Post a response:
|
...is possible to write a piece of reportage on a given story that does not contain a single factually untrue statement... ... as it is also true to make a BoyChat post that does not contain a single factually untrue statement, yet is highly misleading. See the linked article for details about what actually occurred... A worrying quote in the linked article from Suella Braverman, the British government’s secretary of state for the Home Department; “[H]olding lawful opinions, even if those opinions may offend others, is not a criminal offense.” Which suggests that some opinions may also be unlawful. I guess like some opinions expressed here at BoyChat about having sex with young people? I suspect that such kinds of "thought crime" originated in the U.S. where two individuals may perform the identical act of touching a young person, but only one of them is liable to arrest and conviction, and then only because of the thoughts he held while he did the touching. Police interrogator to man under investigation,"Would you agree that the boy was handsome?"Guilty because he thought the boy was cute... Let me know if you read this post, OK, so I won't waste my time responding in the future if you aren't reading my responses. Thanks. M. It was 1984 39 years ago, but the eponymous book was published in 1949 by Orwell, which is almost three-quarters of a century ago. The "Thinkpol" are indeed alive and well today! https://catholicreview.org/english-police-apologize-to-woman-arrested-for-silently-praying-outside-abortion-facility/ [@nonymouse] [Guardster] [Proxify] [Anonymisierungsdienst] |