Starmer's vision quest

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

CXRAndy

Legendary Member
 

CXRAndy

Legendary Member
Unfurled in Birmingham

1000025714.jpg
 

AndyRM

Elder Goth
It's because they're ok with it when it's people they don't like. There's a whole side discussion on the Gender thread about how withholding services isn't a breach of the Equality Act when you don't like the person you're discriminating against.

Not so much. I just don't think Glinner's latest pity party is worth much comment.

I would be interested to hear from him (and he may well have said this on his substack, I don't know) what, if anything, prompted him to throw a grenade at his life in pursuit of his agenda.

He's done and said some seriously f*cked up stuff for the cause.
 
  • Like
Reactions: C R


He was arrested for incitement to violence based on someone's sex/sexuality/race/creed.

Laws brought in by Thatcher and enhanced by Boris Johnson. The same laws that Lucy Connolly was jailed under.

I don't see what your problem is here unless you think incitement to violence based on the above criteria is completely acceptable in which case, the law isn't the problem, your attitude is.

Very strange that we see these free speech warriors complaining about their free speech being curtailed but they never seem to STFU saying things that they complain that they're unable to say.
 
Last edited:

bobzmyunkle

Über Member
Not so much. I just don't think Glinner's latest pity party is worth much comment.
If his latest tweets broke any law then it was at a level where maybe a knock on the door and a caution might be appropriate. Instead it was deemed appropriate to dispatch 5 armed police to the airport to arrest him on arrival.
On the face of it, absurd.
 

AndyRM

Elder Goth
If his latest tweets broke any law then it was at a level where maybe a knock on the door and a caution might be appropriate. Instead it was deemed appropriate to dispatch 5 armed police to the airport to arrest him on arrival.
On the face of it, absurd.

I agree. Which is why I think there's more to the story than that.

The whole "dispatching 5 armed police thing" makes it sound very dramatic. All police at airports are armed and they'd have been there anyway, so it's not like they screeched up to the plane as it landed and bundled him off.
 

icowden

Shaman
I agree. Which is why I think there's more to the story than that.

The whole "dispatching 5 armed police thing" makes it sound very dramatic. All police at airports are armed and they'd have been there anyway, so it's not like they screeched up to the plane as it landed and bundled him off.

Yes - he was detained by the Heathrow Police - who are routinely armed. The tweets in question were one stating
"If a trans-identified male is in a female only space, he is committing a violent abusive act. Make a scene, call the cops and if all else fails punch him in the balls"
Second tweet was a picture of protestors with the legend "a photo you can smell"
Third tweet referenced the photo and said "I hate them. Misogynists and homophobes" followed by an undetermined expletive.

Whether or not you agree with Linehan, this does seem to be palpably absurd and a waste of taxpayers money.
 

spen666

Senior Member
Yes - he was detained by the Heathrow Police - who are routinely armed. The tweets in question were one stating

"If a trans-identified male is in a female only space, he is committing a violent abusive act. Make a scene, call the cops and if all else fails punch him in the balls"
I can see why this tweet MIGHT be looked at by police. It is on any sensible reading an attempt at humour ( not in my view humerous). No serious interpretation of this could regard it as an incitement to violence and in any event it says "if all else fails..." it is a huge hurdle to e passed before the suggestion of punching is made

Second tweet was a picture of protestors with the legend "a photo you can smell"
I struggle to see what criminal offence can possible be made out by this tweet. It may be offensive to some people, but that does not make it a crime. You do not have the legal right not to be offended ( as Ricky Gervais amongst others has said so eloquently in the past)


Third tweet referenced the photo and said "I hate them. Misogynists and homophobes" followed by an undetermined expletive.

This is no more than an expression of his opinion. It is not inciting anyone to do anything. If he hates homophobes and misogynists, then he is entitled to that opinion
Whether or not you agree with Linehan, this does seem to be palpably absurd and a waste of taxpayers money.

I agree, but I would go much further and say it is a rather worrying- attempt to criminalise free speech.

I would think that there is a case for saying this was a potentially unlawful act by the police. That is without bringing into question whether the use of the powers of arrest were lawful and whether he should have been (if these tweets were to be investigated), invited to attend an interview as a voluntary offender as per the leading case of Mark Richardson v The Chief Constable Of West Midlands Police [2011]EWHC 773 QB . The fact that someone is suspect of a crime or is wanted to be questioned about a crime is not of itself sufficient alone to justify an arrest.
 

Shortfall

Member
Not so much. I just don't think Glinner's latest pity party is worth much comment.

I would be interested to hear from him (and he may well have said this on his substack, I don't know) what, if anything, prompted him to throw a grenade at his life in pursuit of his agenda.

He's done and said some seriously f*cked up stuff for the cause.

Good take. Anyone who argues that women don't have cocks deserves to have their career destroyed, their health ruined, lose all their "friends", and get thrown in a cell.

FML!!!!!!
 
Top Bottom