and after his mothers abusive rant the little boy on her lap apologized by blinking morse code to all his fellow passengers "sorry for my mum,she is a twat at home as well".

Disgusting cunt of a woman, you're as much a part of the problem as any illegal or immoral immigrant that you so quickly assume these people to be.

Amuses me no end how the poms spent hundreds of years invading and colonising the world then idiots like this complain when someone comes to their country.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-15923875

Arrest over video of 'racist rant' on Croydon to Wimbledon tram.

Looks like the BTP are looking for the woman now as a result of this.

How ironic, a British person complaining about people "invading" their country.

>> ^zombieater:

How ironic, a British person complaining about people "invading" their country.


Think people need to start being specific. It was England that took over the world, not Britain. There's plenty of Welsh, Scottish and Northern Irish people who wouldn't want to be tarred with that brush you're using

She looks very much like someone coming off drugs, or maybe coming down from them. Poor kid clearly hears that mouth often, he's entirely unfazed by it

Don't worry, Britain and England are synonymous for most people and judging by how politics is going in Scotland, they want to strengthen that definition as well

>> ^alien_concept:

>> ^zombieater:
How ironic, a British person complaining about people "invading" their country.

Think people need to start being specific. It was England that took over the world, not Britain. There's plenty of Welsh, Scottish and Northern Irish people who wouldn't want to be tarred with that brush you're using
She looks very much like someone coming off drugs, or maybe coming down from them. Poor kid clearly hears that mouth often, he's entirely unfazed by it

I can't validate it, but I get the feeling there's something wrong here beyond ordinary racism and bigotry. She seems like she might have psychological issues or a drug problem or something.

To spell it out, it's one thing to have an irrational hatred of black people and yet another thing to yell loudly about your hatred of black people while surrounded by a dozen black people.

Or maybe they're shooting a new Kentucky Fried Movie.

Two things about his video make me happy.

None of the people on the train smack her (must have been a huge temptation).
And, the posting of this video on the internet means she will forever be the poster child for ignorant racism in England.

See that camera on you?--Yes, please continue spewing your hatred.

This story reminds me of this vintage video: http://videosift.com/video/Schwarzfahrer-Oscar-winning-german-shortfilm.

(Glad to see that it's already been sifted )

*nsfw

This video has been flagged as being Not Suitable For Work - declared nsfw by bareboards2.

>> ^alien_concept:

>> ^zombieater:
How ironic, a British person complaining about people "invading" their country.

Think people need to start being specific. It was England that took over the world, not Britain. There's plenty of Welsh, Scottish and Northern Irish people who wouldn't want to be tarred with that brush you're using
She looks very much like someone coming off drugs, or maybe coming down from them. Poor kid clearly hears that mouth often, he's entirely unfazed by it


My name is Inigo Montoya. The Welsh killed my father. Prepare to die.

While her tirade makes me sick, the fact that she was arrested for this makes me even more sick.

Freedom of speech means nothing if you don't have the freedom to offend people. The aim should be to draw the line where it causes harm - whether by inciting violence or by denying someone a job, etc.

The real illness in that Orwellian police state is found in the mental weaklings (proles) who called the cops over hateful, offensive speech. If the roles had been reversed and it was a Black person spouting racist rubbish, there would be no arrest or "bobbies" looking for her. It won't be much longer.


>> ^Skeeve:

While her tirade makes me sick, the fact that she was arrested for this makes me even more sick.
Freedom of speech means nothing if you don't have the freedom to offend people. The aim should be to draw the line where it causes harm - whether by inciting violence or by denying someone a job, etc.

An absolutely disgusting display, but I can only upvote and agree with this.
>> ^Skeeve:

While her tirade makes me sick, the fact that she was arrested for this makes me even more sick.
Freedom of speech means nothing if you don't have the freedom to offend people. The aim should be to draw the line where it causes harm - whether by inciting violence or by denying someone a job, etc.

>> ^Skeeve:

While her tirade makes me sick, the fact that she was arrested for this makes me even more sick.
Freedom of speech means nothing if you don't have the freedom to offend people. The aim should be to draw the line where it causes harm - whether by inciting violence or by denying someone a job, etc.


This line of thinking always puzzles me. Freedom of speech always has (and always should have) limitations. It doesn't supersede other rights--it exists in relation to them and is not any more "special," which is why (for example) there are laws against libel and slander, laws against yelling "fire" in a crowded theater in order to start a panic, etc.

The lady in this video is clearly going beyond just voicing her opinion and harassing the other passengers. At one point she seems ready to get physical (at about the 1:00 part she's screaming that she dares someone to try to remove her from the train). She's entitled to her opinion about immigrants and she's also entitled to express her opinion, but she's not entitled to repeatedly verbally attack or threaten the people around her, who have no chance to avoid or get away from her since they're all trapped on the tram together. In other words, her right to free speech does not supersede the other passengers' rights to travel on the tram in peace.

I'm glad she was arrested and, as mentioned above by @Boise_Lib, that no violence was involved. She should be prosecuted not for expressing an offensive opinion but for repeatedly and intentionally harassing the other passengers. This is not the kind of behavior that should be rewarded with a "Oh, it's her right to free speech" pass.

Almost getting violent is not illegal.

Your link and your examples support my point completely. There are limits to free speech: when they cause harm to others. Libel, slander, yelling "fire" in a crowded theatre, or my examples of inciting violence or causing discrimination, all cause harm.

Being an asshole on the subway does not cause harm.

She never threatened anyone (so there goes any "uttering threats" charge) and harassment is almost by definition a repetitive act (which means this likely can't be called that either, legally).

With regards to freedom of speech not superseding other rights, here is a link to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Please point out which one her freedom of speech was superseding. There is no "everyone has the right to never be offended and to be sheltered from the opinions of others."
>> ^SDGundamX:

>> ^Skeeve:
While her tirade makes me sick, the fact that she was arrested for this makes me even more sick.
Freedom of speech means nothing if you don't have the freedom to offend people. The aim should be to draw the line where it causes harm - whether by inciting violence or by denying someone a job, etc.

This line of thinking always puzzles me. Freedom of speech always has (and always should have) limitations. It doesn't supersede other rights--it exists in relation to them and is not any more "special," which is why (for example) there are laws against libel and slander, laws against yelling "fire" in a crowded theater in order to start a panic, etc.
The lady in this video is clearly going beyond just voicing her opinion and harassing the other passengers. At one point she seems ready to get physical (at about the 1:00 part she's screaming that she dares someone to try to remove her from the train). She's entitled to her opinion about immigrants and she's also entitled to express her opinion, but she's not entitled to repeatedly verbally attack or threaten the people around her, who have no chance to avoid or get away from her since they're all trapped on the tram together. In other words, her right to free speech does not supersede the other passengers' rights to travel on the tram in peace.
I'm glad she was arrested and, as mentioned above by @Boise_Lib, that no violence was involved. She should be prosecuted not for expressing an offensive opinion but for repeatedly and intentionally harassing the other passengers. This is not the kind of behavior that should be rewarded with a "Oh, it's her right to free speech" pass.

a part of me is relieved to know that this kind of behavior isn't restricted to the u.s. of a.

@Skeeve

I love debating on the Internet and clearly you're spoiling for a fight, but I'm gonna take a pass on this one. I think we agree more than we disagree (i.e. that no one should ever be arrested for the content of their message unless it causes or is about to cause harm).

If I understand what you're saying, you'd like freedom of speech to protect not just content but manner, time, and place of speech and I suppose that's where I'd disagree. The laws in the U.S. and the U.K. that regulate the time, manner, and places where free speech are allowed seem to indicate that neither congress/parliament nor the courts agree the freedom extends that far. And I'm grateful for that. You're not. Fair enough.

Happy Sifting.

EDIT: See http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/freedom-speech/#OffPriFreSpe for a good breakdown of the benefits and dangers of making offensive speech illegal, and an analysis of the times when it might be in the public's interest to make it illegal.

>> ^alien_concept:

>> ^zombieater:
How ironic, a British person complaining about people "invading" their country.

Think people need to start being specific. It was England that took over the world, not Britain. There's plenty of Welsh, Scottish and Northern Irish people who wouldn't want to be tarred with that brush you're using
She looks very much like someone coming off drugs, or maybe coming down from them. Poor kid clearly hears that mouth often, he's entirely unfazed by it


Good point. England, then!

Liberalism is western democracy/civilization moron.

Liberalism (from the Latin liberalis)[1] is the belief in the importance of liberty and equal rights.[2] Liberals espouse a wide array of views depending on their understanding of these principles, but generally, liberals support ideas such as constitutionalism, liberal democracy, free and fair elections, human rights, capitalism, and freedom of religion.[3][4][5][6][7] These ideas are widely accepted, even by political groups that do not openly profess a liberal ideological orientation. Liberalism encompasses several intellectual trends and traditions, but the dominant variants are classical liberalism, which became popular in the eighteenth century, and social liberalism, which became popular in the twentieth century.

Liberalism first became a powerful force in the Age of Enlightenment, rejecting several foundational assumptions that dominated most earlier theories of government, such as nobility, established religion, absolute monarchy, and the Divine Right of Kings. The early liberal thinker John Locke, who is often credited for the creation of liberalism as a distinct philosophical tradition, employed the concept of natural rights and the social contract to argue that the rule of law should replace absolutism in government, that rulers were subject to the consent of the governed, and that private individuals had a fundamental right to life, liberty, and property.

The revolutionaries in the American Revolution and the French Revolution used liberal philosophy to justify the armed overthrow of tyrannical rule. The nineteenth century saw liberal governments established in nations across Europe, Latin America, and North America. Liberal ideas spread even further in the twentieth century, when liberal democracies triumphed in two world wars and survived major ideological challenges from fascism and communism.

Today, liberalism in its many forms remains as a political force to varying degrees of power and influence on all major continents.>> ^quantumushroom:

The real illness in that Orwellian police state is found in the mental weaklings (proles) who called the cops over hateful, offensive speech. If the roles had been reversed and it was a Black person spouting racist rubbish, there would be no arrest or "bobbies" looking for her. It won't be much longer.

>> ^Skeeve:
While her tirade makes me sick, the fact that she was arrested for this makes me even more sick.
Freedom of speech means nothing if you don't have the freedom to offend people. The aim should be to draw the line where it causes harm - whether by inciting violence or by denying someone a job, etc.

Methinks she'll get doc'd soon.

Please do not confuse classical liberalism (now known as libertarianism) with the marxist and communist twaddle known as "modern liberalism", a preventable mental disorder that will be the ruin of Western Civ.

Political correctness is your training program to be a good slave.

YOUR training, not mine, Numbnuts.




>> ^Fade:

Liberalism is western democracy/civilization moron.
Liberalism (from the Latin liberalis)[1] is the belief in the importance of liberty and equal rights.[2] Liberals espouse a wide array of views depending on their understanding of these principles, but generally, liberals support ideas such as constitutionalism, liberal democracy, free and fair elections, human rights, capitalism, and freedom of religion.[3][4][5][6][7] These ideas are widely accepted, even by political groups that do not openly profess a liberal ideological orientation. Liberalism encompasses several intellectual trends and traditions, but the dominant variants are classical liberalism, which became popular in the eighteenth century, and social liberalism, which became popular in the twentieth century.
Liberalism first became a powerful force in the Age of Enlightenment, rejecting several foundational assumptions that dominated most earlier theories of government, such as nobility, established religion, absolute monarchy, and the Divine Right of Kings. The early liberal thinker John Locke, who is often credited for the creation of liberalism as a distinct philosophical tradition, employed the concept of natural rights and the social contract to argue that the rule of law should replace absolutism in government, that rulers were subject to the consent of the governed, and that private individuals had a fundamental right to life, liberty, and property.
The revolutionaries in the American Revolution and the French Revolution used liberal philosophy to justify the armed overthrow of tyrannical rule. The nineteenth century saw liberal governments established in nations across Europe, Latin America, and North America. Liberal ideas spread even further in the twentieth century, when liberal democracies triumphed in two world wars and survived major ideological challenges from fascism and communism.
Today, liberalism in its many forms remains as a political force to varying degrees of power and influence on all major continents.>> ^quantumushroom:
The real illness in that Orwellian police state is found in the mental weaklings (proles) who called the cops over hateful, offensive speech. If the roles had been reversed and it was a Black person spouting racist rubbish, there would be no arrest or "bobbies" looking for her. It won't be much longer.

>> ^Skeeve:
While her tirade makes me sick, the fact that she was arrested for this makes me even more sick.
Freedom of speech means nothing if you don't have the freedom to offend people. The aim should be to draw the line where it causes harm - whether by inciting violence or by denying someone a job, etc.

Be sure to click here for the sequel!