Let me set out a scenario to you. You are miles away from London where there has been yet another Islamic terror attack that has caused the deaths of innocents. Your then girlfriend is in London and is suspected by you to be in the vicinity of where the followers of Islam have carried out their latest attack. In addition to this you are having difficulty contacting your girlfriend because of post attack mobile phone difficulties such as extra load on the system that occurs after an terror attack as people try to get in touch with loved ones. Would you not get more and more frantic worrying about the safety of your girlfriend? I know I would.
Louis Duxbury was the man in this position and he was frantic with worry about the safety of his partner. Because he was frantic with concern for his partner he went out on social media and told the world just exactly what he thought should happen to the Islamic extremists and terrorists that had brought carnage yet again to the capital city. He allegedly told the world via a 17 minute emotional rant about Islamic terror, that the terrorists and extremists should be ‘wiped out’. This is a view that is shared by many Britons and Ihttp://thylacosmilus.blogspot.com/’ve noticed that this sentiment is increasing in its volume and occurance since the London Bridge II attack, by an Islamic jihadi savage who was in my view wrongly released from custody. Does anybody, outside of the metro-Left bubble in London, really believe that it would be wrong to ‘wipe out’ those terrorists and extremists who want to kill us and our children and other loved ones in the name of their beastly deity ‘Allah’. We can see by the very voluble support for the police officer who killed Usman Khan on London Bridge that killing murderous terrorists is popular.
However for Louis Duxbury telling the world that Islamic terrorists should be wiped out has earned him an eighteen month gaol sentence for ‘inciting religious violence’. This man who ranted primarily because he was worried about his girlfriend being in a terror attack zone has been monstrously and unjustly punished by a judicial system that has become overtly and scandalously politicised.
I have corresponded briefly with Mr Duxbury before his imprisonment about the case and have featured it here and here. I have held off until now to do an update as I wanted to read and absorb the judge’s comments on sentencing and what they show is the utter contempt the Establishment show for the rest of us and how Islamopandering is now the cancerous norm in our judicial system.
In my brief correspondence with Mr Duxbury he informed me that he in now way believed that all Muslims should be wiped out, only those who are terrorists or proto-jihadi extremists. This would not look to me or anybody else on the Clapham Omnibus like a credible or immediate threat to the lives of ordinary decent Muslim Britons.
Mr Duxbury stuck with his explanation through both trials that he was subjected to over this matter. The first attempt by the Crown Prosecution Service to convict Mr Duxbury failed when the jury could not agree on a verdict. A second trial was held later, at vast public expense, at which the prosecution managed to convict Mr Duxbury of ‘inciting religious hatred’. I should add that this case, like so many other of these dubious ‘hate speech’ cases, took two years to progress through the courts.
Here’s a, very one sided, report in the York Press about this case. As is normal policy for this blog the original text is in italics whereas my comments are in plain text.
The York Press said:
A “SAD loner” who posted a 17-minute anti-Islam rant on Facebook has been jailed.
And the online message, in which York man Louis Ryan Duxbury, 22, issued a “call to arms” against Muslims, has also cost him his home and his career plans.
York Crown Court heard a fellow sports science student at York St John University reported the post to the university authorities who called in police.
Note well here the presence of the sort of ‘grassing culture’ in Britain, the sort of culture that Britons used to be horrified by when this grassing culture existed in places like the German Democratic Republic.
Duxbury was handed an 18-month prison sentence for inciting religious hatred.
I despise all ‘hate speech’ laws not just because they stifle free speech and are often applied arbitrarily but also because there is I believe nothing morally wrong with hating ideologies that propel individuals to take the lives of others in the name of that ideology. If for example there is nothing wrong with hating Fascism or Communism because of the horrific death toll that these ideologies and those that supported them caused, why then is it wrong to hate a violent and fascistic ideology that cloaks itself with religiosity? There are good and sound reasons to dislike Islam even whilst at the same time respecting the rights of Muslims as individuals.
The university has also expelled him and he has handed over the keys of his rented home, the court heard.
Mr Duxbury has lost everything. He’s lost his freedom, his future and his home because the State wishes to bully people into seeing that which are not real and which do not exist, such as the idea that Islam is a religion of peace. The judge’s comments in this case are a mixture of counterfactual nonsense and a political statement as you will see.
Jailing him, the Recorder of York, Judge Sean Morris, warned him his video could contribute to a future attack on Muslims.
I doubt that very much. If the ‘rant’ is as I’ve had described it to me as being then it is more than likely a call for something to be done about the massive number of deaths caused by Islamic extremists and terrorists. Neither I nor any other reasonable person would describe a call for terrorists to be wiped out to equate with a call to wipe out nice Mr Mohammed the secular Muslim who runs the newsagents.
“It has been a multi-racial and multi-faith island for thousands of years and will continue to be so,” he said.
I’m, as many people know, a civic nationalist. I don’t care where you’ve come from or what your skin colour is just as long as you fit in and be loyal that’s fine. However I also know my history and Judge Morris is talking utter bullshit about Britain being a ‘multi racial and multi-faith’ country for thousands of years. May I suggest to Judge Morris that he hitches a ride with Dr Who in the Tardis and sees what it was like being a Jew in Hereford in 1290 at the time of the Great Expulsion or Black in London in the seventeenth or eighteenth centuries. It is only in recent centuries that Britain has become multiracial and as for religion, that also has only recently been a matter of personal choice. British religious tolerance is the anomaly in British history. The Romans drove out of morphed the pre-Roman religion into something else, Romano-British Paganism was driven out by the Christians and then there was the Reformation and the Counter-Reformation that split Christianity in Britain. It was only in the late 19th century that the last of the legal disabilities that were put on Jews and Catholics were removed. No, Britain has never been a ‘multi-faith’ country until recent centuries nor has it been in a significant way multi racial up until a similar time period. This judge is either incredibly ignorant of history, or he is so heavily guided by the untruths of ideology that he actually believes this string of highly political words.
“We have to live together in harmony because otherwise mayhem follows. I think you are a bit of a sad loner, but you have to go to prison.”
Well Judge Morris, who started the mayhem? Was it the non-Muslims of Britain who caused Britain to be, in your view, on the abyss of mayhem, or was it the extremist Muslims who have slashed, bombed, shot and raped their way to being disliked who have caused this to be the case? From what I’ve observed over the years, the vast majority of Britons have been extremely tolerant of both Islam the religion and Muslims the people. What has soured that relationship has been the hate filled ideology of Islam itself and the actions of some Muslims who have taken that ideology to kinetic conclusions.
Why I ask does this man ‘have ‘ to go to prison. Why does this man get gaol time whilst those Islamic preachers who say ‘kill the Jews wherever you find them’ or who make disparaging claims about and threats towards those whom Islam considers as ‘kuffar’ walk freely among us? There is a clear double standard being played in this appalling and unjust case.
The rest of York Press article consists mainly of acts of outragous virtue signalling from the Establishment such as the University and North Yorkshire Police. They both trotted out the usual boilerplate statements about embracing diversity and tackling ‘hate crime’ and congratulated themselves on what they saw as a ‘job well done’. I’m not sure what disgusts me more about those involved in this case, the historically ignorant and politicised judge or the Establishment entities celebrating someone being gaoled for an opinion.
The prosecution authorities should not be left off the hook here. They spent a significant amount o public money and two jury trials to prosecute what is a nothingburger of a ‘crime’. But, it’s poltically important to the Crown Prosecution Service and to the various interest groups that are influencing CPS policy, to get results like this. At a rough estimate of £2000 per day in court costs not to mention the £69 per hour fee for prosecution lawyers with 10 hours being spent on case preparation then these two trials that the state avidly used to convict Mr Duxbury cost roughly £12.5k. That money could and should have been spent on prosecuting real criminals not those who merely make injudicious comments about Islamic terrorists whilst they are in a state of distress.
This is a truly appalling case where the state has nakedly gone out to punish those who have non-approved opinions about an ideology that despite being dangerous, the state refuses to properly tackle. It is yet another case which shows how easily abused ‘hate speech’ and ‘hate crime’ laws can be. They are also far too capricious as they mete out punishment to members of one group but not to members of other groups and that in my view goes well against the idea that justice should be equitable and that we should all be equal before the law. Louis Duxbury joins the many thousands of other Britons who have been persecuted by the state, not for what they’ve done, not for their actions, but for their mere words. We who believe that speech, even nasty, appalling and offensive speech should be free need to put what political and moral pressure we can on the next Parliament to remove and repeal laws that eat into the freedom of the British subject.
I understand that Mr Duxbury is going to appeal against either the conviction or the sentence and that a crowdfunding portal will be set up so that people can donate to Mr Duxbury’s legal costs. As soon as I get details of this crowdfunding page I will publicise it and donate to it and I would advise others to do so as well.
