Shadow Welsh secretary Jo Stevens had her Cardiff constituency office vandalised after abstaining on the Gaza vote, and told BBC Wales the experience was “intimidating” and “threatening”.
Protesting at Starmer’s constituency office could be seen as intimidation but I feel falls this side of the line as people have a right to protest.
There’s expressing your views and then there’s this.
Bradford West MP Naz Shah - who quit the Labour frontbench to support a ceasefire - said she has received “Islamophobic hatred”,
Which is clearly unacceptable. The problem is that people are cunts and it looks like whichever way you vote you’re going to get some bastards having a go at you.
Rather than harrass and intimidate MPs people need to vote with their feet and deselect MPs out of office if they don’t agree with them. That’s the whole point of democracy.
And if she was critisizing violence I’d be with her.
But all bringing up arguments like this dose. Is provide shelter for a woman actively trying to critisize freedom of speech.
Supporting the right to protest. In no way supports violence. And allowing a few idiots to prevent support for freedom of speech is in no way worth the cost.
“Islamophobic hatred” is a very vague statement. The wording would be very pertinent to the strength of the argument.
Eh? You what? Are you trying to say she didn’t receive islamophobic hatred? Based on what?
What you can do is write to your local MP and ask them to question Naz Shah on the islamophobic hatred she says she was subjected to so that your disbelief can be confirmed.
Are you trying to say she didn’t receive islamophobic hatred? Based on what?
No I am saying the statement is very broad. Islamophobic covers from “I don’t like my MP being a Muslim” to “I am going to murder all your family based on your religion”. Both are illegal and wrong. Except the first will get you a slap on the wrist, and the second could easily lead to a prison sentence. Context matters.
I’ve just notice you’re very quick to dismiss claims of islamophobic abuse as “broad” and “it needs to be qualified before we take it seriously” in a lot of your posts and comments.
If “Both are illegal and wrong” (your words) why are you trying to defend it? Even if they’re both just “wrong” one would expect you to denounce the action as messed up or horrid. But you’re acknowledging they’re “illegal” too yet you’re perfectly comfortable dismissing it. “Even though it’s illegal and wrong we can’t believe her”.
Maybe it’s just the way you put things down in words, but it sounds like in all of your posts on this and similar subjects that you very much don’t want to give people of Asian background the time of day. I thought it was only Rishi and posts about his wife and the fact that you don’t like the Tories (and who does) but Naz Shah is a Labour MP. I thought you’d defend a Labour MP from abuse not seek to apologise for it.
She finds it very concerning.
That protesters are asking their representatives to represent their views.
WTF is wrong with these people that public expression of views. Is suddenly seen as unacceptable pressure.
Have they forgotten that representing people is their freaking job.
This has crossed a line:
Protesting at Starmer’s constituency office could be seen as intimidation but I feel falls this side of the line as people have a right to protest.
Precisely this.
There’s expressing your views and then there’s this.
Which is clearly unacceptable. The problem is that people are cunts and it looks like whichever way you vote you’re going to get some bastards having a go at you.
Rather than harrass and intimidate MPs people need to vote with their feet and deselect MPs out of office if they don’t agree with them. That’s the whole point of democracy.
And if she was critisizing violence I’d be with her.
But all bringing up arguments like this dose. Is provide shelter for a woman actively trying to critisize freedom of speech.
Supporting the right to protest. In no way supports violence. And allowing a few idiots to prevent support for freedom of speech is in no way worth the cost.
Sorry, have you read either the article or my reply?
The right to protest does not mean you can be islamophobic.
“Islamophobic hatred” is a very vague statement. The wording would be very pertinent to the strength of the argument.
Eh? You what? Are you trying to say she didn’t receive islamophobic hatred? Based on what?
What you can do is write to your local MP and ask them to question Naz Shah on the islamophobic hatred she says she was subjected to so that your disbelief can be confirmed.
Be sure to post the reply your MP sends you.
No I am saying the statement is very broad. Islamophobic covers from “I don’t like my MP being a Muslim” to “I am going to murder all your family based on your religion”. Both are illegal and wrong. Except the first will get you a slap on the wrist, and the second could easily lead to a prison sentence. Context matters.
I’ve just notice you’re very quick to dismiss claims of islamophobic abuse as “broad” and “it needs to be qualified before we take it seriously” in a lot of your posts and comments.
If “Both are illegal and wrong” (your words) why are you trying to defend it? Even if they’re both just “wrong” one would expect you to denounce the action as messed up or horrid. But you’re acknowledging they’re “illegal” too yet you’re perfectly comfortable dismissing it. “Even though it’s illegal and wrong we can’t believe her”.
Maybe it’s just the way you put things down in words, but it sounds like in all of your posts on this and similar subjects that you very much don’t want to give people of Asian background the time of day. I thought it was only Rishi and posts about his wife and the fact that you don’t like the Tories (and who does) but Naz Shah is a Labour MP. I thought you’d defend a Labour MP from abuse not seek to apologise for it.