Woke Judges?

dowie

dowie

dowie

Caporegime
Joined
29 Jan 2008
Posts
59,109
I wonder if we'll see more stuff like this given the popularity of ideas like you can't be racist to white people, ACAB (all cops are ********)/defund the police/police are racist, speech is violence, punch TERFS etc..

Anyway a District Judge seemed to be rather lenient in the case of the apparent Hamas supporters, sporting paraglider memes at a protest:

Yet the same Judge handed down custodial sentences to Police officers over memes shared in a WhatsApp group:

And he bragged about it to students:

Police bad, Hamas supporters good?

But there's more - punching "TERFs" is seemingly OK too? (screenshot for this one as I had to censor the sweary)
Op73ORF.png


What could be behind this??? Oh... good old wokeness:

And possibly a bit of obvious bias on this Israel/Palestine issue...

Tan Ikram - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
Tanweer Ikram CBE (born 1965) is the deputy senior district judge (deputy chief magistrate). He studied at Wolverhampton Polytechnic where he obtained his LLB in 1988 and was called to the Bar at the Inner Temple in 1990.[1] He was admitted as a solicitor of the Senior Courts in 1993.
Click to expand...

Ah yes, the prestigious Wolverhampton Polytechnic... perhaps in addition to getting an award for diversity efforts it seems quite plaussible he was a big beneficiary of diversity hiring himself!
 
Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.

In before people tell you it's a right wing conspiracy and it's impossible/isn't happening.

If this is happening, does this make us better or worse as a society?
slinxy said:
What exactly is woke? And why is it bad?
Click to expand...

Woke has changed over the years. Currently my understanding (based on actions and words hear from self-proclaimed 'woke' people) is being aware of past/current injustices and using that as a justification of current injustices as a method of redress.

It's bad, because treating people unfairly or with prejudice based on group identity is wrong? Well I think so.

But yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, my opinion, man.
 
I think Ricky Gervais has a decent eough definition of being woke and the other "woke" towards the end of his recent stand up - I'll not quote it as it'll have swearies in it; but it'll be easy enough to find.

One is a position that mostly all people should be behind, but the other is a twisted version that is probably more about oppression than making the world a better place.
 
Fubsy said:
Woke has changed over the years. Currently my understanding (based on actions and words hear from self-proclaimed 'woke' people) is being aware of past/current injustices and using that as a justification of current injustices as a method of redress.

It's bad, because treating people unfairly or with prejudice based on group identity is wrong? Well I think so.

But yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, my opinion, man.
Click to expand...

Thank you… from my opinion it’s just lazy cataloging of people, ideas or value that seem more liberal or more “left-winged” than their own view.

Hardy anyone would classify themselves as woke and it’s now used commonly as a slur.

Rather say why they think a person’s set of action or/and views is bad/wrong, that person is just labelled as woke, often without any justification.

If you think something it’s wrong, it helps to explain rather than just calling it “woke”, leftist or left winged.

An idea is only “left” of your own because your view is to the right of it. But depending on where your views are on the scale, someone that could be considered as centre-right would been seen as a “leftie”.
 
There's nothing wrong in the original "awake" to injustices (of the social justice warrior kind) meaning of the word. Being aware of those, and learning from them is a good thing. Focusing on them, having it as a core of your identity, to the point where discussion is seen as a personal attack on you, is a bit of a problem.

Walking around with grievances that then shape your interaction with others, and in the case of the OP, even judgment of others based on their identity is, to borrow a phrase, problematic.
The dogmatic way of thinking, the either with us or against us mentality, will only divide people along certain racial/religious/sexual/political/etc lines until there's a point people won't be able to take it anymore and we'll see more, and more disfunction in society.

The judge in the OP is evidently, based on the careful selected cases presented, using grievances to make judgement. Justifying that type of behaviour, without considering where it leads us*, makes me think you would want to harm others based on their identity, and that scares me based on knowledge of the past.

*it may not lead us there, but dismissing the possibility seems disingenuous to me, almost to a point where I distrust a person's real intent. Do they secretly want to kill me because I'm not part of their group?
 
Last edited:
dowie said:
Ah yes, the prestigious Wolverhampton Polytechnic... perhaps in addition to getting an award for diversity efforts it seems quite plaussible he was a big beneficiary of diversity hiring himself!
Click to expand...

A district judge is the Vanarama Conference of judging.
 
slinxy said:
Thank you… from my opinion it’s just lazy cataloging of people, ideas or value that seem more liberal or more “left-winged” than their own view.

Hardy anyone would classify themselves as woke and it’s now used commonly as a slur.

Rather say why they think a person’s set of action or/and views is bad/wrong, that person is just labelled as woke, often without any justification.

If you think something it’s wrong, it helps to explain rather than just calling it “woke”, leftist or left winged.

An idea is only “left” of your own because your view is to the right of it. But depending on where your views are on the scale, someone that could be considered as centre-right would been seen as a “leftie”.
Click to expand...

I don't think "wokeness" is a right or left thing.

At this point in time I see it more as liberal Vs authoritarian. With liberal =/= left.

It's more about the whether someone wants to impose their ideas on others or not.
 
I woulds suggest that laws the criminalise private communcation no matter how offensive are wrong. Communication in preparation or pursuit of a criminal endeavour, planning a robbery, murder, fraud, etc. Yes that should be a crime. Being offensive rude or talking crap amongst likeminded colleagues or friends absolutely not.

The case of the fella found guitly for his wildly inappapropriate Grenfell themed bonfire should never have seen the inside of a court room. Likewise those police officers shouldn't have been charged. Whatever the judges motivations these laws are utterly wrong headed.
 
No idea what you're ranting about sounds like utter BS but regards the court case its the difference between an angry mob that are riled up and police officers who have a professional duty of care and a responsibility not to do dumb crap.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom