ian1964 10,409 Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 Stephen Birrell doesnâ??t like Catholics, he doesnâ??t like Celtic Football Club manager Neil Lennon and he doesnâ??t like Celtic supporters. These are not exactly unusual sentiments in certain parts of Scotland. But what is unusual is that last week Birrell was jailed for expressing such prejudices. His crime was to join a Facebook page and share his unpleasant views with the rest of us. Birrellâ??s pearls of wisdom included: â??Hope they all die. Simple. Catholic scumbags. Haha.â??; â??Proud to hate Fenian tattie farmersâ??; and â??Theyâ??re all ploughing the fields, dirty scumbags. FTP [Fuck the Pope]â??. This guy is not a pleasant individual and obviously not likely to turn up on many lists of people we would most like to have dinner with. But no threats were made, there was no incitement to commit acts of violence and Birrell did not actually harm anyone. Yet the 28-year-old football fan was charged with â??religiously aggravatedâ?? breach of the peace and sent to prison for eight months. He was also banned from attending any football games in the UK for five years. In short, this was seen as a religious hate crime and all this has happened even before the new Offensive and Threatening Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications Bill (Scotland) is passed by the Scottish Parliament - a law that would introduce prison terms of up to five years for making sectarian comments at football games or on the internet. The idea of sending someone to prison for expressing their personal hatreds seems bizarre in a society that claims to allow freedom of speech. But in the frenzied atmosphere being whipped up around the new laws, a judge sitting in a Scottish courtroom felt emboldened to deprive a person of his liberty by criminalising his words. Birrell is not the only victim of this draconian new mood. Last month, my nephew Brendan travelled all the way from West Belfast to Glasgow to see his beloved Celtic play, only to be arrested while entering the ground for shouting â??Up the IRAâ??, a slogan still found on many gable ends in his hometown. He was held in prison all day and overnight before being charged with â??religiously aggravated breach of the peaceâ??. Given the prevailing climate, the addition of â??religiously aggravatedâ?? turns a minor incident that has been normal behaviour for a section of Celtic fans at games for many years into a serious crime with serious consequences. And then there were the two fans whose banner mentioned the â??Hunsâ??, a term used by Celtic supporters (and even some Rangers fans) for many years to describe the Rangers football team and its supporters, a term that has now been criminalised in the rush to label every expression as a symbol of sectarian hatred. These fans were also arrested and one was charged with a hate crime. The case was postponed several times, leaving the fans unaware of their fate. For months, I have warned that politicians are using the physical attack on Celtic manager Neil Lennon by a Hearts fan to blur the distinction between words and deeds. This poses a serious threat to free speech and civil liberties. But few civil liberties champions have joined this particular campaign, apparently finding the principle of free speech easy to sacrifice when it comes to â??uncouthâ?? football fans who upset their liberal sensibilities. But you donâ??t need to like fooball fans to defend their right to free expression. I donâ??t like anything Birrell says or represents, but I defend absolutely his right to say it without being locked up and labelled a criminal. Birrellâ??s case, and the many more that will inevitably follow as fans outdo each other in their rush to take offence at the sectarianism of their rivals, have nothing to do with justice and everything to do with the ongoing demonisation of one group â?? football fans â?? in society. Scotlandâ??s first minister, Alex Salmond, can now claim the dubious distinction of presiding over one of the most authoritarian and illiberal pieces of legislation in Western Europe. Anyone who remotely cares about basic civil liberties should howl with rage at the imprisonment of Stephen Birrell and should stand up now to defend free speech and the right of football fans to be offensive, whether on Facebook or in the stands at Ibrox and Celtic Park. Kevin Rooney is a teacher based in London. He will speaking at the debate Silencing sectarianism: footballâ??s free speech wars at the Battle of Ideas festival on Sunday 30 October. http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php/site/article/11337/ 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ergatrude 0 Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 Well said. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juancornetto 1 Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 Interesting that Kevin is a Celtic season ticket holder. At least there's one reasoned free thinking chap amongst the hordes of small minded ignorant trash. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian1964 10,409 Posted October 26, 2011 Author Share Posted October 26, 2011 Interesting that Kevin is a Celtic season ticket holder. At least there's one reasoned free thinking chap amongst the hordes of small minded ignorant trash. You reap what you sow:) 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,329 Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 Interesting that Kevin is a Celtic season ticket holder. At least there's one reasoned free thinking chap amongst the hordes of small minded ignorant trash. Interesting that he, and many other Celtic fans, are only coming out with this now that Celtic fans are being threatened with the new law. I don't recall any supporting TBB or TFIO. As for the general point he is making, I disagree. Should be people be allowed to say absolutely anything, no matter how offensive? I don't believe so. There has to be a line. It's where that line should be is the big question to me. People should not be allowed to praise terrorists who have killed and maimed innocent people in this country and we do not need free speech to allow this. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juancornetto 1 Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 Interesting that he, and many other Celtic fans, are only coming out with this now that Celtic fans are being threatened with the new law. I don't recall any supporting TBB or TFIO. As for the general point he is making, I disagree. Should be people be allowed to say absolutely anything, no matter how offensive? I don't believe so. There has to be a line. It's where that line should be is the big question to me. People should not be allowed to praise terrorists who have killed and maimed innocent people in this country and we do not need free speech to allow this. It's already a against the law to "support" proscribed terrorist organisations. The problem is what constitutes support? Is it financial, recruitment or vocal promotion (as is the case for that shower). 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ergatrude 0 Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 Whilst I agree with the principle of freedom of speech, I would also agree that some people should at least consider other people before they abuse the privilege. At the same time I also agree with the article's main point. In my opinion the point is that what Stephen Birrell said is wrong, no one would deny that, but that the punishment which he received in comparison to other offences is unfair. How can a man receive a prison term for something he said & another man escape unpunished for an assault caught on camera in front of 30,000+ people? This sort of justice doesn't send out any clear messages or act as any warning, what it actually does is increase both sides efforts to criminalise the other by points scoring. I also agree with Bluedell that it's taken a while for a Celtic minded person to come forward & say this after they all seemed to be whistling another tune. At the same time though,does it matter? As long as the outcome is that the legislation is clear & fair then, in my opinion, it doesn't matter how long it takes everyone to get on the same page. In conclusion, I like agree'ing with things :cheers: 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,329 Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 It's already a against the law to "support" proscribed terrorist organisations. The problem is what constitutes support? Is it financial, recruitment or vocal promotion (as is the case for that shower). Even if it's not covered by that legislation, vocal promotion is covered by sectarian BOP. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
biggordy 0 Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 Free speech is one of the fundamental bases of Democracy. Without it, Democracy is just a sham. Welcome to Alex Salmond's independent "Democracy". This could be the one single issue which halts Salmond's "march in to Poland" 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,329 Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 How can a man receive a prison term for something he said & another man escape unpunished for an assault caught on camera in front of 30,000+ people? Who was unpunished for assault in front of 30,000 people? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.