Discussion
oyster said:
One 'bellend' used free speech, which our predecessors fought against tyranny to achieve.
The other bellend used violence to try and settle a dispute, which our predecessors fought against tyranny to prevent.
The fact you treat them equally is infantile.
I hold them both in contempt. just to clarify my position in case it was in doubt. The other bellend used violence to try and settle a dispute, which our predecessors fought against tyranny to prevent.
The fact you treat them equally is infantile.
Using "free speech" does not automatically make the user right and therefore above criticism.
Getragdogleg said:
oyster said:
One 'bellend' used free speech, which our predecessors fought against tyranny to achieve.
The other bellend used violence to try and settle a dispute, which our predecessors fought against tyranny to prevent.
The fact you treat them equally is infantile.
I hold them both in contempt. just to clarify my position in case it was in doubt. The other bellend used violence to try and settle a dispute, which our predecessors fought against tyranny to prevent.
The fact you treat them equally is infantile.
Using "free speech" does not automatically make the user right and therefore above criticism.
oyster said:
So to be clear - you think expressing free speech of an opinion that is different to your own is of the same magnitude of contempt as physical assault?
No, I think they both have different bad opinions.Two people with opposing opinions met and it didn't end well. You do know it is possible for two people in the same argument to be wrong don't you ?
If the guy who did the hitting had just used freedom of speech and called Owen a w
ker and not hit him this would not have been a problem.Lentilist said:
Getragdogleg said:
If the guy who did the hitting had just used freedom of speech and called Owen a wker and not hit him this would not have been a problem.
So Owen Jones is physically assaulted, apparently for no reason other than being Owen Jones, the perpetrator has a history of violence and links to far right hooligan groups, yet the issue is apparently that the left over-react to differences of political opinion?ker and not hit him this would not have been a problem.Getragdogleg said:
otolith said:
Getragdogleg said:
No, I think they both have different bad opinions.
What's that got to do with one of them assaulting the other? otolith said:
Getragdogleg said:
otolith said:
Getragdogleg said:
No, I think they both have different bad opinions.
What's that got to do with one of them assaulting the other? Owen is still a w
ker. That's not changed. 
CoolHands said:
Escapegoat said:
CoolHands said:
Is there a gofundme for the perpetrators? I’d give
Thanks for providing context for your contributions on PH. No wonder you're a Trump fan, too.But not many want to help pay the legal bills of a violent offender as soon as they hear he hoards white supremacist thug memorabilia.
You are definitely unusual.
Isn't it amusing how at the start of this thread, many were doubting the attack was politically motivated or motivated because of Jones' sexuality, in fact, many openly derided the idea that an attack had taken place at all. Now a violent offender with right wing memorabilia in his house has been found guilty, in a court of law, of a politically motivated, homophobic attack on Jones, many are still basically defending the guy's actions 'cos...Owen Jones'. PH can be a strange place at times. The law must be impartial, Jones may, or may not be, an insufferable mouthpiece, but he was the victim of a homophobic, politically motivated attack and that is unacceptable.
biggbn said:
Isn't it amusing how at the start of this thread, many were doubting the attack was politically motivated or motivated because of Jones' sexuality, in fact, many openly derided the idea that an attack had taken place at all. Now a violent offender with right wing memorabilia in his house has been found guilty, in a court of law, of a politically motivated, homophobic attack on Jones, many are still basically defending the guy's actions 'cos...Owen Jones'. PH can be a strange place at times. The law must be impartial, Jones may, or may not be, an insufferable mouthpiece, but he was the victim of a homophobic, politically motivated attack and that is unacceptable.
Hang on - are you not jumping the gun? I thought that the culprit had admitted affray but that there was an as yet unconcluded trial of the facts to determine whether or not the attack was homophobic.
It might yet be found that Jones had simply been given a smack for being an utter t
t rather than for being gay. Occam's razor and all that.biggbn said:
The law must be impartial, Jones may, or may not be, an insufferable mouthpiece, but he was the victim of a homophobic, politically motivated attack and that is unacceptable.
That's what pisses me off about these kind of cases, was it really a homophobic politically motivated attack or was it just an attack that happened to be on a gay political activist? The supposed right-wing racist knuckledragger is probably a bit dim, would he recognise Owen Jones as a gay labour journalist or would he just have a fight with a gobby bellend? I would probably veer towards the latter if I had to guess.Can't have been much of a nutjob or fight given the injuries, a slight bruise on his back seems more like handbags rather than a full-on kicking. Anyway some good will come out of this on both sides, the attacker will be taken off the streets and Owen Jones will probably not shoot his mouth off to idiots without thinking of the possible results.
psi310398 said:
biggbn said:
Isn't it amusing how at the start of this thread, many were doubting the attack was politically motivated or motivated because of Jones' sexuality, in fact, many openly derided the idea that an attack had taken place at all. Now a violent offender with right wing memorabilia in his house has been found guilty, in a court of law, of a politically motivated, homophobic attack on Jones, many are still basically defending the guy's actions 'cos...Owen Jones'. PH can be a strange place at times. The law must be impartial, Jones may, or may not be, an insufferable mouthpiece, but he was the victim of a homophobic, politically motivated attack and that is unacceptable.
Hang on - are you not jumping the gun? I thought that the culprit had admitted affray but that there was an as yet unconcluded trial of the facts to determine whether or not the attack was homophobic.
It might yet be found that Jones had simply been given a smack for being an utter t
t rather than for being gay. Occam's razor and all that.https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/jan/17/ma...
To be fair, whether it was homophobic and politically motivated or not, he was assaulted and that in itself is out of order, the law being the law.
biggbn said:
Apologies if I have but I thought he had been found guilty and the judge had found it was homophobic and politically motivated?
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/jan/17/ma...
Quite.https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/jan/17/ma...
It'll be interesting to see what the next set of excuses are given the initial comments by many that it didn't even happen.
bhstewie said:
hstewie said:biggbn said:
Apologies if I have but I thought he had been found guilty and the judge had found it was homophobic and politically motivated?
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/jan/17/ma...
Quite.https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/jan/17/ma...
It'll be interesting to see what the next set of excuses are given the initial comments by many that it didn't even happen.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff