UK Think Tank Calls For Opponents Of Terrorism To Be Silenced. No, Really.
(Tea Party 247) – A UK report has recently made the assertion that the British government is not nearly as harsh on ring-wing extremists as it is on Islamic terrorists and that just isn’t fair. The article goes as far as to say that the failure to punish and ban far-right extremist groups is “undermining the fight against online propaganda.” What a load of malarkey.
According to the article by the Independent, National Action and its spin-offs Scottish Dawn and NS131 are the only neo-Nazi organizations designated as terrorist groups in the UK. As such, sharing their material is considered a terror offence punishable by up to 15 years’ imprisonment. The article complains that propaganda from other “hate groups” is met with much less punishment.
The Independent goes on to say:
A report by the Henry Jackson Society (HJS) warned that posts by non-proscribed groups may not be properly monitored or taken down by social media companies.
Nikita Malik, director of the think tank’s Centre on Radicalisation and Terrorism, said some companies rely on government lists of banned organisations when deciding what to remove.
“The lack of far-right groups subject to proscription in the UK, when compared to Islamist groups, has left the authorities reliant on hate crime legislation rather than specific terrorist offences which carry heftier sentences,” she added.
“The government will need to keep this situation under review in a fast-moving online world, where offending causes real and significant harm.”
The report found that Islamists convicted of online offences received prison sentences three times longer, at 73.4 months on average, than their far-right counterparts, at 24.5 months, because of the current legal regime.
The sharing of hateful content online can be punished by a variety of offences, including malicious communications, hate crimes and causing “gross offence”.
But punishments are less severe than those for crimes under the Terrorism Acts, such as expressions of support for a proscribed organisation, viewing material useful to terrorists, encouraging terrorism and disseminating terrorist publications.
Who exactly gets to determine what is “far-right hate speech?” Does being pro-life count as “hate?” What about believing that marriage is to be between one and one woman? It seems as though this liberal outlet is calling for the government to tighten up on freedom of thought and expression with conservatives being the targets.
The article asserts that social media companies have become really good at spotting jihadi symbols and language, but “have progressed more slowly with the diverse range of indicators used by the far-right.” Of course, the article doesn’t bother to actually point out what these “diverse” symbols and languages are.
We aren’t saying there aren’t actual right-wing extremists, which the left calls Nazis, but they are most certainly not a bigger threat than that of Islamic Jihad and terrorism, period. Oddly enough, the counter-terror police have named the far right as Britain’s fastest-growing terror threat.
The Independent reports:
Ms Malik said right-wing extremists frequently used “free speech” arguments to defend themselves against potential takedowns, while Islamists can claim their freedom of religion is being impinged.
She told The Independent that right-wing extremists had become adept at using “coded language” and dogwhistles that are difficult to combat using automated flagging or removal programmes.
Or maybe there just aren’t that many groups that actually fall under the category of “terrorists” or “hate groups.” This just sounds like yet another attempt by the left to silence conservatives while minimizing and defending Islamic extremists and terrorists.