Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv
Subject: Re: British Man Arrested for Saying He Doesn't Like Palestinian Flags
Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2025 17:56:54 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 48
Message-ID: <vrq036$3a4tv$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vrpqu9$35t1d$1@dont-email.me> <vrpu8b$379os$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2025 22:56:55 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="1ea9c5475543669c358e6fac63756154";
	logging-data="3478463"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19KgFig20Bkt+eOKveJllbD9znkiRjYNT4="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:UrNuAWd/fHwCybOHRoYA1m1Vvlc=
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
X-Antivirus: Avast (VPS 250323-4, 3/23/2025), Outbound message
In-Reply-To: <vrpu8b$379os$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-CA

On 2025-03-23 5:25 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
> BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
> 
>> British man posts online that he doesn't like to see all the Palestine flags
>> in his city. Shortly afterward, at 4MA, British police broke into his house
>> and arrested him for it.
> 
>> https://x.com/RadioGenoa/status/1903716412968857769
> 
> I had a very difficult time hearing the audio.
> 
> Is it this arrest at 9:55 pm Tuesday 10/31/2023
> 
> https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1830176/man-arrested-racist-palestine-flag-video
> 
> The charge: racially aggravated Section 5 public order offence
> 
> If the objection is to flying a flag, which is an assertion of
> nationalism, I don't see the "racial" aspect. Note that this is an
> AGGRAVATING factor; the prosecution is seeking a steeper penalty.
> 
> But this is a moviePig crime and words mean whatever we want them to
> mean. "Racial" includes "nationality" or "national origins". Remember,
> it's the offender's perception, not the fact of the group offended. It's
> an expression of hostility and if the offender expressed hostility that
> is NOT criminalized, that's not considered.
> 
> https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/37/section/28
> 
> moviePig wrote these helpful charging guidelines to guide police:
> 
> https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/public-order-offences-incorporating-charging-standard#a07
> 
> The underlying crime includes Section 4. Check out the interpretation
> that the offending speaker could be a victim of another crime himself
> when he utters offending words and can thus be charged with his own
> crime. In fact, Section 4 applies even if what the offender did isn't an
> assault!
> 
> https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/public-order-offences-incorporating-charging-standard#a07
> 
> moviePig has already won.

To paraphrase something whose origins I've forgotten: "It's a moviePig 
world and we're just living in it - for now."

-- 
Rhino