View Full Version : Convicted for a Facebook rant, how said. Also when did people become so uptight
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-19604735
A teenager has been found guilty of posting an offensive Facebook message following the deaths of six British soldiers in Afghanistan.
Azhar Ahmed, 19, of Ravensthorpe, West Yorkshire, was charged with sending a grossly offensive communication.
He told Huddersfield Magistrates Court he accepted the message had been "unacceptable" but had denied it was "grossly offensive".
The judge said his comments were "derogatory" and "inflammatory".
The six soldiers were killed by an improvised explosive device (IED) in Lashkar Gah on 6 March in the deadliest single attack on British forces in Afghanistan since 2001.
Sgt Nigel Coupe, 33, of 1st Battalion The Duke of Lancaster's Regiment, was killed alongside Cpl Jake Hartley, 20, Pte Anthony Frampton, 20, Pte Christopher Kershaw, 19, Pte Daniel Wade, 20, and Pte Daniel Wilford, 21, all of 3rd Battalion the Yorkshire Regiment.
'So upsetting'
The offensive message, which said "all soldiers should die and go to hell", was posted by Ahmed just two days later on 8 March.
Ahmed told the court he was only trying to make his point that many other deaths in Afghanistan were being ignored and added he had no idea it would cause so much upset.
He said he replied with apologies to many people who commented on his Facebook page and when some told him they had lost relatives in Afghanistan he realised how serious it was.
"That's when I realised it was unacceptable for them to see something so upsetting and distressing, to write something like that," he added.
District Judge Jane Goodwin said Ahmed's Facebook remarks were "derogatory, disrespectful and inflammatory".
He will be sentenced later.
Here's the best version i can find of what he said. If you're offended by that then you're the type of uptight, reactionary person that is causing so many problems with society.
http://i.imgur.com/0sxEO.png
http://i.imgur.com/0sxEO.png
The boys a nob but for something like that to go to trial would cost more than that nobs worth...
Hope they throw the book at him
at least they are saying its inappropriate.. in america its ok for a church cult to stand outside of soldiers funerals, and protest screaming that they are glad hes dead that God wants all soldiers to die and go to hell to punish america for homosexuality. this numpty just posted it on face book.. imagine how the families of the fallen are feeling while they are putting their sons and daughters in the ground and having this screamed at them. Im all for everyones right to their opinions , but sometimes.. somethings are best left unsaid.
The boys a nob but for something like that to go to trial would cost more than that nobs worth...
He has a legitimate point but agreed the way in which he made it makes him seem like a dick.
It seems to be though that some people are so averse to seeing other opinions, to having their deliciate feelings hurt that they have to legislate them away. I always like to compare the sentences in situations like to this to 'real' crimes. The results are pretty surprising.
Hope they throw the book at him
I find your post offensive, it has caused me distress. Therefore I would for you to be arrested and charged.
at least they are saying its inappropriate.. in america its ok for a church cult to stand outside of soldiers funerals, and protest screaming that they are glad hes dead that God wants all soldiers to die and go to hell to punish america for homosexuality. this numpty just posted it on face book.. imagine how the families of the fallen are feeling while they are putting their sons and daughters in the ground and having this screamed at them. Im all for everyones right to their opinions , but sometimes.. somethings are best left unsaid.
I disagree. I may not agree with what someone says but I will defend their right to say it. Again Westboro Baptist Church are distasteful people for a variety of reasons but they're free to protest.
I disagree. I made not agree with what someone says but I will defend their right to say it. Again Westboro Baptist Church are distasteful people for a variety of reasons but they're free to protest.I'm with you on this one RecQuery. I guess he posted it not expecting the reaction that it got, but I don't believe he should have been jailed. At best he should have just been given a caution by the Police.
I find your post offensive, it has caused me distress. Therefore I would for you to be arrested and charged.
Am I worried, I think not [lol]
Am I worried, I think not [lol]
Nor should it, that's the point. Unless you happen to publically spout an opinion the majority disagree with or that some overly sensitive flowers of people feel cause distress.
I'm with you on this one RecQuery. I guess he posted it not expecting the reaction that it got, but I don't believe he should have been jailed. At best he should have just been given a caution by the Police.
I'd support a caution or just a stern informal warning if he posted this in a group for the armed forces or people related to the armed forces but this was a personal opinion he posted on his Facebook page.
Azhar Ahmed has been wrongly convicted in this case. He should have been convicted of stupidity in a public place and his lack of education. I may not agree with what someone says but I will defend their right to say it. However I should insist that Azhar Ahmed and his like learn a bit more about what they’re talking about.
Yes, the press is full of our soldiers dying; and no, not all the civilian deaths are reported. However that is the fault of the government and the media. The soldiers themselves have little control of the government PR machinery; besides they’re probably a bit too busy.
Azhar Ahmed rants about ‘the women who have been raped.’ In truth I doubt any Allied squaddy would have the time or the inclination given the choice of company in the areas they’re working in. He also rants about ‘children who have been sliced up.’ Where does that come from; there has been one report of children being attacked by an American servicemen armed with a bayonet in recent months.
If Azhar Ahmed really wants to protest or make a difference he should use the democratic process and lobby his MP.
One again, British Justice and common sense seem to be avoiding each other, making criminals out of people for the most trivial of things.
I disagree. I may not agree with what someone says but I will defend their right to say it.
The spirt of this is brilliant! Without Free Speech we have nothing.
rich62_uk
17-Sep-12, 16:01
So I as an English person living in Scotland would be fine running Scots down ? Wishing them dead etc .....
I am with Golach and hope they throw the book at him.
It's political correctness gone mad!
So I as an English person living in Scotland would be fine running Scots down ? Wishing them dead etc .....
I am with Golach and hope they throw the book at him.
I'm sorry, what?!? The guy ran no one down or in any way hurt anyone else, that's an escalation that did no happen and in no way relates to the point. If you mean run down in a different context then my apologies for interpretting it wrong.
Now if you wanted to create your own website, post to Facebook and Twitter about how you felt about Scottish people - whatever that may be - I might think you're crazy or out of touch but I'd be fine with it and defend your right to do it provided you did not stalk or harass individuals, make direct credible threats to individuals or escalate it to something violent. Hyperbole would be fine.
He sounds like some kind of incomer to me. You have to make allowances.
He obviously forgot to adjust his privacy settings properly.
So I as an English person living in Scotland would be fine running Scots down ? Wishing them dead etc .....I am with Golach and hope they throw the book at him.Naw, cos as John Smeaton wid say, "we'll set about ye"! :-)
I'm sorry, what?!? The guy ran no one down or in any way hurt anyone else, that's an escalation that did no happen and in no way relates to the point. If you mean run down in a different context then my apologies for interpretting it wrong.
Now if you wanted to create your own website, post to Facebook and Twitter about how you felt about Scottish people - whatever that may be - I might think you're crazy or out of touch but I'd be fine with it and defend your right to do it provided you did not stalk or harass individuals, make direct credible threats to individuals or escalate it to something violent. Hyperbole would be fine.
See, this is a big change that might have a bearing on freedom of speech IMO. In the bad old days to get these views published or out there you would need to either stand on a soapbox screaming your lungs out on a street corner, where some passing squaddy would (quite rightly) rip your arm off and beat you to death with it. Or write it in a letter to a newspaper who wouldn't print it for fear of said squaddy paying their offices a visit.
Consequences need to be thought about if you are going to shoot your mouth off.
See, this is a big change that might have a bearing on freedom of speech IMO. In the bad old days to get these views published or out there you would need to either stand on a soapbox screaming your lungs out on a street corner, where some passing squaddy would (quite rightly) rip your arm off and beat you to death with it. Or write it in a letter to a newspaper who wouldn't print it for fear of said squaddy paying their offices a visit.
Consequences need to be thought about if you are going to shoot your mouth off.
So in your world the big, strong or skilled people can project their force and intimidate others? How very enlightened, hurt all those who you disagree with.
If you're the sort of person who would instigate physical violence over some idiot on a street corner well then you have no place in society let alone a professional armed force. That's the sort of thing some idiot binge drinking ned/tink or gang member would do. If people are really that insecure then perhaps there's some truth to the old jokes and sayings.
oldmarine
17-Sep-12, 20:21
Hope they throw the book at him
I, as a WW2 Veteran, agree with you.
oldmarine
17-Sep-12, 20:29
He has a legitimate point but agreed the way in which he made it makes him seem like a dick.
It seems to be though that some people are so averse to seeing other opinions, to having their deliciate feelings hurt that they have to legislate them away. I always like to compare the sentences in situations like to this to 'real' crimes. The results are pretty surprising.
I find your post offensive, it has caused me distress. Therefore I would for you to be arrested and charged.
I disagree. I may not agree with what someone says but I will defend their right to say it. Again Westboro Baptist Church are distasteful people for a variety of reasons but they're free to protest.
I, along with many of your troops, served against common enemies during WW2. As long as I can exercise free speech I will disagree with what you have posted.
I, along with many of your troops, served against common enemies during WW2. As long as I can exercise free speech I will disagree with what you have posted.You advocate the use of free speech but disagree with RecQuery defending someone's right to free speech. I'm confused?
So in your world the big, strong or skilled people can project their force and intimidate others? How very enlightened, hurt all those who you disagree with.
If you're the sort of person who would instigate physical violence over some idiot on a street corner well then you have no place in society let alone a professional armed force. That's the sort of thing some idiot binge drinking ned/tink or gang member would do. If people are really that insecure then perhaps there's some truth to the old jokes and sayings.
I suggest you find a squaddy freshly back from Afghanistan and discuss their insecurity with them. This illustrates my point exactly. You can insult who you like with impunity, except as this case proves, you can't.
I suggest you find a squaddy freshly back from Afghanistan and discuss their insecurity with them. This illustrates my point exactly. You can insult who like with impunity, except as this case proves, you can't.
Hear Hear recquery is one of those keyboard warriors we see a lot of these days hiding and sniping from behind a Vdu screen
I guess the lesson, if there is one, is don't say anything via the web that you wouldn't say to someone's face.
You advocate the use of free speech but disagree with RecQuery defending someone's right to free speech. I'm confused?
It's an odd dichotomy I've noticed among some of the more rabid pro-military people here. Strangley these people seem to support the big boot of authority and state brutality despite the fact the military is usually deployed to stop it elsewhere. They're quick to point out that the armed forces are always fighting for our/their/everyones freedom while at the same time not wanting that freedom to be practised. As I mentioned already I could perhaps see the point if someone was continually harassing an individual or group. This guy however posted a rant on his own Facebook page.
Curiously enough I can look up rants on this forum from some people which could be considered like the one this guy did except for they target different groups.
I suggest you find a squaddy freshly back from Afghanistan and discuss their insecurity with them. This illustrates my point exactly. You can insult who you like with impunity, except as this case proves, you can't.
Can your sacred cow brook no criticism? I'd argue that people in the armed forces are a lot smarter than you give them credit for and can see the nuances. Whereas you seem to consider them to be insecure meatheads who would beat up someone because they didn't like them or their opinion.
Heart Hear recquery is one of those keyboard warriors we see a lot of these days hiding and sniping from behind a Vdu screen
Falling back on your old tactic of insulting and dismissing people who disagree with you? Glad to know you have the uncanny ability to make wide sweeping judgements about someone based on some forum posts.
Req, why did you start this thread?
Req, why did you start this thread?
Because I thought it was the start of a slippery slope.
Because I thought it was a sad indictment of our society and culture that someone could be arrested for a Facebook rant, never mind sentenced and probably given a higher sentence than some actual crimes.
Because I'd expect this sort of thing in China or Korea but not the UK.
Because the only way I can be sure that I'm allowed to say what I want is to make sure others can say what they want.
Because I thought it was the start of a slippery slope.
Because I thought it was a sad indictment of our society and culture that someone could be arrested for a Facebook rant, never mind sentenced and probably given a higher sentence than some actual crime.
Because I'd expect this sort of thing in China or Korea but not the UK.
Because the only way I can be sure that I'm allowed to say what I want is to make sure others can say what they want.
That's the point though isn't it? Should you be allowed to say what you want? Why?
All through the technological age, there have been rules and regulations (often required qualifications) to use and benefit from communication systems. Now we have the most far reaching and powerful communication tool ever, and almost no control over how it is used and who it is used by.
My feeling is, as the development has been so rapid and in diverse directions, there should be a root and branch review of all these issues.
Some will react like petulant children when a parent wants to limit the use of their toys. I'm OK with that.
That's the point though isn't it? Should you be allowed to say what you want? Why?
It's not a case of saying what you want all the time, it's a case of having a reasonable expectation to a certain level of privacy and freedom. The media is thick with government rhetoric supporting protests in other countries and saying we're doing things for the sake of freedom. Yet we don't seem to support these sort of things at home. Why?
All through the technological age, there have been rules and regulations (often required qualifications) to use and benefit from communication systems. Now we have the most far reaching and powerful communication tool ever, and almost no control over how it is used and who it is used by.
My feeling is, as the development has been so rapid and in diverse directions, there should be a root and branch review of all these issues.
Some will react like petulant children when a parent wants to limit the use of their toys. I'm OK with that.
This or something similar has been said for every new technology, from movable type and mass printing to satelite television, that allows you to disseminate ideas and information. I'm not making any value judgements or drawing any parallels but I've seen the very same justification used elsewhere under similar auspices and it scared people then but not now?. It's the same one China and Iraq uses. Strangley though people of a certain class, affiliated with certain groups or with sufficient techical knowledge can still get unfettered access to information it's just dangerous to the masses.
No one person, company or government owns the Internet, though some would like to think they do. Are people really that scared of different opinions, sources of information or being insulted that they would block it all. Are we really that delicate and weak?
Once again you equate wanting freedom to being a child, while you in essence want the government to treat us like children. Why?
Getting a bit back on topic. This guy posted stuff on his personal Facebook page. It's kind of akin to saying something to a group of people in your own house or in-front of your friends. He used a bit of hyperbole but made no credible threats and didn't target individuals. I've seen similar throwaway comments made on this forum just against different groups or people. Should everyone who made them be arrested?
Well, at least it has opened this sort of stuff up for discussion. I personally don't take offence or am I upset by insults or peoples opinion of me or what I say. But I would not want grieving relatives of anyone spoken to like this in person so why on a facebook page?
You can't argue that this sort of thing doesn't cause harm though, look at all the deaths caused by the reaction to the film recently.
Convicted for a hurtful internet comment? Really?
Time and money has actually been spent on convicting someone over a Facebook rant?
Unbelievable.
Also I have to wonder, if Azhar Ahmed was instead a white man called John Johnson, would he still have been convicted?
Convicted for a hurtful internet comment? Really?
Time and money has actually been spent on convicting someone over a Facebook rant?
Unbelievable.
Also I have to wonder, if Azhar Ahmed was instead a white man called John Johnson, would he still have been convicted?
Funnily enough, that question on here would usually be the other way round. ;)
I think we do have to understand that our facebook pages are NOT akin to our front room - we should all try to understand that and excercise discretion when going off on one. However, there is a knee jerk reaction to anyone who criticises our armed forces or our celebrities which is out of all proportion, we have this and we had that laddie picked up for tweeting Tom Daley to tell him his dad would have been disappointed. We need a sense of proportion. Look how long it took that mannie who mentioned blowing up Robin Hood Airport to have his conviction quashed. The judge in the appeal said that "if people who receive or read that kind of message would brush it aside as a silly or bad taste joke, or ridiculous banter, then it would be a contradiction in terms to call it 'menacing'". Its ridiculous that there was a conviction in the first place.
We are all free to take offence at what people say about us or to us on the internet - we can huff, stamp our feet and complain as much as we want but we really should not expect the LAW to interfere and soothe our hurt feelings. This man said a horrid thing but he didnt threaten or attempt to harrass or frighten or cause alarm and he is entitled to his view - just like we are entitled to our view that he is an idiot.
Do you see, folks? Squidge has found the secret with simple eloquence. Common sense and understanding!
http://www.manchestersmagic.co.uk/news/uk-and-world/20120920-shot-pcs-funerals-officers-offer-cover/
Man arrested over facebook page.
http://www.manchestersmagic.co.uk/news/uk-and-world/20120920-shot-pcs-funerals-officers-offer-cover/
Man arrested over facebook page.
Still in bad taste as was the post in the original story, but unless the page is being used or organise credible attacks on police or they're spamming people with it, I again have no problem with it.
In related news glad to see they had a rethink over that Tom Daley Twitter thing - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19660415 also on a related lighter note http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/sep/19/waitrose-twitter-hashtag and http://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/comments/106h2g/waitrose_twitter_hashtag_invites_ridicule/
Still in bad taste as was the post in the original story, but unless the page is being used or organise credible attacks on police or they're spamming people with it, I again have no problem with it.
In related news glad to see they had a rethink over that Tom Daley Twitter thing - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19660415 also on a related lighter note http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/sep/19/waitrose-twitter-hashtag and http://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/comments/106h2g/waitrose_twitter_hashtag_invites_ridicule/
Yes, but I think we have proved that you can't say anything you want. That makes me feel more comfortable (once people realise it and stop getting arrested :lol:).
Yes, but I think we have proved that you can't say anything you want. That makes me feel more comfortable (once people realise it and stop getting arrested :lol:).
When did we prove this?!?
When did we prove this?!?
Well, you can, but you get arrested.
So in your world the big, strong or skilled people can project their force and intimidate others? How very enlightened, hurt all those who you disagree with.
If you're the sort of person who would instigate physical violence over some idiot on a street corner well then you have no place in society let alone a professional armed force. That's the sort of thing some idiot binge drinking ned/tink or gang member would do. If people are really that insecure then perhaps there's some truth to the old jokes and sayings.
Pretty much agree with that...but would quibble at the inclusion of "tinks" there are more decent ones than not, nationwide, so you are using stereotypes, in that case, like any other bigot.
Hear Hear recquery is one of those keyboard warriors we see a lot of these days hiding and sniping from behind a Vdu screen
Much like yourself and others?
Yes, but I think we have proved that you can't say anything you want. That makes me feel more comfortable (once people realise it and stop getting arrested :lol:).
No..we have proved that we can't say anything we want on the internet because there are people trawling it it constantly looking for something to be offended by, of however little importance in the great scheme of things, and with the ability to broadcast their offence to the world, and summon up supporters..and often draw the remarks to the attention of thousands who would ever have seen it otherwise..including the families of those referenced.
Maybe the best way to have stopped the UK backing up the US in Iraq would have been to have someone objecting on a Facebook page and acquiring likes, rather than organising the completely ignored million who marched....but then, the internet was not the force it is now.
Way I look at it is that incitement to violence is one thing...but having an opinion is something else again. It is the intention to incite violence that counts, not the fact that you have a different bias/opinion to somebody else. Sticks and stones will break my bones, but words will only offend me......and I do not have a Human Right not to be offended.
As Anais Nin said "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are."
I'm sorry to say, but I believe facebook can be a very dangerous tool. It is about time it was better policed. This is an imflamatory remark and had to be nipped in the bud. True there are some dreadful atrocities going on that we know nothing about, but then, niether does this guy. He lives in this country - he should respect our forces. Soldiers are just obeying orders. Are you saying that his implications that SOLDIERS are 'slicing up children' and 'raping women' are justified?
Freedom of speech is fine, but when its used to fan the flames of discontent it goes a tad too far. If any of us even drew a cartoon making fun of islam, ah what an outcry - and imagin the consequences if we put it on facebook, yet so many of you are saying he should be allowed to spout this rubbish? Get a grip.
I'm sorry to say, but I believe facebook can be a very dangerous tool. It is about time it was better policed. This is an imflamatory remark and had to be nipped in the bud. True there are some dreadful atrocities going on that we know nothing about, but then, niether does this guy. He lives in this country - he should respect our forces. Soldiers are just obeying orders. Are you saying that his implications that SOLDIERS are 'slicing up children' and 'raping women' are justified?
Freedom of speech is fine, but when its used to fan the flames of discontent it goes a tad too far. If any of us even drew a cartoon making fun of islam, ah what an outcry - and imagin the consequences if we put it on facebook, yet so many of you are saying he should be allowed to spout this rubbish? Get a grip.
Benjamin Franklin said that 'They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.'
I'm not making any comparisons or drawing any parallels however the justifications you've given are the same that authoritation regimes both past and present have given for restricting society and spying on their populaces. Incidentally so is the mantra of 'just obeying orders' you're allowed to disobey an illegal or unethical order.
It is exactly things that could cause discontent that must be protected. I'm saying that drawing a cartoon of Mohammed being a violent, child molesting, crazy man should be allowed, just as I'm saying that criticising what in recent years has become the sacred cow of the armed forces should be allowed.
In many ways this thread reminds of the this Telegraph story (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/art/art-news/9232512/Mythical-swan-photo-taken-down-after-bestiality-fears.html).
I'm sorry to say, but I believe facebook can be a very dangerous tool. It is about time it was better policed. This is an imflamatory remark and had to be nipped in the bud. True there are some dreadful atrocities going on that we know nothing about, but then, niether does this guy. He lives in this country - he should respect our forces. Soldiers are just obeying orders. Are you saying that his implications that SOLDIERS are 'slicing up children' and 'raping women' are justified?
Freedom of speech is fine, but when its used to fan the flames of discontent it goes a tad too far. If any of us even drew a cartoon making fun of islam, ah what an outcry - and imagin the consequences if we put it on facebook, yet so many of you are saying he should be allowed to spout this rubbish? Get a grip.
I don't think FaceBook/Twitter/Forums/blogs etc should be policed by joe punter..and that is what is happening now. Why would I think that because I am offended by something, it follows that the remark is offensive to a majority....or even one other person? The only sacred cows are the ones deemed by law to be sacred cows.
I have no problem with the internet being policed by the authorities to flag up illegal comments inciting violence...but excuse me.....if you are going to prosecute every media outlet which fan the flames of discontent..the newspapers are where to start, followed by blogs...because they, particularly the tabloids, are the original opinion forming outlets going by the links used to "prove" assertions. Facebook only disseminates the information acquired from the print media/on the internet..so why police the messenger and allow the message to continue to appear?
Biggest problem, it seems to me is that so many people have skins like wet tissue paper nowadays.....and taking umbrage has become a pastime for the terminally PC, the terminally bored, the terminally bigoted...those who like to think they are more "decent" than everybody else...the terminally self-important/arrogant..and the terminally religious.
I don't think FaceBook/Twitter/Forums/blogs etc should be policed by joe punter..and that is what is happening now. Why would I think that because I am offended by something, it follows that the remark is offensive to a majority....or even one other person? The only sacred cows are the ones deemed by law to be sacred cows.
I have no problem with the internet being policed by the authorities to flag up illegal comments inciting violence...but excuse me.....if you are going to prosecute every media outlet which fan the flames of discontent..the newspapers are where to start, followed by blogs...because they, particularly the tabloids, are the original opinion forming outlets going by the links used to "prove" assertions. Facebook only disseminates the information acquired from the print media/on the internet..so why police the messenger and allow the message to continue to appear?
Biggest problem, it seems to me is that so many people have skins like wet tissue paper nowadays.....and taking umbrage has become a pastime for the terminally PC, the terminally bored, the terminally bigoted...and those who like to think they are more "decent" than everybody else...the terminally self-important/arrogant.
Or the terminally religious, which is why half the world is on fire today.
Or the terminally religious, which is why half the world is on fire today.
Kinda included that in the terminally bigoted and the terminally self-important/arrogant.in my own mind.....but happy to add it (because I've just noticed I can)
Well done the police, another bad mouthed twerp got arrested, hope he gets the book thrown at him
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/man-appears-in-court-after-facebook-1351570
Well done the police, another bad mouthed twerp got arrested, hope he gets the book thrown at him
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/man-appears-in-court-after-facebook-1351570
May you live in the world you want and seem to admire.
May you live in the world you want and seem to admire.
Long may my world stay as it is.
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.