Posted on 03/28/2016 9:16:17 AM PDT by the scotsman
'A MAN WHO, was arrested last week after sending a tweet about confronting a Muslim woman in the aftermath of the terror attacks in Brussels, says he plans on making an official complaint against the London Metropolitan Police, and on making a damages claim against them.
46-year-old Matthew Doyle sent a tweet in the aftermath of the terror attacks suggesting that he had confronted a Muslim woman about her reaction in the wake of the attacks.
In the aftermath of the tweet Doyle was castigated on Twitter. He removed the tweet, then claimed he had been joking, then switched tack and reaffirmed the sentiment behind the message.
After his tweet created an online storm, Doyle was arrested by the Met Police on suspicion of incitement to hatred.
He was subsequently released without charge on Friday after the police acknowledged they had no specific power to arrest him in the first place.
“Police may not make charging decisions on offences under Section 19 of the Public Order Act,” the force said in its statement.
In a statement today to TheJournal.ie, Doyle affirmed that he intends to sue the Metropolitan Police Force.'
(Excerpt) Read more at uk.news.yahoo.com ...
“arrested by the Met Police on suspicion of incitement to hatred”
Coming to a US jurisdiction near you soon than you think.
R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul, 505 U.S. 377 (1992)
That was before the crazies completely took over.
That was then and this is now Comrade!
How did it come to this?
Be ever vigilant -
US indicates favoring UN anti-blasphemy laws favors by CAIR.
Could You Be A Criminal? US Supports UN Anti-Free Speech ...
www.forbes.com/sites/abigailesman/2011/12/30/could-yo... Proxy Highlight
Dec 30, 2011 ... UN Resolution 16/18 against free speech gains US approval. ... sought to criminalize blasphemous speech and the “defamation of religion,” ... that those supporting the adoption of Sharia law in the west have emphasized.
US Criminalizing Free Speech?
by Judith Bergman
January 5, 2016 at 5:00 am
Send
Is this House Resolution a prelude? Has Attorney General Lynch seen the potential for someone lifting her “mantle of anti-Muslim rhetoric”? And what is “anti-Muslim rhetoric” exactly? Criticizing Islam? Debating Mohammed? Discussing whether ISIS is a true manifestation of Islam? Who decides the definition of “hate speech” against Muslims?
Of all 1,149 anti-religious hate crimes reported in the United States in 2014, only 16.1% were directed against Muslims, according to the FBI. By contrast, over half of all anti-religious hate crimes were directed against Jews – 56.8%.
Why this lopsided, discriminatory House Resolution in favor of a religious group that statistically needs it the least?
Are the Attorney General and the eighty-two House Democrats out to destroy the First Amendment and introduce censorship? A House Resolution could be reintroduced later as binding legislation.
Eighty-two leading Democrats have cosponsored a House Resolution (H.Res. 569) “Condemning violence, bigotry, and hateful rhetoric towards Muslims in the United States”.
The Resolution was introduced in the House of Representatives by Democrat Donald S. Beyer (Virginia) on December 17, 2015 — a mere 15 days after Tashfeen Malik and Syed Farook gunned down 14 innocent Americans and wounded 23 in an ISIS-inspired terror attack at a Christmas party in San Bernardino, California.
The House Resolution states, “the victims of anti-Muslim hate crimes and rhetoric have faced physical, verbal, and emotional abuse because they were Muslim or believed to be Muslim,” and the House of Representatives “expresses its condolences for the victims of anti-Muslim hate crimes.”
What victims? Of all 1,149 anti-religious hate crimes reported in the United States in 2014, only 16.1% were directed against Muslims, according to the FBI. By contrast, over half of all anti-religious hate crimes were directed against Jews – 56.8%. The fewest, 8.6% of anti-religious hate crimes, were directed against Christians (Protestants and Catholics).
The Resolution goes on to denounce “...in the strongest terms the increase of hate speech, intimidation, violence, vandalism, arson, and other hate crimes targeted against mosques, Muslims, or those perceived to be Muslim.”
The House Resolution singles out Muslims in the United States as an especially vulnerable religious group that needs special protection to the extent that the Resolution “urges local and Federal law enforcement authorities to work to prevent hate crimes; and to prosecute to the fullest extent of the law those perpetrators of hate crimes.”
The reason for the introduction of this House Resolution at this point in time makes more sense if seen in conjunction with statements made by Attorney General Loretta Lynch on December 3, at a dinner celebrating the 10th anniversary of the Muslim Advocates — an organization that, according to its own website, has “powerful connections in Congress and the White House” and ensures that, “the concerns of American Muslims are heard by leaders at the highest levels of government.” Muslim Advocates goes on to say, “As a watchdog of justice, we use the courts to bring to task those who threaten the rights of American Muslims.”
US Criminalizing Free Speech? - Gatestone Institute
www.gatestoneinstitute.org/7176/criminalizing-free-speech Proxy Highlight
Jan 5, 2016 ... Of all 1,149 anti-religious hate crimes reported in the United States in 2014, .... Islamic “blasphemy laws,” making criticism of religion a criminal offense. ... to have no problem criticizing other religions, as well as other Muslims.
This is the tweet that got him arrested. Arrested. While I don't think he should be confronting random Muslim women and asking them to explain terror attacks, it amazes me that something this tame could get someone arrested in the UK. As others mentioned, its coming to the US too. Its already here on college campuses.
A muzzy slicing a neck is not hate. Saying words is hate.
Already here! Cake maker, photographer and more to come!
The problem is, Supreme Court precedents don’t carry much weight in the United Kingdom.
We have a Supreme Court ourselves lol.
The Brits have become cuckolds.
I was responding to a post saying that such laws would be coming to the United States. As for Great Britain, and Europe in general, hate speech laws are simply government-enforced political correctness. PC is anathema to free speech.
Freedom of speech is worth fighting for in the courts or on the battlefield.
Agreed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.