Woke Judges?

Chuk_Chuk said:
Actually I think we do now have legislation against this (I think it is section 127 of the communication acts), which is why people are getting arrested for Twitter posts in this country.
Click to expand...

Thanks!

- "grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character"

Wow, that's so ambiguous, it could be literally applied to anything!

Edit: I actually find that legislation "grossly offensive", not to mention of extremely "menacing character". Who's with me? Can we find out who wrote it and have them imprisoned?
 
Last edited:
Zenduri said:
Ahh yes the quote i quoted in the part about Hamas and paraglider girls. The part that doesnt have any direct quotes....
Click to expand...

Nope, try again. It was directly questioned even. But more to the point; why not just address what I've said instead of throwing in nonsense about the funding of Hamas or that I want them hung etc..
 
Last edited:
Zenduri said:
I edited my post, the factual bit about what they were charged with and the consequences they received, yup made up.....
Click to expand...
No one claimed you made that bit up nor has anyone objected to it.

Are you going to address the conundrum re: that guilty verdict and the finding that they weren't supporting Hamas?

Interestingly his LinkedIn page has now seemingly been taken down, totally normal behavior if that "like" was some sort of accident, nothing to hide, nothing to see here...

Also, the "consequences" they received (or relative lack of) are what is being objected too, you're not really adding much in response to that criticism by confirming that they did not receive a custodial sentence. Meanwhile Downing Street has referred this to the Attorney General:


Yup, there must be Twitter brain rot in Downing Street too...
 
Last edited:
dowie said:
No one claimed you made that bit up nor has anyone objected to it.

Are you going to address the conundrum re: that guilty verdict and the finding that they weren't supporting Hamas?
Click to expand...
Well lets get to the point that i didnt quote YOU at all. I made a statement based on my observations and the underlying tone of both you and that Twitter nob. I never quoted you saying you want them hung or anything like that

Regarding the conundrum as you call it. If there were sporting pictures of Hamas fighters paragliding in or Hamas fighters paragliding with flags then that is a different scenario vs the stock paragliding image they used. Nuance is a thing and it matters. If they were holding images of hamas fighters paragliding in with hamas flags then thats very cut and dry, a stock paragliding image leaves it open to interpreation.

They were quite rightly found guilty of "displaying an article in a public place in such a way as to arouse reasonable suspicion that they were supporting Hamas". But they were found nto guilty of supporting Hamas. That to me seems a reasonable outcome based on the information. If they were running through the streets with those images saying "Kill all the jews, we love Hamas" then it would be the wrong call as they would be clearly supporting Hamas and inciting hatred
 
dowie said:
No one claimed you made that bit up nor has anyone objected to it.

Are you going to address the conundrum re: that guilty verdict and the finding that they weren't supporting Hamas?

Interestingly his LinkedIn page has now seemingly been taken down, totally normal behavior if that "like" was some sort of accident, nothing to hide, nothing to see here...

Also, the "consequences" they received (or relative lack of) are what is being objected too, you're not really adding much in response to that criticism by confirming that they did not receive a custodial sentence. Meanwhile Downing Street has referred this to the Attorney General:

Yup, there must be Twitter brain rot in Downing Street too...
Click to expand...
As i clearly stated before the Judge should have recused himself due to a conflict of interest but the judgement still seems fair. His linked in page hasprobably been taken down due to all the right leaning nut jobs bombarding him with various levels of hatred and harassment. That tends to be the standard playbook. Downing street is full of rot too or have you forgot about the last 4 years especially of ******* thats occured.

Lets not forget the fact that no-one in the Goverment has a spine to call for a ceasefire to the war crimes and genocide Israel is inflicting. The response has not been proportional to the terrorist act and Netanyahu who is a known right wing hardliner is blatently using this as his final solution to push all palestinians out of Gaza.

Rather than going around in circles i have better things to do today. :D
 
Last edited:
Zenduri said:
Downing street is full of rot too or have you forgot about the last 4 years especially of ******* thats occured.

Lets not forget the fact that no-one in the Goverment has a spine to call for a ceasefire to the war crimes and genocide Israel is inflicting. The response has not been proportional to the terrorist act and Netanyahu who is a known right wing hardliner is blatently using this as his final solution to push all palestinians out of Gaza.
Click to expand...

I guess that at least explains why you can't see anything wrong here and have somehow just accepted some sort of Schrodinger's Hamas support argument... along the lines of the paragliders do indicate support for Hamas as per the guilty verdict but they also weren't supporting Hamas...
 
slinxy said:
There are "discussions" that are best left in the echo chambers of twitter and fb, and this is one of them..
Certain people refuses to use thoose platforms for this very reason..

God knows why the OP decided to bring this here rather than just liking, discussing it and sharing it on twitter.
Click to expand...

God knows why the OP brought a discussion to a forum for general discussion? Yes, OCUK's GD forum, too high-brow for mere Twitter and Facebook discussions.

No one is making you read the thread so popping in twice to moan about the fact it even exists is rather silly, in fact you could just put me on ignore and you'd not see my threads at all. That you're still in here adding to the thread perhaps indicates that you're a bit mad about it and want to shut this sort of thing down, no one should object to wokeness right?
 
dowie said:
I guess that at least explains why you can't see anything wrong here and have somehow just accepted some sort of Schrodinger's Hamas support argument... along the lines of the paragliders do indicate support for Hamas as per the guilty verdict but they also weren't supporting Hamas...
Click to expand...
Yeah ok ill bite for one last comment :rolleyes:

So me agreeing the attack was a Terrorist act and is inexcuseable while also saying, quite rightly, the response has not been proportional and Israel is bombing and killing innocent children while commiting war crimes means im some sort of Hamas sympathiser/ hamas supporter defender?

The fact is with these girls its not what you feel is right or beleive is the right punishment. It's whats prosecutable within the rules of law. They were rightly prosecuted for "arouse reasonable suspicion that they were supporting Hamas". There was however no CLEAR evidence they were actively encouraging Hamas support or Hamas' actions. It's not what you feel it whats you can prove and prosecute within the boundries of the law.

I am now done with this. GL rage baiting
 
Last edited:
Zenduri said:
The fact is with these girls its not what you feel is right or beleive is the right punishment. It's whats prosecutable within the rules of law. They were rightly prosecuted for "arouse reasonable suspicion that they were supporting Hamas". There was however no CLEAR evidence they were actively encouraging Hamas support or their Hamas' actions. It's not what you feel it whats you can prove and prosecute within the boundries of the law.
Click to expand...

Sure... and the CPS's response to the ruling should just be ignored too and Downing Street's request that the AG review this too...

Just double down on the Schrodinger's Hamas support argument. They maybe supported Hamas but they didn't support Hamas but they're guilty and have faced "consequences" but if you object to the consequences (or rather lack of) then...
 
dowie said:
God knows why the OP brought a discussion to a forum for general discussion? Yes, OCUK's GD forum, too high-brow for mere Twitter and Facebook discussions.

No one is making you read the thread so popping in twice to moan about the fact it even exists is rather silly, in fact you could just put me on ignore and you'd not see my threads at all. That you're still in here adding to the thread perhaps indicates that you're a bit mad about it and want to shut this sort of thing down, no one should object to wokeness right?
Click to expand...

again you use the word woke without explaining what you think it is and why you think the judge is "woke".... yes you are trying to make a point so spell it out!

some people are beyond reform, by posting in your thread about "woke", I'm merely trying to question the use of the word.
 
slinxy said:
again you use the word woke without explaining what you think it is and why you think the judge is "woke".... yes you are trying to make a point so spell it out!
Click to expand...

I did reply to you with a specific tweet, did you not see that reply? What's the source of your confusion here - complete unfamiliarity with the term? Have you heard of the terms used in the tweet I highlighted?

Happy to clarify but you could perhaps engage with what was already presented to you and be a bit more specific here as a point has been laid out in the OP and some further clarification offered to you re: why there was a use of the term woke.
 
dowie said:
Sure... and the CPS's response to the ruling should just be ignored too and Downing Street's request that the AG review this too...

Just double down on the Schrodinger's Hamas support argument. They maybe supported Hamas but they didn't support Hamas but they're guilty and have faced "consequences" but if you object to the consequences (or rather lack of) then...
Click to expand...


At the best of times I'd take anything a politician says about the law with a couple of spreader trucks worth of salt given that half the politicians in the UK, including those that theoretically passed a law exam 30 years ago but haven't practiced since don't seem to know the law.
Given the current crop of politicians in number 10 I'd need a mine's worth of salt to take anything they say seriously, as they've been playing political nonsense games for months/years to try and knock theior utter failings about everything else off the news for a few minutes.
 
Last edited:
throwaway4372 said:
just ban dowie imo
culture wars bs has no place in the world, never mind on this forum, get out.
Click to expand...

That seems to be the woke stance, just get mad that any of this stuff is even criticised and try to shut it down. If it makes you so angry perhaps just read other threads instead... no need for the authoritarian/commie stance re: wanting to shut down anything that might be a talking point you dislike.
 
throwaway4372 said:
or just stop wasting everyone's time with pointless arguing
tell someone who cares, basically.
Click to expand...

Why are you in this thread then? Why not read some other thread - you simultaneously don't care but then you're throwing in a bunch of angry emojis and replying to the thread multiple times:

Rz6EDYs.jpeg


If you don't like the thread then read some other threads or log off and go punch the walls of your office/flat/house or whatever... If you're wasting time then that's entirely on you, now one is forcing you to reply to threads you don't like or opinions you don't like, exercise some self-control!
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom