Here’s a good one from Catstrangler101 from the New English Review speaking about ‘harassment’ on Twitter.
“This week I’ve been thinking about the whole concept of “harassment” as it applies to communications sent via Twitter. I have to declare an interest, of course, since someone not a million miles away from me is currently due up before the beak in Birmingham Magistrates Court on Tuesday 08 April to face a charge of Racially Aggravated Harassment for allegedly calling that mendacious grievance-mongering taqiyya-artist – Fiyaz Mughal OBE of TellMamaUK notoriety – a “Lying Muslim Scumbag.”
I have to say at this point that the phrase “Lying Muslim Scumbag” was perhaps unworthy of someone who had received a good old English 1960’s Grammar School education; back in the days before the Marxist ideologue Anthony Crosland abolished what was probably the best educational system in the country. A far better term, and one which would have been much more colourful and descriptive, not to mention a distinct improvement in factual accuracy, would have been “a lying, deceitful and mendacious grievance-mongering taqiyya-artist who wouldn’t know what the truth was if it came storming up to him in the street and smacked him across the face with a wet kipper.” But then, as they say, 20-20 hindsight is a wonderful thing.
To return to the concept of harassment – back in the days before we had the Internet, it was necessary to seek out your target for harassment purposes, maybe by finding out his telephone number or his home address or his place of work, and either bombard him with telephone calls and letters, or accost him in person and wag your finger vigorously under his nose while telling him exactly what you thought of him in no uncertain terms.
Now that is genuine, old fashioned British harassment good and proper, that is – genuine copper-bottomed gold-plated harassment with the Assayer’s “100% Pure Harassment” hall-marked into the side of it. The reason that it is harassment is because your target can’t easily walk away from it without suffering some material or psychological inconvenience.
If you are bombarding him with phone calls, for example, he can try not answering the telephone, but then he might miss that all-important call from the President of the Bank of Swaziland whose uncle had suddenly died and unexpectedly left a large amount of funds unclaimed, 30% of which would be available for the trifling up-front cost of an advance fee, or – oh, I don’t know – perhaps that the Association of Chief Police Officers had decided in the interests of community cohesion not to challenge his organisation’s obviously fabricated figures for the next twelve months.”
Read the rest via the link below, it’s excellent