This is so sad to watch

My heart is racing! What was the sentence?!

How can you take a guy who puts on a wig seriously? UK is sooooo fucked!

Orwell wasn't writing fiction 🔮

Fuck this, fuck all of this. The UK is so cooked. View quoted note →

That is the ugliest outfit I have ever seen

They are a slippery slope. But its a carefully edited video that doesn’t show the full story https://www.reuters.com/fact-check/clipped-video-mans-sentencing-over-social-media-comments-is-misleading-2024-08-16/

I don't know how any jurist could stay on the bench if this is the law they had to enforce.

Brits, aussies, canadians, etc are mostly cucks

Fuck this. Apparently the law in the UK is that if you say negative things about immigrants, you are assumed to want them to be harmed. This is his ruling. Fuck this. View quoted note →

Hard to watch 🤮

After passing sentence he slipped down to Kings Cross...

"I was just following the lawand doing my job", the judge will say in the future.

jordan parlour was sentenced to 20 months in prison - august 9 2024

Party for 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿🙏

Insanity

For those interested, I stand by my position on hate speech, but earlier in the hearing there were posts by this person encouraging people to smash the hotel in question which is probably actionable even in the united states: https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Jordan-Parlour.-Media-Posts.-Final.pdf

seems? come on now. its tyranny in the name of genocidal replacement goals.

And if I wear a wig at court, I am an asshole 😂

Thanks for clarifying. I read the report and he was inciting violence and attacks.

the post got six likes

Ya that's unnacceptable. But there are other examples where there is no incitment and people getting jailtime, which is fucked. This video is misleading in that sense.

Ya that's unnacceptable. But there are other examples where there is no incitment and people getting jailtime, which is fucked. This video is misleading in that sense.

He gives me Dolares Umbridge vibes. IYKYK

Yes, I get it, and the sentence should reflect whether it actually precipitated any actual harm or violence, but if I go into the street and start chanting "burn this building fuck these people burn this building..."etc. I can and should be arrested even if no one gives a shit I'm saying that.

Yes, I get it, and the sentence should reflect whether it actually precipitated any actual harm or violence, but if I go into the street and start chanting "burn this building fuck these people burn this building..."etc. I can and should be arrested even if no one gives a shit I'm saying that.

did he actually ‘smash the hotel’

No but it was a literal incitement to violence which is its own crime, separate from the conduct of the crime. I don’t know if it would be prosecuted in the states but its different than the quotations from the video which was much less.

Horrifying

No existe tal Discurso, es un metalenguaje para señalar, etiquetar y perseguir a quienes no piensan como los Autócratas 😬

giving someone 20 months in jail for a shitpost is a slippery slope

I think I addressed the sentencing issue already above and I agree.

This guy must be hung! 😜

Complete lunacy

Exactly. Remember during COVID when the Americans drove trucks to the nation's capital and it required the military to break up the protest? Every other country caved to the pressure, but 'merica was totally free from that tyranny, the majority of people didn't fold like sheep and give up their "freedom".

Agreed. At minimum hate speech laws are troubling because of the question: who gets to decide what constitutes hate speech? It's also tied with this ridiculous notion that words can equal violence. Ultimately, once one equates words with violence it's very easy to justify actual violence in response to words.

🤯

From the Reuters article: > “Every man and their dog should be smashing fuck out Britannia Hotel,” the judge quotes one of Parlour’s posts from early August as saying. > Responding to another user who said, “I’m down if you are lad”, the judge quoted Parlour as writing: “start about 5 bell tonight be my boy but it's all gravey”. At some point, even the most ardent free speech advocate will draw the line. If a crime boss says "I'll give $100k dollars to anybody who murders the governer", then that's not covered by free speech. Do you think this crossed the line? https://www.reuters.com/fact-check/clipped-video-mans-sentencing-over-social-media-comments-is-misleading-2024-08-16/:

I don't think he would like my response to him.

i think if he actually ‘smashed the hotel’ then a crime was committed his shitpost got 6 likes he got 20 months in jail

If that hotel were housing child rapists, I'd want to shut it down too.

Fat fatty FUPA of a person

Whoever defines “hate” owns the discourse.

“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” The man in the wig is, at best, a coward and almost certainly a traitor to his position and the people he is meant to serve. View quoted note →

Why did it cut out right at the climax… video editors these days should be locked up…

https://www.reuters.com/fact-check/clipped-video-mans-sentencing-over-social-media-comments-is-misleading-2024-08-16/ Britain is still fucking nuts, but…

Game of thrones vibes. Scary

Thought the edit was sus…

"Hate speech" is a made up term. And criminalizing it is absurd and an obvious reach into censorship. Hate is an emotion. Try a grammatical substitution to test its validity. "Emotional speech". Criminalizing it means targeting speech based on the speaker’s perceived emotional state and punishes thoughts, not actions. Speech is typically regulated only when it causes direct harm, like incitement to violence (Brandenburg v. Ohio, 1969) or defamation. Criminalizing "hate speech" mean punishing a broad category of expression that includes any emotionally charged statement, which is unenforceable and absurd.

fuck the wigs. View quoted note →

Freedom of speech means you have the freedom to say things that are approved by the state, bro.

This is unbelievable. His own words could be interpreted as hate speech too.

There’s a big gulf between “can” and “should.”

Now action must be taken We don’t need the key We’ll break in… Yes I know my enemies They’re the teachers who taught me to fight me Compromise, conformity, assimilation, submission, ignorance, hypocrisy, brutality, the elite All of which are American dreams All of which are American dreams All of which are American dreams All of which are American dreams All of which are American dreams All of which are American dreams All of which are American dreams All of which are American dreams

Is it hateful to say that guy looks super queer in his powdery wig?

Thank you for that.

I would guess his taxes are paying for the hotel to be filled with immigrants... When is it time to act, and how do you act?

20 years gulag

Fuck the UK legal system (not the people).

This is unbelievable!!!

TOTALITARIANISM IS HERE. “ there can be no doubt you were inciting others to violence” What?! Yes, there can be doubt. A whole lot of doubt that that’s not what the person intended. You could act like a human and say maybe the person meant with the words they spoke actually were—that they didn’t want their tax money to be wasted. A totally valid concern. This is why the law is almost always based on action, not intention. Intention is very hard to prove, and impossible to prove absolutely. All possible intentions aside. What people say changes on a whim sometimes. People get angry. People get frustrated. Sometimes they just need to let it out. And when they do sometimes just hearing what they’re saying, brings them back down to earth and calm them down. We all know that punishing people with years in prison over words and opinions is ridiculous. What makes this all make sense is if they are seriously just looking for a way to incriminate anyone they want.

Tell me again about Western Values evaporating in the West.

This sort of insanity is why we defend anonymous and decentralized networks. View quoted note →

I got an investment proposals for you, HMU RN for more details and see if you’d like to give it a shot.💯

How pathetic. Can the UK offer no resistance to this kind of tyranny?

this. is. fucking. wild. View quoted note →

wtf

More true than funny

I blame the people. They allowed this to happen.

So what? Did he injure anyone? Did he destroy anyone's property? The politicians are turning the UK into a third world crime ridden shithole, what's their sentence? What's about the politicians who took bribes and forced their subjects to get an experimental untested and in many cases lethal medical intervention?

How much jail time do the politicians get when one of the people they let into these communities turns out to be a child rapist?

is this real?

Are you talking about the judge?

I'm making a different point, primarly about rage-bait on Nostr. I'll have to write a longer message to explain it: You don't need to convince me to dislike the UK. I'm Irish, and am very aware of the UK's problems and hypocrisy 😀. There are many recent examples, such as taking the rap group Kneecap to court for waving a flag I support free speech as much as anyone on Nostr; I've been annoying my friends for decades with how much I support privacy, and the right of assembly, and free speech, and so on. If I promise that I will pay any hitman who murders my enemy, I'm guilty of murder, even though in practice it means I'm being locked up for words I said. I'm quite happy to allow people to advocate for death and destruction of large groups of people; as distasteful as that will be. But when somebody directs violence against an individual or a very small group ("let's burn anyone living in this hotel"), then I think they are crossing a line. However, I can understand that people might draw the line elsewhere. In fact, maybe somebody wouldn't have a problem with giving verbal directions to hitmen. Maybe the crime boss isn't guilty for saying words, but would instead by guilty at the moment they pay the hitman. However, we didn't get an opportunity to discuss all these issues. Instead, a very selectively-edited video was shared to generate rage and engagement. We love to say "Bitcoin/Nostr fixes this", but it doesn't (immediately) fix every problem 😀 I don't like hate speech laws, i.e. laws that specifically adjust the sentences of "normal" crimes due to vague "hate" issues. Therefore, I would like this person to be free. Such laws are inappropriate and therefore should be opposed, even if it means some undesirable people are freed. If the UK didn't have these 'hate speech' laws, and if the UK generally respected the basic rights we all support, then this person might still be prosecuted under 'normal' laws around organizing and inciting violence against small groups, and I (and you!) might be supportive of that prosecution. This person identified a small group of people, shared their location, and tried to organize a violent mob to burn those people to their death. We could have had a good discussion on this, where everybody got all the relevant facts at the start, to allow us to debate where the line is drawn. And I'm open to drawing the line at a very extreme position. But instead we had some rage-bait via selectively-edited video

I love those old Monty Python sketches 😅

Bizarre and revolting View quoted note →

This shit is insane. Folks in the UK are fucked!

Mysteries of the Bitcoin Citadel (Audio Drama) Lauren thought she was driving north to sign papers and sell a crumbling lakeside lodge. Instead, she found her uncle’s fortress of paranoia-every wall humming with riddles, ledgers, and the sense he’d built it for something no one will explain.

Fountain

Mysteries of the Bitcoin Citadel • Listen on Fountain

When Lauren and Ellie inherit their late uncle’s cabin, they uncover more than family secrets. Discovering a hidden world built on buried clues, ...

You are a cuck and a faggot, and you are the reason your country will be African in 50 years

Why cop out and not upload the complete video?! It’s a bit different in context, wouldn’t you say? That’s TwiX tactics. We don’t need this on Nostr.

what does the full context show? (the only thing I can imagine that would make a difference here she made a specific call to violence after the other stuff that he read e.g. "here's the name and address of someone that people should go beat up")

Have a look in the comments. Full context has been quoted & discussed. We don’t want TwiX culture replicated on Nostr. (At least I‘d prefer not to.)

Nearly two years in prison for online criticism… unless you think he literally meant people’s dogs should be smashing a hotel. The thing with long form articles that “fact check” is they are often intentionally misleading because most people don’t take the time to read past the title. He was arrested for a critique of the society he lives in. There’s no way anyone should spend two years in prison for this: (Source the article you linked)

You didn’t include the next section of the article. He gave a location, time, and said he would do it too. Britain is still an Orwellian shithole, but these types of threats are prosecuted if there is violence that happens afterwards. Depends on the country too.

Tbf 50 years ago you'd hear worse than this in any pub in Britain. The problem is a lack of privacy in communication. Most people are unaware of how public their online discourse is.

I actually misread that, I thought it was the other user giving the time and place… fair enough. I agree that you shouldn’t incite violence and definitely shouldn’t make a plan for it to happen. All the best 🤝