff on facebook that was specifically anti-muslim and included suggestions of bad things being done to muslim people

Fair enough, what is amazing he went to the LSE, must have been a fish out of water there.

I don’t agree with the guy but I struggle to see how he is inciting anyone.

He’s inciting people to think he’s a bit of a dick.

as above, being a dick on social media is not “Incitement”.

Being racist makes you a dick but I don’t think it should be a criminal offence. I think it’s a bad sign when the police start arresting people for what they think. I don’t think hatred should be illegal and I don’t think inciting it should be illegal.

as above, being a dick on social media is not “Incitement”.

curious what you think would be out of order then if you think what this guy says and does is OK

if you think what this guy says and does is OK

where did I say what he was saying was “OK”? 🙄

I said he’s being a dick. What he is saying is not “OK”

but neither is it incitement, requiring custody.
He should be ridiculed (Twitter seems to be filling it’s collective hat on that front) and exposed as being out of step with civilized thinking.

You don’t think inciting hatred should be illegal???

Wow!!

I don’t think hatred should be illegal and I don’t think inciting it should be illegal.

but racial hatred and incitement to it *are* illegal and everyone (including the Croydon Cretin) know it is.

so he bangs out 20 tweets and as many facebook posts all along the theme of wanting Muslims out of the UK and then people decide he’s just misunderstood and meant no harm.

he’s a grown up, he may have got carried away after the attention the initial tweet got but he knew the law and should have understood the risk he was taking.

the fact he claims to work in PR is the icing on the cake, really.

Yeah, he’s obviously a casually racist shitebag but IMO he hasn’t actually incited racial hatred there, hes just outed himself as a ****. The internet’s response seems pretty appropriate and proportionate, be a **** on the internet, get internetted. Being a **** shouldn’t be an arrestable offence though or we’re all screwed.

The law’s definition of inciting racial hatred is pretty, well, mealy mouthed tbh but you can find the CPS guidance online. it’s not exactly what you’d think though and I think that’s where the “common sense” understanding goes away from the legal. It’s basically down to 2 things- is a statement insulting, abusive or threatening- and tbh his initial behaviour was definitely insulting, likely abusive, possibly threatening and the tweet likewise you can definitely make a case for insulting.

And also, whether it’s intended to stir up racial hatred or makes it likely that it’ll be stirred up. That’s the messy bit. Because it’s not just discontent or hostility, it’s hatred. I think he obviously wanted to stir up hostility; it’s harder to make a case for hatred.

It’ll be interesting if his original victim comes forward; tbh I think he probably made it up. I don’t think he’s guilty of inciting racial hatred by twitter, personally. But if he really did harass someone in the street because of their religion, that’s a different matter.

I don’t think hatred should be illegal and I don’t think inciting it should be illegal.

The former is impossible to police as until one espouses that hatred it is hidden. For example I hate avocado’s to eat with a passion but you didn’t know how much I hate them until I told you.
The latter is illegal if it is incitement to racial hatred and should rightly stay that way.

The definition of incitement is the issue here

I don’t think hatred should be illegal and I don’t think inciting it should be illegal.

Tricky line to draw I suspect.

To take an extreme, if someone is publicly posting faked images etc to stir up hatred, and is calling for X to be killed. Then X is killed. Shouldn’t the poster bear some responsibility for that?

Likewise should groups like ISIS be censored? OR should they be allowed to freely post on the internet and hold public rallies?

I’m never keen on censorship – but I can recognise the driving forces behind it.

*self censors*

e, if someone is publicly posting faked images etc to stir up hatred, and is calling for X to be killed. Then X is killed. Shouldn’t the poster bear some responsibility for that?

An incitement to violence is different from an incitement to hatred.

I think the bloke is doing a public service. He has publicly singled himself out as a racist buffoon, damaged his own social status, probably his employment prospects and given everyone else some good lessons on public decorum and the perils of being an unreasonable dickhead.

An incitement to violence is different from an incitement to hatred.

Again that’s a very tricky line to draw.

If you incite hatred of X based on the idea that X want to kill you and molest your children etc then sooner or later that hatred will spill over into “self defence” violence.

If he is randomly going up to muslim women in the street and effectively accusing them of being terrorists, then I would classify him as a danger to the public, I think at the very least the police should be giving him a little scare about his behaviour.

On a purely practical matter, it wouldn’t be the first time someone has been banged up more for their protection than for any crime committed…

So, could Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris et al be accused of incitement?

If they can or could have beem, then I think that we’re living in a dark day for democracy.

Twitter man is a dick obviously. But wouldn’t you rather the dicks out themselves so their logic can be confronted, or does the left want to give them an outlaw status and the conseuqent support that goes along with that kind of outsider romanticization.

Trump gets away with worse on a daily basis – I wonder if we could jail him if he visited the UK?

Northwind – Member
Yeah, he’s obviously a casually racist idiot but IMO he hasn’t actually incited racial hatred there, hes just outed himself as an idiot with a voice. The internet’s response seems pretty appropriate and proportionate, be an idiot on the internet, get a response… Being an idiot shouldn’t be an arrestable offence though or we’re all screwed.

This (FIFM)

finbar – Member
Trump gets away with worse on a daily basis – I wonder if we could jail him if he visited the UK?

And this.

He lives next door to a muslim and likes to make ironic racist jokes. With such mitigation how can he possibly be racist?

Nahh … everyone keeps tweeting then see if those stooopid people in the authority will arrest everyone.

Ya, they better make sure they have the budget to feed everyone when they arrest the people for questioning over night …

Ya, let’s see their budget, ya see if their budget can sustain stooopid expenses … stop wasting public money and stop political correctness pussy footing.

What are the authority going to do? Jail people for tweeting? Even serious crime do get that …

Bunch of zombie maggots in charge … 🙄

Trump gets away with worse on a daily basis – I wonder if we could jail him if he visited the UK?

That was the (completely overlooked) thrust of the petition banning him from the UK: we’ve banned other people for less than he has said.

…which is pathetic.

The whole episode is regrettable really. Obnoxious man provides evidence of his obnoxiousness. Police have no alternative really. It’s like filming yourself speeding and posting it on the internet (although more serious due to racial nature)

Trump gets away with worse on a daily basis – I wonder if we could jail him if he visited the UK?

No he doesn’t he’s much smarter and caveats what he says. There is no basis for taking legal action against Trump or arresting him. None, whatever people might wish