The BBC have been making a massive case of the prosecution of a couple of people, and now their imprisonment, for making death threats to the unknown celebrity feminist Criado-Perez, so extreme that the judge said "it is hard to imagine more extreme" ones.
Brendan O'Neill on Spiked wrote it up and the unimaginably extreme death threat is "Fuck off and die" which is clearly not even a death threat of any sort and could not have been claimed so by any judge who was not wholly corrupt.
Brendan is pushing the obvious fact that this prosecution is harsh and an overreactive threat to free speech. In comments I go further to say that the difference between a free society under the rule of law and a police state is that in the latter the law is, or is not, applied according not to what you have done but to whether you are politically approved:
So expect to see James Hansen locked up for saying anybody who expresses doubts about catastrophic global warming should be imprisoned.
George Moonbat for threatening to murder airline executives.
The BBC for saying climate sceptics should be treated like paedophiles.
Well OK no they shouldn't for precisely the same reasons this pair shouldn't.
But more important is the differential treatment. The law is distorted in one direction to imprison people for not liking "feminists" and even more in the opposite to protect state funded totalitarians. If the law, for political reasons, is not applied equally on everybody this is the difference between the rule of law and a police state. That this pair should be treated humanely is important but that they should be treated the same as Moonbat and BBC executives is vital.
Brendan O'Neill on Spiked wrote it up and the unimaginably extreme death threat is "Fuck off and die" which is clearly not even a death threat of any sort and could not have been claimed so by any judge who was not wholly corrupt.
Brendan is pushing the obvious fact that this prosecution is harsh and an overreactive threat to free speech. In comments I go further to say that the difference between a free society under the rule of law and a police state is that in the latter the law is, or is not, applied according not to what you have done but to whether you are politically approved:
So expect to see James Hansen locked up for saying anybody who expresses doubts about catastrophic global warming should be imprisoned.
George Moonbat for threatening to murder airline executives.
The BBC for saying climate sceptics should be treated like paedophiles.
Well OK no they shouldn't for precisely the same reasons this pair shouldn't.
But more important is the differential treatment. The law is distorted in one direction to imprison people for not liking "feminists" and even more in the opposite to protect state funded totalitarians. If the law, for political reasons, is not applied equally on everybody this is the difference between the rule of law and a police state. That this pair should be treated humanely is important but that they should be treated the same as Moonbat and BBC executives is vital.
No comments:
Post a Comment