David Craig, on September 29th, 2017As promised, I’ve been to talk with my local Plod to try to find out what I am now permitted to write in my blog in the new Stalinist State of Britain. Since the (IMHO) totally useless, politically-correct, Islamophiliac, treacherous Director of Public Prosecutions, Alison Saunders, decided that writing something negative about some person or group was equivalent to attacking them in the street with a knife or hammer, I wanted to know what could be written and what constituted a supposed “hate crime”.
First, here’s the official definition of a supposed “hate crime”:
A Hate Incident is any incident which the victim, or anyone else, thinks is based on someones prejudice towards them because of their race, religion, sexual orientation, disability or because they are transgender.
If you, or anyone you know, has been called names, been bullied or had anything happen to them that you think may be because of one of these factors, then you should report this as a hate incident. Even if you dont want the incident to be investigated, it is important that the police know about it, so that they can build up a picture of how many incidents are happening and where. This information can help police investigating other hate incidents.
Not all hate incidents will amount to criminal offences, but those that do become hate crimes. The Association of Chief Police Officers and the CPS have agreed a common definition of hate crime: “Any criminal offence which is perceived by the victim or any other person, to be motivated by hostility or prejudice based on a person’s race or perceived race; religion or perceived religion; sexual orientation or perceived sexual orientation; disability or perceived disability and any crime motivated by hostility or prejudice against a person who is transgender or perceived to be transgender.”
(I haven’t bothered correcting Plod’s punctuation)
The key thing I found out from Plod is that the truth no longer matters. So, if I were to write that one is more likely to be blown up, run over or beheaded by people from a certain religion than by say Trekkies and I could provide statistical proof of my claim, it would be irrelevant that what I wrote was true. All that would matter would be whether someone felt offended by my claim or whether someone thought someone else might be offended by my claim.
So, for example, if I listed a series of terrorist incidents that had been carried out by a certain clearly-identifiable group or repeated the authorities’ claim that there are about 23,000 people in Britain from a specific section of of our ‘community’ who would like to destroy British society and replace it with something ‘better’, I would be writing the truth. However, if someone perceived that what I had written was motivated by hostility or prejudice then I would automatically be guilty of a hate crime even though what I had written was true.
This is an incredible destruction of the basic principle of British law – that one is innocent until proven guilty. Now you are guilty if someone (anyone) thinks you should be guilty.
How have we allowed this to happen to the country that gave the world democracy and freedom of speech?
The libtards seem to have won.
The rest of us should hang our heads in shame.
Category: 
I hope better brains than mine can find a way to use this definition of hate crime, or perception of hate crime, in our favour. There must be a way to turn the tables.
Answer: Take this hate-mongering site down.
Can we feel free to hate Liverpudlians, teenagers, dwarfs, builders, doctors’ receptionists, BMW drivers, estate agents, even policemen etc ?
It’s looking less than rosy for the times ahead…..
“SJW
September 29, 2017 at 11:39 am
Answer: Take this hate-mongering site down.”
I love comments like these, they expose the utter idiocy, retardness and complete stupidity of those post them.
It goes like this, ” I dont agree with what youre saying you have to be silenced”, rather than trying to argue the case as to why someones wrong, reason being of course is SJW’s arent equipped to argue rationally, its all hyper emotional bullshittery with them, no tolerance for alternative viewpoints.
Well MR SJW, heres one for yous, when YOUR viewpoint becomes the one that your new uptopian society despises, itll be cockrings like yourself that will get the same treatment youre currently espousing should be the norm for everyone elses vies, thatll not end well for you as youll have no way to defend your own views, theyll simply shut YOU down. DUH! Like i said, effing stoopid man!
Divide and conquer through spewing hate and fear.
You people are nothing without someone to hate and blame.
“SJW
September 30, 2017 at 10:39 am
Divide and conquer through spewing hate and fear.
You people are nothing without someone to hate and blame.”
You either believe in FREE SPEECH warts and all or you dont.
In which case you believe in dictatorships and authoritarianism which quite frankly you can go shove up your easily offended rectum.
Do you REALLY believe that only YOUR view is the morraly correct and righteous one?
That no other view has any merit whatsoever?
That only your views must, can and should be heard?
Let me give you a hint about something, ya big baby.
Free speech means that someone, somewhere will always be offended by something, thats the price of free speech, learn to take it on the chin instead of being hyper morally indignant on behalf of groups that are a threat to world stability, heritage, culture and peace….for a fucking change!
Finally, getting offended.
Your lack of common sense, lack of appreciation of all the millions of the people that died in ww2 to give you the right to spout your trite, cloying and suffocating views offends me, as does your stupidity.
However id not for a moment want to supress your views, i say let you espouse them, it helps expose morons like yourself with the oxygen of publicity, better to have people think you stupid than open your mouth and eliminate all doubt. Too late in your case.
The Crown Prosecution Service is highly politically motivated.When they reluctantly charged a token Muslim gang of grooming and pimping out underage English girls as a diversion they charged two Coronation stars Bill Roache and Michael Lee Vell with dubious sex charges. Both where acquitted.
No act of parliament has been passed making it illegal to criticise any religion nor for any religion to not criticise controversial subjects eg Abortion, Homosexuality.
The CPS who issue guidance to the police are trying to create by deceptive interpretation a law that does not exist.
Its current 200,000 a year head the stunningly attractive Alison Saunders a person of the highest moral integrity.Who seems fixated on the militant feminist agenda http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4935148/
Are the CPS and their mostly lesser intelligent police parrots claiming that if some religion of peace person from the Indian sub-continent was upset by the following than truth would be no defence in a court of law?
wwe.frontpagemag.com/ppm/267285/acid-attacks-londons-muslim-no-go-zones-daniel-greenfield
sorry about link to frontpage
http://www.frontpage.com/ppm/267285/acid-attacks-londons-muslim-no-go-zones-daniel-greenfield
link not working
perhaps predictably
Free speech had to go in order for truth to be relegated below subjectivity. This is the most important eithical issue of our time.