Peter Tatchell Arrested - Outrageous

[Everanewbie]

AIBU to be outraged my Peter Tatchell's latest arrest?

For those who have not heard, the famous campaigner attended a recent Gaza protest. He held a placard that demanded Israel stop the genocide, and that Hamas are a shameful, and reiterated their official terrorist status for the torture an execution of a Palestinian man that attended an anti-Hamas demonstration in Gaza. He was arrested on the basis of inciting racial and religious hatred. The police have since apologised indicating that they believed him to be part of a counter-protest. He spent 5 hours in a cell.

Interesting Q&A on Tatchell's own website, especially this:

Q: Do you stand by your statement that “it is time society acknowledged the truth that not all sex involving children is unwanted, abusive and harmful”, particularly given that the statement occurs at the end of a piece discussing adults having sex with children and not children having sex with others of their same age group?

A: Some adults say that when they were children they had sex with adults and that the sex was not unwanted, abusive or harmful. They say that, not me. I merely repeated their view. I accept that this is their sincerely held view as mature, responsible, ethical adults. But I do not agree with them. Their view is not my view. I disagree with it, which is why my letter said that paedophilia is “impossible” to condone. This means I do not condone it. I condemn it. Children cannot give valid consent to sex. It is abuse and is rightly illegal

The dishonesty is off the scale, because while he now claims "they said that not me" and that he doesn't agree with the view stated, the original statement wanted "society to accept the truth, etc, etc" which clearly indicates that he did support their stance

The mass murder of innocent Palestinian civilians by bombs and starvation is what is outrageous. Where are your priorities? Yes the police are a worry on multiple fronts, is this seriously the first time you’ve been bothered about it?

Is it only Palestinians that bother you? Why are you not campaigning for the Sudanese?

I see your point and again agree with most of what you say... but human rights to free speech don't come with a caveat of "but only if expressed in a approved spaces, and it does not apply if people want to use threats of violence to silence you." I can see why the police have to make decisions in the real world, but it is appalling if human rights are curtailed by threats of violence, and more so when the reason for the threat of violence is an expression of hatred for an illegal terrorist org.

It’s not very much better. He was removed from a protest by police because of his message (specifically, because he opposed Hamas), which is bad enough, and then locked up for five hours.

Either the police officer thought protesting Hamas at a pro-Palestine protest was a crime, or he knew it wasn’t and abused his power.

Either way it’s worrying.

It’s true he’s a serial protester, but you don’t lose the right to protest by using it.

To positively review one paedophile book, @Thegreyhound, may be regarded as a misfortune; to positively review two of them looks like carelessness

All the otherwise sane people got PIE's number by the mid-80s. Most of the stuff on Tatchell dates from the late 1990s.

I have looked at the facts and have posted them on this thread - are my images not showing up for you? I don't know whether Tatchell is himself a paedophile or whether he just supports paedophilia and likes to hang around with paedophiles and with abused, looked-after children. I've read enough of his views to conclude that either way he is dangerous. 'Nuance' is not an appropriate response here.

Speaking of child marriage, he's in favour of that too.

He should take his pro trans protests to Palestine and see what happens there

Nope this man should have zero public profile

No you don't but you learn what buttons to press to get maximum coverage for your part in it.

If he didn't know he could have been mistaken for the counter protest by his placard it would be assuming he's not bright or experienced. I don't make that assumption. Once that was cleared up that he wasn't part of the counter protest he was released so it's a non story really.

That explanation makes it even worse though.

PT says he explained to the officer he was not a counter-protester, he was part of the pro-Palestine march.

If the officer took PT’s anti-Hamas message as proof he opposed the marchers, that implied the officer thought he was witnessing a pro-Hamas protest, and arrested the one guy (in his perception) who wasn’t supporting the proscribed terror group.

a direct physical threat to anyone at the protest

Now there's quite a careful choice of words.

Do you really think one would have to be thick to believe that the pro-Palestine protesters oppose Hamas?

(His placard opposed the actions of Israel and Hamas).

That’s very depressing if you are right.

But if so, what’s the officer doing allowing an illegal pro-Hamas march to proceed, and going still further to shield them from opposing voices?

surely being a paedophile would be having a sexual desire for or sexual relationships with children?
taking your view to its conclusion, someone teaching Romeo and Juliet and saying ‘things were very different regarding marriage and the age of consent in those days’ would be a paedophile. Someone commenting that there are child brides in parts of the world would be a paedophile. Logic fail much?

He’d happily see any woman who doesn’t blindly bleat that ‘Trans women are women’ locked up.
Shame they didn’t lose the key, nonce apologist.

No, I think he knew what buttons to press which is essentially what I posted

I don't know why the protest was allowed any more than the majority of the population.

Maybe take another read of @PencilsinSpace 's post at 16:34 (& her earlier ones) and decide whether Tatchell's open support for leading paedophiles and his views on adults having sex with children is really the hill you want to die on??

And yet, according to many MN posters, "burn them alive in their hotels" is free speech and not inciting violence. So it seems the right to free speech is in the eye of the beholder. No wonder the police are confused when telling people to burn down hotels is free speech, but they have to stand in the line in front of the hotel when people try to do it.

Equally, since many people are on this thread (and elsewhere) saying that free speech has to be defended, and that there are few occasions when it shouldn't be allowed, then presumably you would agree that the view that paedophilia should be legal and that he is entirely free to espouse that view. Because a lot of people here think not (and I agree with them actually).

Frankly, there is no such thing as free speech and never has been. There never will be. We can place as few limits on it as possible, but there are things that a civilised society cannot and should not countenance. The goady idiot should be allowed his placard, but it isn't unreasonable for the police to ask him to display it in a slightly different location - it's not like they asked him to go to Birmingham. It was move across the street.

And actually it has long been the case (so not a recent thing) that if you wish to hold a public protest you need to obtain permission and part of that process - especially if there are potential flashpoints as in these cases - is being clear about where you and your colleagues will stand or walk. Variation is not permitted. This is to avoid confrontation that turns violent. I am really not saying that either side was or would be violent, but risk assessments and conditions are not based on what will happen but what might happen. So to an extent, in public spaces they really do come with a cavet that you can only do it in approved spaces.

Yes that take on Sarah Cook is wilfully daft- she may well have believed herself to be in love but all the adults around her should have done better- her parents were greatly at fault in that case, as were Musa’s, and she was a victim, not only of their stupidity but also of disgusting attitudes in the press from what I remember- journalists laughing at her for being a ‘podgy’ ‘Essex girl’ ‘gymslip mum’ All very unedifying

Free speech is tricky.

I support prison for "burn them alive in their hotels" - but equally I think what is typed in the heat of the moment, and then deleted, by a mother, is probably worthy of a month or two, not years.

As far as I am aware it is not a crime to advocate for paedophile rights. I am with you, however, that if supporting hamas is illegal (because hamas are evil) then supporting paedophiles should likewise be a crime. But the police need to police the law as is, not what it should be.

I think most people understand that "free speech" means "broad freedom of speech, subject to some limited restraints". I don't think we need to complicate things - if someone says they support freedom of speech then we can reasonably assume that they don't mean it 100% literally, but do support the right to say all sorts offensive and bad things.

"it's not like they asked him to go to Birmingham. It was move across the street." Well they did ask someone who was supporting palestine (whilst making a point against a group it is illegal to support in the UK) to move to stand with the people on the opposite side of the protest.

I’m going by his own declarations of ‘abhorrent’ and ‘impossible to defend’ as stated earlier. Seems fair enough.

If the misogynist pratt that is PT can be arrested for the non-crime hate-incidents, maybe he and the great unwashed mass of his supporters might start to realise what we have been telling them: stop writing crap on signs, or face the consequences.

I have zero sympathy for him, his supporters and people who think like them.

And more whataboutery 😀

There is inconsistency in reporting. The reason he claims he was arrested is different as to why the Met claim he was arrested.

Why is fact she is a mother relevant?

He was held at the local police station not sent to jail