Bad actors stoking hate again (Southport Stabbings)

Indeed. It’s an excellent example of how the government can influence the judiciary to get the result it wants, and refutes Binners’ touchingly naive viewpoint.

Not influence, they challenged the interpretation of the law and asked for clarity, the appeals court reviewed and clarified, which has removed the defence by belief argument, i can see both sides of the argument, it’s why laws change with the times quite a lot.

I expect that not everyone who goes to football matches, the O2, and the Albert Hall, have good intentions

Albert Hall? I think the last classical music riot was at the premiere of The Rite of Spring in 1913.

The ears of a rugby player, with the face of a smack head, it’s quite the combination.

I actually like the fact that far right agressors are being given stiff scentences.

I have to say I’m delighted with the sentencing for both the rioting nutters and the jso nutters. Peas of a pod just with different beliefs

Those beliefs being:

JSO:  That we should block roads with our bodies to cause mass public inconvience and hence pressure the government to act in the way we want.

Rioters:  That we should block roads with burnt out vehicles; block road junctions and only let through cars of white people; throw bricks at cops and through the windows of random people’s houses; burn down buildings full of the non-whites we don’t like, and hence cause mass public inconvenience (and fear) to pressure the government to act in the way we want (and scare off the non-whites from coming here. And all the ones the born here, too).

I can’t see how JSO’s tatics are useful, and I’m not sure they understand the Overton window, but to see them as equivilent to the rioters we’re seeing getting sentenced is ludicrous.

Just imagine if every rioter decided to use the defence of their ‘beliefs’ to justify torching a library?

What’s the problem? They have to persuade the jury that their actions were justified. Good luck with that. I assume you think the Colston Four should’ve been sent to prison.

So I’m sorry but ‘I don’t like the outcome’ doesn’t indicate a conspiracy.

Sigh. Rejecting an argument I haven’t made and recycling a silly picture just tells me how little you have in your locker.

Given them heafty sentences I’m certainly going to think twice before an evening’s rioting.

CaherFull Member
Given them heafty sentences I’m certainly going to think twice before an evening’s rioting.

Ditto, nice weather again tomorrow and after going shopping I was intending to head back into town for a bit of rioting and looting. Not sure I’ll bother now and a little peeved as I was looking out for some knock off Crocs.

First world rioting problems I suppose.

I suppose this thread’ll do as he’s definitely a bad actor.

Forgetting about a donor paying for his little holibobs trip to the US, the following is pretty amazing in a bad way:

Farage went to the USA to see his mate that almost died and to “represent Clacton on the world stage”.

He must have been chuckling to himself when he dictated that!

I can’t see how JSO’s tatics are useful, and I’m not sure they understand the Overton window, but to see them as equivilent to the rioters we’re seeing getting sentenced is ludicrous

All this demonstrates is your own lack of comprehension. As I’ve posted in other threads, despite my alignment with XR I’m no huge fan of Roger Hallam. However, to suggest that he’s unaware of the Overton window is quite simply ridiculous. Firstly, he is aware of it….and secondly….the whole modus operandi of JSO is an attempt to navigate and shift the ‘Overton window’ (no-one really uses that phrase these days) via the radical flank effects. This is something that Hallam himself has written about extensively. #rantover

chrismac
Full Member
I have to say I’m delighted with the sentencing for both the rioting nutters and the jso nutters. Peas of a pod just with different beliefs

I would hate to imagine what sentencing you would hand out if the ******* were drinking Red Bull….!

JSO keeps popping up as a comparison and it shouldn’t

The point about pre-meditation has been raised in the case of the disorder in Plymouth. It isn’t necessary evidence to prove the offence (although it can be used) and doesn’t figure in the sentencing guidelines unless it reaches the threshold of either instigator or significant planning, at which point it becomes more serious.

In the JSO case see points 10, 11 and 12 (linked below) for the instigation and significant planning in that case. These are the judge’s remarks about the (separate) sentencing hearing https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/R-v-Hallam-and-others.pdf

Violent protest or non-violent protest; you can be imprisoned if harm is caused to our democratic society

All this demonstrates is your own lack of comprehension. As I’ve posted in other threads, despite my alignment with XR I’m no huge fan of Roger Hallam. However, to suggest that he’s unaware of the Overton window is quite simply ridiculous. Firstly, he is aware of it….and secondly….the whole modus operandi of JSO is an attempt to navigate and shift the ‘Overton window’ (no-one really uses that phrase these days) via the radical flank effects. This is something that Hallam himself has written about extensively. #rantover

@Tom-B, my colleague (geopolitics researcher) was telling me the other day that Overton became frustrated about how his ideas were understood, i.e., this idea of shifting the Overton window by acting in ways radically outside it. According to my colleague (I’ve not read up on this), Overton thought this may work when one also has control of the full media landscape, but if not, it’s a real gamble of a tactic. If this is true, almost no one understands the Overton window nowadays.

I should’ve elaborated in my other post sorry.

Does the Overton Window affect Rule #1?

Given them heafty sentences I’m certainly going to think twice before an evening’s rioting.

Trouble is it doesn’t really achieve much,they will have to let out a load more prisoners early to squeeze this lot in and then there’s the on-going  cost of keeping them there.

It’s too simple an answer to the problem, same as the the whole narrative of the ‘boats’ which has got us to here.

Although I’d be quite happy to let them serve the sentence in our Rwanda facilities :-)

Makes sense to me. Just imagine if every rioter decided to use the defence of their ‘beliefs’ to justify torching a library? We all obviously think that their Tommy Robinson style ‘beliefs’ are nuts, but that doesn’t mean that they hold them in any less importance than Tarquin and Miranda hole their own ‘beliefs’ about climate change, does it?

I missed the bit where Tommy Robinson’s beliefs were supported by in an international committee of scientific experts. But hey ho – you do you. Nice pussy.

you can be imprisoned if harm is caused to our democratic society

Which is why Rupert Murdoch is behind bars. Oh, hang on …

We all obviously think that their Tommy Robinson style ‘beliefs’ are nuts, but that doesn’t mean that they hold them in any less importance than Tarquin and Miranda hole their own ‘beliefs’ about climate change, does it?

binners, may I suggest that, if you want to make these constant little digs at a group based upon them being (percieved as) mostly middle to upper-middle class, STW might not be the least awkward place to do so.

@binners is totally off the mark, the actual names of two of the defendants in the Hallam case are in fact Lucia and Cressida. I don’t know where he got Tarqin and Miranda from.

I don’t know where he got Tarqin and Miranda from

He’s making up names that sound trustafarian, as that’s what he thinks all environmental protestors are.

Just imagine if every rioter decided to use the defence of their ‘beliefs’ to justify torching a library?

Fundamentally that’s the starting point for any rioter or protester isn’t it?

Their belief that they are right and correct has overruled any notions about socially acceptable behaviour and perhaps even legality. The cause/belief is outside of the commonly accepted norms (overton window if you like) and the rioters find themselves at odds with society and the authorities.

Does the Overton Window affect Rule #1?

Other way round surely. In order to nudge the overton window one way or another you have to act outside of it, which, necessarily, means breaching rule one as a minimum.

I guess we do have to concede that JSO are doing that, pushing at some boundaries, breaking ‘rule one’ in order to shift the social narrative around climate change, the difference being their specific tactics, they’re threatening people’s ability to drive about in range rovers rather than threatening the lives of Brown people, Muslims and refugees (along with the dwindling number of public libraries)…

Our recent race riots were as much a backlash against the perceived loss of control the Right held (the Tory party had failed to cling on to power a month beforehand). Until SKS got in they could still see see a (watered down) version of their beliefs being implemented by the Tories and the sort of rhetoric they like. Loss of privilege often feels like oppression, etc, etc. This was the far right trying to create an early bit of unrest and forment a bit of a class war as a new front in the ‘culture war’. I expect them to try similar things from here on, they’ll be going increasingly “guerilla” with their tactics…

So yes those comparing JSO and SYL’s mob are technically correct both are consciously operating outside of the rules, but as ever that sort of reductive assessment lacks the nuance of looking at either groups goals or tactics.

One lot literally want to save Humanity from itself, the other lot would rejoice if half of our species (the non-white half) died tomorrow… People are welcome to play the “yeah but what about…” game, and compare apples with sausages, but it does tend.to.make you look like a bit of a **** in the long run.

Something, something ‘are we the baddies‘ meme, etc…

Meanwhile as the cannon fodder get chucked in the slammer……..the general lights another cigar.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/aug/16/nigel-farage-revealed-to-be-uks-highest-earning-mp

Time for a tune methinks:

Supergrass are behind the current wave of violence?

Supergrass are behind the current wave of violence?

Almost certainly.

He’s making up names that sound trustafarian, as that’s what he thinks all environmental protestors are.

Jokes work less well when you feel like you need to explain them…Besides which, in a thread of nearly 40 pages taking the piss out of the racist underclass, poking fun at the middle classes doing a bit of protesting before their horse riding lessons is at very the very least, not punching down.

Jokes work less well when you feel like you need to explain them…

TBF it was never working that well.

you’ve really got the hots for me. huh?

JSO keeps popping up as a comparison and it shouldn’t

Why not? Both plan and  organise  criminal damage and vandalism. Both refuse to follow reasonable requests from the police to disperse and let everyone else go about their legal business. Whether you support the view of one side, both sides , or neither doesn’t suddenly make them not comparable.

One lot literally want to save Humanity from itself, the other lot would rejoice if half of our species (the non-white half) died tomorrow

So it’s ok to act illegally and commit criminal acts if it’s something you support but not if it isn’t. That’s hardly democratic. I think that’s what North Korea and China specialise in. Is that what you would like to replicate. You have to detach thier beliefs from their criminal actions

Why not? Both plan and  organise  criminal damage and vandalism. Both refuse to follow reasonable requests from the police to disperse and let everyone else go about their legal business. Whether you support the view of one side, both sides , or neither doesn’t suddenly make them not comparable.

We can certainly compare blocking roads, to burning down buildings with people inside you consider are the wrong colour. Or pouring soup on sealed artworks, to smashing up the houses of innocent families.

It’s not the concept of comparison that confuses me; its that you concluded these things are equally bad.

So it’s ok to act illegally and commit criminal acts if it’s something you support but not if it isn’t. That’s hardly democratic. I think that’s what North Korea and China specialise in. Is that what you would like to replicate. You have to detach thier beliefs from their criminal actions

It’s democratic if these beliefs are presented to a jury for them to consider if they can be considered mitigating factors and if so, to what degree, which is what was being suggested above. I suspect that’s not the procedure in North Korea, but I’ve no clue tbh.

I’m amused by the frequent appeals to “our democracy” as though it were some perfect path to justice and equality. Unfortunately it’s largely a tool of the wealthy, for example the oil companies. If JSO could stuff our MPs’ pockets with cash maybe they wouldn’t need to block traffic.

https://www.globalwitness.org/en/campaigns/fossil-gas/uk-government-met-oil-lobbyists-every-day-last-year/

poking fun at the middle classes doing a bit of protesting before their horse riding lessons is at very the very least, not punching down.

STW regulars poking fun at the middle classes? Not punching up, that’s for sure.

JSO keeps popping up as a comparison and it shouldn’t

Why not? Both plan and organise criminal damage and vandalism. Both refuse to follow reasonable requests from the police to disperse and let everyone else go about their legal business. Whether you support the view of one side, both sides , or neither doesn’t suddenly make them not comparable.

* No animals were hurt in the making of this production

So it’s ok to act illegally and commit criminal acts if it’s something you support but not if it isn’t. That’s hardly democratic. I think that’s what North Korea and China specialise in. Is that what you would like to replicate. You have to detach thier beliefs from their criminal actions

Who said it was OK to break laws?

If anything I was accepting the comparison, both groups have committed offences. But you have to acknowledge their motives are quite a long way apart, and the actual harms JSO seem willing to inflict are mostly material rather than looking to kill or injure strangers.

If it helps you to think of JSO as being in the same league as NF and burning building and attacking whole communities as equivalent to chaining yourself across a road for an afternoon fine, clearly one of us has things out of proportion.

If you want to see it as some sort of class thing, also fine. We can’t really deny that class and social stratification is a very British obsession, as for “punching down” there’s plenty of that going on. I can’t deny environmentalism does seem to be the sort of thing some middle class people have more time and disposable income to dabble with, I still can’t quite fathom why some less well off white people feel the need to “punch down” on asylum seekers though, other than because some wealthier bastards with newspapers/websites/SM followings told them to and tried not to dirty their hands…

To me the tacit endorsement of the race riots that came from wealthy Right wingers (wherever they might be living) was all part of their “Bread an circuses” act.

They’ve happily **** the rioting demographic over for more than a decade, gotten wealthy doing it, and kept succeeding because of misdirection and making sure that there’s always someone else to blame, ideally a minority with no substantial voice or resources to counter the propaganda, but enough cultural/ethnic difference to make them stand out.

Who said it was OK to break laws?

Many many people contributing to this thread coming up with alsorts of spurious arguments as to why it’s ok do  re jso to commit criminal damage and vandalise works of art and sports events. Many seem the accept that because they agree with thier cause it’s all fine and that should be enough to have thier trials abandoned

Many many people contributing to this thread coming up with alsorts of spurious arguments as to why it’s ok do

Fr’instance ?

Many many people contributing to this thread coming up with alsorts of spurious arguments as to why it’s ok do re jso to commit criminal damage and vandalise works of art and sports events.

Are you sure? I have to confess not following this thread very closely but I got the impression that the main gripe was over the punishment meted out to JSO being too severe, rather than it was okay to cause criminal damage. I guess that I would probably fall into the category.

Also some people seem to be suggesting that there isn’t much difference between the criminality of JSO and the criminality of the EDL so that they can expect similar punishments. Which is a bizarre belief imo.

Many many people contributing to this thread coming up with alsorts of spurious arguments as to why it’s ok do  re jso to commit criminal damage and vandalise works of art and sports events. Many seem the accept that because they agree with thier cause it’s all fine and that should be enough to have thier trials abandoned

As above, I don’t think anyone’s been arguing in favour of JSO’s actions, more commenting that they see the JSO sentencing as disproportionate compared to the recent spate of violet fascists taking to the streets.

Are you saying that JSO should receive the same sort of sentences for chucking cornflour at some Rocks as the EDL/NF should for their own recent activities?

Many many people contributing to this thread coming up with alsorts of spurious arguments as to why it’s ok do  re jso to commit criminal damage

Please quote an example.