Harry’s Place

What a boring man. I mean, it’s nice when an artist tries to engage with his audience at a gig, but having a 6 minute mostly incomprehensible rant is just YAWN!

Would a performer who “merely” criticized an ethnic group as say, inferior or subhuman, without inciting violence, be permitted a visa? This is beyond the pale, no?

I’m with you Brett. I had no idea he was like this. I thought he just made a song and used the term ‘batty boy’ or something relatively small (but still offensive) like that. Yeah, he should be banned. Are gay activists putting a petition to the Home Secretary or anything like that? I’ll sign it. And contact my MP too if that’ll help.

Talentless knuckle dragger. Odds are he’ll be involved in sex with a minor charge before the decade is out.

It’s a complete no brainer, this is pure incitement, nothing to do with free speech. I’m not a legal fundie, but I wager this sort of direct incitement is covered under existing legislation.

Rather not to let this nasty, hate-monger in than waste tax payer’s money on prosecution.

What a disgusting piece of shit.

And to judge from the crowd, I must say that the Black community just never ceases to disappoint.

You could ban him, I suppose, but that won’t change the fact he’s a large fan base that holds these types of views.

I think he should be banned.

The truth is, people do take their lead from pop stars. This man is, in fact, an ethical model. People do assault and intimidate gay people, while reciting these sorts of lyrics.

Bounty Killer has no right to come into this country. It is a privilege that he is allowed to do so,

He is not being censored by being banned from coming into this country. In any case, it would be impossible - and therefore foolish - to try to ban this sort of incitement

However, that does not mean that he should escape any consequences of his actions. To exclude him from Britain would make it very clear that this country, collectively, abhors people who incite hatred towards sexual minorities. Just as it abhors incitement to racism.

I hope that it would also diminish the risk which this man’s conduct presents to ordinary men and women, whose interests in living a pleasant life, unmolested by bigots, trump his right to put on a show.

Afta’ listen wit me own ear me say ban ‘im for rapin’ da queen enlash like dat.

Would a performer who “merely” criticized an ethnic group as say, inferior or subhuman, without inciting violence, be permitted a visa?

I don’t personally see that as contentious. Saying ‘White men can’t dance,’ or ‘Black men cant swim,’ or some such, whether there is any truth in these generalations - and I happen personally to think that there is - is not of itself discrimination and is not incitement.

Banning such speech to my mind crosses the line from sensible curbs of incitement and keeping the peace into legislating excessive PC and draconian restrictions on free speech.

And yes, I do think the French are perfidious!

“And to judge from the crowd, I must say that the Black community just never ceases to disappoint.”

That’s not “the black community” John. That’s manic dancehall fans. The overwhelming number of victims of this murder music are black Jamaicans.

Admittedly, support from the black press and certain self-styled black community leaders has been somewhat dissappointing. That is to say, mostly they have defended the dancehall singers, actually. But some figures, like singer Beverly Knight, to name just one, have been very outspoken in their condemnation of homophobia.

Sending email to my MP…

You could ban him, I suppose, but that won’t change the fact he’s a large fan base that holds these types of views.

Yeah, and there’s another fan base that holds those type of views - the Roman Catholic Church and its congregration. Why the hypocrisy, John?

Out of interest what’s the official line on white power bands? Are their UK gigs banned?

I think the question is: should people be let into the country, not should their gigs be banned.

It would be hugely difficult to ban a concert, and rightly so.

It is an uncomfortable fact is that blacks - in America, the UK, South Africa and elsewhere, are massively over represented amongst violent crime victims, but they’re also massively over represented as perpetrator of violent crime and in the respective prison populations.

Why that is is a whole other debate ……as an aside I posit that the black cultural zeitgeist in small part represented by this unpleasant ‘Bounty Killer’ character, is part of that cause.

Me pointing this sort of stuff out should not be banned; it’s part of the backdrop required in a democracy to allow open debate, essential for the formulation of sensibly, policy positions based upon the real World, not wishful thinking.

It would be hugely difficult to ban a concert, and rightly so.

Yes, just so. But if there is - as part of the performance - such incitement as we see above, then the weight of the law should be bought to bare. All too often seemingly it isn’t.

“And to judge from the crowd, I must say that the Black community just never ceases to disappoint.”

That is an unbelievable thing to say, John P. Racist, full stop.

Of course Bounty Killer should be banned: incitement to murder or assault, never mind hate, is criminal under British law, full stop.

“Saying ‘White men can’t dance,’ or ‘Black men cant swim,’ …is not of itself discrimination and is not incitement.”

I was thinking more along the lines of Black men are intellectually inferior. Jews are subhuman, etc. The white race is superior. (Without explicit “incitement”.) Would such a foreign performer get a visa? Or is it just bashing gays that is permitted?

That’s not “the black community” John. That’s manic dancehall fans. The overwhelming number of victims of this murder music are black Jamaicans.

My deepest apologies for the moral oversight!

Afterall, Bounty killer’s fan base would be overwhelmingly white, now wouldn’t it?

As was the support for a certain proposition in California.

The ‘twin’ causes of racism and homophobia no longer dove-tail.

Sorry.

I think there is a distinction between giving a person a platform and freedom of speech. Forbidding him from coming into the country is obviously the former rather than the latter (his songs can undoubtedly be downloaded from the web).
As for the distinction between UK white power bands (who can perform in the UK) and non-UK bands (who can be banned), I’m really haven’t got a hard-and- fast ethical distinction. My gut feeling is that we shouldn’t aim to increase the amount of crap in the country but I
can’t think of a good reason for forbidding foreigners but not UK residents from performing.
Maybe we should ban all such bands from public performances?

I don’t think David T’s distinction: “I think the question is: should people be let into the country, not should their gigs be banned.”
really works- the end result- and the aim- is the same.

Yeah, and there’s another fan base that holds those type of views - the Roman Catholic Church and its congregration. Why the hypocrisy, John?

Jesus Christ, Morgoth, just what kind of catholicism have you been imbibing?

I’ve yet to recite a prayer beginning with the words “kill batty-boy”.

No, those types of violent sentiments have traditionally been chanelled into, and concentrated on, Catholic anti-semitism.

I was thinking more along the lines of Black men are intellectually inferior. Jews are subhuman, etc. The white race is superior.

That’s not of itself incitement, it’s a view - regardless of biological accuracy - on genetics and race. I would have thought it would pass master as legal, I certainly think it should be allowed, in the same way as one should be allowed to say ‘Chinese people have blond curly hair’, and ‘Germans have no sense of humour’ or ‘the Hockey stick curve on which Kyoto Protocol was predicated is complete tosh’.

We shouldn’t be legislating for Politically Correct thought, that is pure authoritarianism and very dangerous thought crimes, we should focus only on incitement and discrimination….simple really.

I even think legislating against ‘hate speech’ is too far, before you know it thought crimes become hate speech… it’s too difficult to draw the line.

Incitement and discrimination is easy to to differentiate, and to my mind, that’s where the line should be drawn.

John P - like it or not, your assumptions about “the black community” are racist. Not every black person likes reggae, or is Jamaican, or indeed supports the proscribing of certain basic human rights for gay people. The tendency of right-wing yahoos and faux-radical lefties alike to treat black people as an amorphous mass, both culturally and politically, continues to depress the hell out of me.

What I still struggle to understand about some of the arguments against such hateful behaviour as this is the need some people have to point to a particular section of society and say, “It’s their fault! What a disappointment they are!” I mean, what next? “If we’d known they’d be this much trouble, we’d have picked our own cotton”? FFS, isn’t this bad enough in and of itself? Because that incident at the top clearly crosses the line between “legitimate artistic expression” and “incitement to murder”, and the “how would they like it if…” argument shouldn’t even enter into it. What I’d like to see is someone like Bounty Killer running for office in Jamaica, on a single-issue “Bun Di Chi-Chi Man” ticket. If he were to be elected, which is by no means beyond the realms of possibility, then surely this would force the wider human rights issue out into the open. Either way, he’d have to defend his opinion with something a little more legally-sound than the “freedom of expression” defence.

Clear-cut case of incitement to violence here, so it goes beyond any possible defense because of freedom of speech.

Just ignore Morgoth, please.

P.

John P - like it or not, your assumptions about “the black community” are racist.

Well I cant speak to John’s view or assumptions, but what he wrote…

And to judge from the crowd, I must say that the Black community just never ceases to disappoint.

…was not of itself racist, he wasn’t advocating discrimination and he wasn’t inciting anything.

Now it could be argued to be an untrue, unfair or unreasonable generalisation, or over simplification; but it isn’t of itself a racist comment. Unless that is, you hold to the position that any discussions about the incidence or preponderance of any characteristic or behavior related to race or ethnicity, is racist; which is simply absurd, PC, wishful thinking, crap.

No, those types of violent sentiments have traditionally been chanelled into, and concentrated on, Catholic anti-semitism.

Bollocks they have. Just ask every gay person whose life has been made a misery by clerical fascists, or every gay person burned at the stake by said same clerical fascists, you hypocrite.

Your religion and your religous hierarchy is built upon hatred and bigotry. Thousands of years of mayhem and murder and misery and repression, with the jackboots of the Church of Rome and Mecca stomping down upon the necks of humanity.

Utter filth. Out of interest, what’s the etymology of batty-man? A British Army bat-man?

“the end result- and the aim- is the same.”

No, the aim isn’t the same.

The aim of excluding demagogical inciters to bigotry from the UK is to signal the UK’s disapproval of these sentiments, and the people who express them. I think that Bounty Killer should be punished for behaving in a disgusting manner. He has no right to come to the UK. He should not be afforded this privilege.

That is very different from saying that you should ban his concerts, censor his lyrics, and so on.

Batty = bottom

But of course, all sorts of people enjoy anal sex.

Nick (SA) - “assumption”, not “comment”. Reading Is Fundamental and all that. Also, the use of the term “PC” as a derogation = FAIL.

I don’t want to derail this blog into a “what is/isn’t racist” cul-de-sac, but I’d be ever so grateful if somebody could explain to me why “the black community” should be responsible for the sentiments of one particular recording artist, as if the audience at a Bounty Killer show is an accurate representation of the sentiments held in the wider community as a whole. Because I wouldn’t be so certain that it is.

“Now it could be argued to be an untrue, unfair or unreasonable generalisation, or over simplification; but it isn’t of itself a racist comment”

Perhaps not necessarily. However, generalising about groups is the stock in trade of racism.

I’m sure you can think of a negative generalisation about a group which isn’t racist, but I’m having some difficulty in doing so.

This is disturbing. Not so much the lyrics and ranting, which are stupid and pathetic in my opinion, but nothing new for anyone who follows reggae and hip-hop on the last decade or so. What’s much more disturbing than some macho idiot shooting his mouth off (and only his mouth) is that reggae artists apparently need the permission of the police in order to perform, which is contingent upon them signing some piece of paper drawn up by a handful of radical activists.

Since when did the police or a bunch of self-appointed guardians of morality have the right to determine what kind of artistic event people can enjoy? What kind of police state has Britain become?

Why are the police not taking action? Here’s a thought: it is claimed that these artists are a danger because they are inciting violence against gays. Under British law, for someone to be convicted of incitement, the inciter must intend the others to engage in the behaviour constituting the offence, including any consequences which may result, and must know or believe (or possibly suspect) that those others will have the relevant mens rea. I don’t think that is the case here. The audience, and the artist, realise this is all part of the act and not meant to be taken seriously. They are watching a show, not attending a political meeting. My evidence for this is that despite years of this kind of bloodcurdling rhetoric from Jamaican artists I can’t find a single instance of any gay person in Britain being harmed by someone the courts determined had been inspired by a reggae song.

But of course, all sorts of people enjoy anal sex.

Try telling that to homophobes though.

As Anthony Bourdain said: “My body isn’t a temple, its an amusement park”.

I’m sure you can think of a negative generalisation about a group which isn’t racist, but I’m having some difficulty in doing so.

That’s easy. Christians are retarded fuckers.

Muslims are retarded fuckers.

Scientologists are retarded fuckers.

Tada!

The fact that a would-be civilised country has allowed them in is more worrying than the homophobia itself. Some people are too far gone for cure.What concerns me more than these people themselves are the psycho-sociological origins of the need for scapegoats on whom to vent hatred. It is only by getting to the roots of this problem and a critique of society as a whole - a society which nurtures such lunatics - that we can hope to get anywhere near solving the problem.

It is interesting and perhaps significant that the hatred is directed at male homosexuals. No one is screaming “Kill the Lesbians!” No male-oriented porno-film is complete without a lesbian scenes.

Scapegoat hatred is very widespread also in more or less innocent forms. I know very few people who haven’t got it in for some group or nation. Less innocent are people like Bossi, the leader of the popular Northern League in Italy, who wants Southern Italian teachers to be expelled from schools in the North and Fimi, leader of the ex-fascist party who would like also to ban Gay teachers. I read in the newspaper today about an anti-semitic rock group which appeared on the Internet, presented by someone who calls himself Karl Gebhardt - the name of a doctor who practised experimental surgery in Ausschwitz. The members of the site removed themselves from the internet before they could be identified.They take popular Italian hits and nazify them. This or another associated group call themselves ‘Zyklon B’ and are still selling a CD entitled ‘Blood must be shed’ on Youtube.

I think homophobia may well increase the percentage of Gays in society as nature’s way of escaping from male chauvinism - setting aside the fact that the screamers are probably repressed homosexuals themselves.

But of course, all sorts of people enjoy anal sex.

Personally I steer clear of Morris dancing and buggery, I simply have not the slightest desire to try either…but wish those that indulge, long, happy and fulfilling lives.

I think homophobia may well increase the percentage of Gays in society as nature’s way of escaping from male chauvinism - setting aside the fact that the screamers are probably repressed homosexuals themselves.

I for one welcome our new Homosexual Overlords. The standard of our domestic soft furnishings is sure to improve dramatically.

But of course, all sorts of people enjoy anal sex.

Ah, SeanT’s wonderful verb, to tofflewomble. How is he getting on after the charges were dismissed?

Nick, I’m with Instapundit on this: “Personally, I’d be delighted to live in a country where happily married gay couples had closets full of assault weapons.”

I fail to see why someone’s own personal biological imperative to stick their whatnot into a whatever thingamajig they choose should be any business of anyone other than him/her and his/her consenting partner(s). Or least of all why it should be the business of the state.

John P - like it or not, your assumptions about “the black community” are racist. Not every black person likes reggae, or is Jamaican, or indeed supports the proscribing of certain basic human rights for gay people. The tendency of right-wing yahoos and faux-radical lefties alike to treat black people as an amorphous mass, both culturally and politically, continues to depress the hell out of me.

Have you tried prozac?

And how dare you make racist generalisations about right-wing yahoos and faux-radical lefties as though both were just one big amorphous mass.

Bollocks they have. Just ask every gay person whose life has been made a misery by clerical fascists, or every gay person burned at the stake by said same clerical fascists, you hypocrite.

Your religion and your religous hierarchy is built upon hatred and bigotry. Thousands of years of mayhem and murder and misery and repression, with the jackboots of the Church of Rome and Mecca stomping down upon the necks of humanity.

Ah those jackboots!

What is a ‘jackboot’ exactly, and what do they look like?

And would you quite knawing on the corners of your keyboard!

What is a ‘jackboot’ exactly, and what do they look like?

I’ll give you a hint, John. They’re the ones with the dog collars. Following the original Big Book Of Hatred.

I’m sure you can think of a negative generalisation about a group which isn’t racist, but I’m having some difficulty in doing so.

That’s either due to unbelievable ignorance, rank stupidity or rather more likely, your PC sensibilities pushing your definition of ‘racist’ so far that it’s stymieing very basic critical thinking faculties.

Try starting gently ….’Chinese people tend to have straight black hair’, ‘Colour deficient vision is unusual in black men, but very common amongst Northern European men’, ‘The Dutch are the tallest Nation in the World’….work on from there…..’Alcoholism is endemic amongst Australian Aboriginals’, ‘Around 50% of British Muslims that marry, marry their first cousins’……go on from there, it’s easy really!

What’s wrong with having straight black hair or colour-blindness?

Correction: the ex-fascist leader is calle Fini with an ‘n’ !

What’s wrong with having straight black hair or colour-blindness?

You wouldn’t get very far in theScottish Colour Identification Championships now would you?

“The audience, and the artist, realise this is all part of the act and not meant to be taken seriously. They are watching a show, not attending a political meeting. “

In which case, why is the level of homophobic violence in Jamaica HORRIFIC? Are people born with a violent hared, or is it instilled in them and reinforced by a variety of souces, including popular culture?

John Little;

“Since when did the police or a bunch of self-appointed guardians of morality have the right to determine what kind of artistic event people can enjoy? What kind of police state has Britain become?”

“Become”? What, you mean since 1976, when the Sex Pistols were effectively banned from performing anywhere in this country because they were assumed to be anti-monarchist, and were placed under arrest after their Thames boat-party performance. Or perhaps earlier, in 1974, when The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, which was famously banned by the BBFC, a decision which wasn’t officially rescinded until well into the 1990s.

All kinds of events require the permission of local authorities in order to take place, and I imagine that, given the numerous complaints and protests over performances by artists who’ve expressed similar sentiments to Bounty Killer, both on record and in performance, that the police are likely to pay particular attention in these cases.

I’ll give you a hint, John. They’re the ones with the dog collars. Following the original Big Book Of Hatred.

Mmmm…still don’t getcha!

It’ll take an an entire clue-transplant, Morgoth!

Personally I steer clear of Morris dancing and buggery

Well its very hard to do.

It seems cut and dried to me. He is clearly using his performances to incite others to commit offences. And his own comments to interviewers demonstrate that he is promoting his own views, it is not just an artistic persona he adopts.

So why is he not banned?

My guess is victimhood poker.

In which case, why is the level of homophobic violence in Jamaica HORRIFIC? Are people born with a violent hared, or is it instilled in them and reinforced by a variety of souces, including popular culture?

There is a great deal of violent homophobia all over Africa Brett.

In Nigeria, for instance.

I think that expressions of homophobia allows Blacks to feel better about themselves in that gays, and gay men in particular, represent a group who are considered even lower in status.

What’s wrong with having straight black hair or colour-blindness?

To some no doubt something, to me nothing, I was breaking David T in gently.

As it happens, I find dark Mediterranean and Asian women particularly attractive - is that racist? Also I’m a protanope (red green deficient) myself - it helps distinctly with night vision, no doubt why its not been selected out and possibly why it’s so common amoungst Northern Europeans with the longer dawn and dusk periods compared to more equatorial latitudes, their long Winter nights. It also helps in ’seeing through’ camouflage, ‘colour blind’ men were selected as photo interpreters by the Yanks in WW2….not alot of people know that!

John P. - I would very much appreciate it if on this occasion we could try to avoid the blind alley of victimhood trading and betting and stay focussed on the wisdom of admitting this one performer to Britian. It is my hope that all people, regardless of which group or groups they may identify with or as, will unite in agreement that this sort of violent provocation is not conducive to the sort of society we would like to build here and that - given the effects on the LGBT community in Jamaica that this music has - we should not be rewarding Bounty Killer and his ikl with lucrative UK concert tours.

We may start with a Winston Churchill motto: “I may not agree with what you say but I’ll defend your right to say it.” That’s a basic premise.
Having said that we, as taxpayers employ the wonderful boys and girls of the thin blue line to keep a weather-eye on borderline cases in order to prevent conduct that is likely to cause a breach of the peace. Note that it is not even necessary for a breach of the peace to place; if there is a likelyhood of it taking place that is sufficient grounds for her majesty’s servants to apprehend the miscreant and to take him to a police station cell until the threat of public disorder has abated. That’s the law. And a good one it is too.
In the event of any egregious effluvium I’m sure we can depend on the world’s best police force to do its job.
Let him come. Let him entertain. Let him be circumspect. I will not be going to the show. I will be listening to my Dylan, Stones, and Queen cds with my civet cat curled on my lap.

Hopefully the hysteria that Brett has whipped up will calm somewhat and people can discuss this a bit more rationally.

In which case, why is the level of homophobic violence in Jamaica HORRIFIC?

Whatever the reason, it has nothing to do with dancehall music, because Jamaican attitudes to homosexuality long predate it. I would imagine that it is related to traditional African beliefs, as indeed reggae and dancehall themselves have roots in traditional African music.

Sex Pistols … Texas Chainsaw Massacre … local councils …

Yes, it’s true that some controversial artistic performances were banned in the past, by local authorities. The demand for the banning was often led by Christians and reactionaries. In the 1980s and 1990s, however, there was a liberalisation fostered by the widespread changes in attitudes which made this kind of censorship unacceptable.

So it really is very disturbing that Britain seems to be turning the clock back to an earlier time when moral panics were whipped up by self-appointed busybodies demanding that the authorities censor artists to preserve the fabric of society. People like Brett and his cothinkers (who are well represented in this thread) are nothing more than a 21st century equivalent of the National Viewers’ and Listeners’ Association and should be ridiculed and dismissed just as Mary Whitehouse was.

Now is anyone going to consider my point why the specific law on incitement may be inapplicable here or are you going to continue with this ignorant “Disgusted, Tunbridge Wells” bollocks for another hundred posts?

Nick, I’m with Instapundit on this: “Personally, I’d be delighted to live in a country where happily married gay couples had closets full of assault weapons.”

All well and good, but on the more substantive matter of Morris Dancing?

Oh…the term ‘assault weapon’ seems just a tad tautological!

Perhaps he meanat ‘assault rifle’ which has a specific definition - an infantry weapon firing an intermediate cartridge of moderate power from a high capacity magazine, from a closed bolt, with a semi automatic and fully automatic capability. Legend has it the term was coined by Hitler himself - Sturmgeweh, the first incarnations being the MP43/ 44.

I think that Bounty Killer should be punished for behaving in a disgusting manner. He has no right to come to the UK. He should not be afforded this privilege.

Lawyerly double-talk, not surprising.

Brett and others have made it clear that they regard the danger as these artists inciting the audience into criminal acts. The artists, apparently, are entitled to their views as long as they don’t express them in a show.

So stop pretending that this is about punishing or signalling disapproval of the artists. The real reason is to punish the audience by not letting them see their favourite performers.

John P. - I would very much appreciate it if on this occasion we could try to avoid the blind alley of victimhood trading and betting and stay focussed on the wisdom of admitting this one performer to Britian.

I shall bite my tongue.

Perhaps not necessarily. However, generalising about groups is the stock in trade of racism

This is a comments thread, not some preachy All In The Family episode.

Of course making generalisations about any group of individuals is the starting point for most forms of racism, but making SOME generalisations about particular groups isn’t necessarily racism.

“I for one welcome our new Homosexual Overlords. The standard of our domestic soft furnishings is sure to improve dramatically.”
Morgoth

Thank-you, Morgoth. When I become Overlord I will reserve special treatment for you, although I’m not into plush furnishing, paper doileys(?), antique shops etc.

I will tell you an anecdote. Years ago I briefly attended the meetings of a Gay association in Verona.Briefly, because I can’t breathe in exclusive groups. One evening there was much complaint about the fact that there was (and maybe still is) a paragraph in Italian law which says homosexuality is an illness. I said, “I think they are perfectly right. We are an illness. I insist on being considered as an illness.” When the uproar and indignation subsided, I added, “The only trouble is that ‘they’ are sicker than we are.”

I am, for once, inclined to agree with Brett: there is no good reason whatsoever why this “performer” should be permitted to enter the UK to give his pro-murder performances here, and plenty of good reasons why he should be excluded.

(I can’t say that I watch MTV, and similar channels, or indeed TV at all, and I think the related and no less odious phenomenon of “gangsta rap” has perhaps, for now, peaked: but frankly the glorification of violence, and indeed misogyny that has spread - which I would date the commencement of which more or less to NWA’s “Straight Outta Compton” of 1988 - by MAINSTREAM organs of the media, and the concomitant absence of any sense that some degree of self-censorship and decency might be a good thing - has brought about a severe degradation of our culture in the last 20 years, perhaps even more severe than that which the foolish amorality of the 1960s that was at least tempered with a misguided but well-intentioned caring sort of thing, ushered in.

It is time to say no to crudity and glorification of violence!

Whatever the reason, it has nothing to do with dancehall music, because Jamaican attitudes to homosexuality long predate it

Thats’ a bit of a chicken and egg argument, and rather thin for it.

No, this sort of viscous bile is part of the process that creates, reinforces, makes acceptable anchors the violent and homophobic zeitgeist. It is unacceptable; more it should be seen to be unacceptable.

If he’s let into Blightyand he pulls that shiite, spewing this bile on stage or off, he should be charged, tried and convicted, and hopefully sent down.

Rather don’t let him in.

One could always wheel out the ’shouting FIRE! in a cinema’ cliche to argue for limits on free speech, as that Stalinist ghoul Galloway did outside an Oxford Union debate which was hosting the BNP’s Nick Griffin that night.

But this is, to use the vernacular, utter bollocks. Being an arsehole in a cinema has nothing to do with free speech - it’s being a public nuisance. Much in the same way, for instance, that driving at 80mph in a built up area should have no bearing on whether or not it should be legal to own a car. One can’t use exceptions to justify general rules.

Which brings us to this sad wretch and his pack of fan-morons. They are entitled to say and think and sing what they damn well want. But that has no bearing on the fact that ‘Bounty’ (a fitting name for such a ponce) is guilty of incitement to violence and should be dealt with accordingly.

That should not, however, again be confused with issues regarding free speech. The two are quite seperate regardless of what some authoritarian types might want us to believe.

John Little: “The audience, and the artist, realise this is all part of the act and not meant to be taken seriously. ”

You’ve obviously no idea about Jamaican youth attitudes to homosexuality.

You also sound like the Rolling Stone journalist in this Day Today clip:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_aU3TeDMnE

Well, it’s a bit difficult to make out what the old boy is saying. However, on the basis that he’s actually inciting violence, rather than rather trenchantly criticising gay folk (which is his right, however wrongheaded), I guess it’s rum that he’s performing. But I have to say I don’t know very much about this chap.

“Whatever the reason, it has nothing to do with dancehall music, because Jamaican attitudes to homosexuality long predate it. I would imagine that it is related to traditional African beliefs, as indeed reggae and dancehall themselves have roots in traditional African music.”

So what?

Racism, slavery, and lynchings has a long history in traditional European culture.

But our culture isn’t sacrosanct.

So if a Swiss band wanted to tour the UK, and the lead singer had a history of standing up and saying:

“I’m gonna tell you what I want to do! Hang a nigger from a tree! Yeah! Watch that nigger twitching. Bye bye nigger. Why not kill a nigger!”

I’d oppose granting them permission to enter the country.

I’d be surprised that anybody would book them.

There would be HUGE demonstrations against them if they turned up.

Actually, why aren’t there huge demonstrations planned against this? Do people not give a toss about cheerleading for murder of minorities? If somebody DID call for a “nigger lynching”, even as part of a “stage act”, there would be a demonstration of thousands against it.

I mean, why isn’t this being treated like Nick Griffin at the Oxford Union?

Oh, sorry - I forgot. This is a “an act”.

Not many “acts” that centre around “nigger lynchings” though!

I mean, why isn’t this being treated like Nick Griffin at the Oxford Union?

Not the same thing at all. Nick Griffin is (to be kind) deeply objectionable: but those who attempted to stop him speaking at a venue like the Oxford Union were more objectionable still.

But as I say, the widespread tolerance of incitation to, and glorification of, extreme violence across a broad thrust of what is now pretty mainstream culture (tee hee were I anti-BBC I would add “paid for by the license player” and might go on to rip off what a preposterous fellow Tim Westwood is: but that would be to let Hollywood off the mark too) might well be the major reason why there isn’t such uproar about this concert.

Also, as Switzerland is part of the EEA - aren’t they allowed in the UK come what may?

I think it must centre around whether he is inciting violence. Generally there should be very light regulation of folk’s speech, even if it is unsavoury. There are certain parameters concerning inciting racial hatred and violence, but that should be about it.

John P.

I must say that the Black community just never ceases to disappoint.

I second that but it must be said that I would imagine that not all the black community are pictured on the dance floor there.

His music seems to be directed to a particularly ‘common’ class of ………. people.

“Nick Griffin is (to be kind) deeply objectionable”

He is also a citizen. With that comes certain privileges.

“Being an arsehole in a cinema has nothing to do with free speech - it’s being a public nuisance. ”

Good point, Truculent Sheep, and I’ll remember that in future.

BTW how do you do quotations on a white background?

I second that but it must be said that I would imagine that not all the black community are pictured on the dance floor there.

Of course! But the fact remains that the guy’s fan-base is almost exclusively black, and that those blacks appear to indulge their homophobia without any qualms whatsoever.

I think this man should not be allowed into the UK.

I may not be all that acquainted with modern music, but is this what actually passes as music nowadays? Incitement to murder and vulgarity set to, what apparently is, a tune?

If Islamic preachers of hate are kept out of the UK (well except he who the ex Mayor of London welcomed) then this demagogue in rhyme should be excluded too.

“Also, as Switzerland is part of the EEA - aren’t they allowed in the UK come what may?”

Have you told Switzerland this? They’ll be most surprised.

Racism, slavery, and lynchings has a long history in traditional European culture. But our culture isn’t sacrosanct.

David T is under the misapprehension that I am defending the homophobic aspects of Jamaican culture. I’m not, I am tentatively offering an explanation of it. Do try to keep up, David T.

Let me just iterate some basic points again: the artist cannot be prosecuted for incitement, I suggest, because mens rea cannot be proven — the objectionable comments he makes are part of a stage performance, and the audience knows this. People need to aquaint themselves with the basics of the law before they launch into diatribes and demands that the police arrest people, or they risk making themselves look uninformed and foolish.

Secondly, I am still waiting for someone to put forward evidence that this so-called “incitement” has actually led to British fans of this kind of music attacking homosexuals. In the absence of anything like that, we have to say that at best this is a lot of fuss over nothing. At worst, it’s whipping up racism against black people.

If Islamic preachers of hate are kept out of the UK

But they are not. The brainless, cowardly twerp laughingly known as the home secretary talks big, but hides under the table when it comes to the crunch.

Keep the gay-bashers out of my country. Keep the antisemitic demagogues out of my country.

Let me just iterate some basic points again: the artist cannot be prosecuted for incitement, I suggest, because mens rea cannot be proven

Are you legally trained? The barrister I met yesterday on business disagrees with you.

I think it must centre around whether he is inciting violence

No! Really! Well, I never!!

Go back to your Ladybird books, Benjamin - you are an embarrassment.

were I anti-BBC I would add “paid for by the license player”

Some people will go on defending the indefensible - I suppose it’s a matter of not admitting that your entire philosophy for the past 30 years has been deeply flawed. The BBC is corrupt, greedy, acts illegally every day of the week, and yes - this is paid for by those forced to pay the state broacaster tax. It would be an anachronism in North Korea, never mind Europe.

The BBC is corrupt, greedy, acts illegally every day of the week

Seems a rather strong statement. I don’t expect you to back your allegations up with any evidence, but, hell, give it a try.

I’m not suggesting you’re ‘defending the homophobic aspects of Jamaican culture’. I just think that the issue of culture is irrelevant to the discussion.

Likewise, I agree that there is no basis to prosecute this man. I’d want to see evidence of a clear and close link between him and his fans, in which he knows that the fans will act on his exhortations, before doing that.

However, I think that this country should signal its disgust at murderous homophobia, by denying this man the privilege of coming into this country.

He is also a citizen. With that comes certain privileges.

This is the UK. He is a subject of the crown! (notwithstanding that the concept of citizen has gained some legal substance in recent years)

David T: oops. EFTA, rather [plus Swiss Confederation-EU bilateral agreements on freedom of movement]

KB Player, use blockquote tags instead of i ones

Seems a rather strong statement. I don’t expect you to back your allegations up with any evidence, but, hell, give it a try.

Crap. The evidence is all over the place. Look at the number of senior presenters related to other senior presenters.
Look at the way it competes commercially against commercial organisations that do not receive the state broadcaster tax.
It shits on the charter every day - supporting ‘Labour’ quite openly, supporting Obama quite openly, hysterically anti-Israel …
But if you choose to be blind, there’s nothing that I can do to convince you. You are impervious to facts.

When will we be having the Annual MOHO Awards?

(Music of Homophobic Origin)

Batty batty batty. Man’s obsessed. Man’s hiding something.

Like this?

NO

As I thought. You have not come up with evidence, merely conjecture.

I think it must centre around whether he is inciting violence. Generally there should be very light regulation of folk’s speech, even if it is unsavoury. There are certain parameters concerning inciting racial hatred and violence, but that should be about it.

From Peter Tatchell’s site:

Bun a fire pon a kuh pon mister fagoty….

Murder him fast, like Federal Express

It’s not even a debatable position.

P.

Secondly, I am still waiting for someone to put forward evidence that this so-called “incitement” has actually led to British fans of this kind of music attacking homosexuals. In the absence of anything like that, we have to say that at best this is a lot of fuss over nothing. At worst, it’s whipping up racism against black people.

If this loon were white and saying such things about blacks, you’d have him banned in New York minute.

And nor would you be demanding proof demonstrating that such incitements to violence against blacks actually led to incidents of violence.

This vulgar sack of shit can stay in Jamaica.

And he shouldn’t be getting a pass on his murderous homophobia just because his ass is black, but instead held up to the same high standards by which we judge all low-lifes.

NO

Anyway, I wouldn’t describe Justin Webb, the BBC’s chief Washington correspondent as a lefty. The poor boy even forecast a McCain victory; not sure how he got that all wrong.

Yes, I agree Paul. It does seem clear he is inciting violence, which means he shouldn’t really be allowed to host a concert if he is going to say all that stuff.

David T - thanks for the clarification, and thanks for drawing attention to what the law against incitement actually requires in order for a successful prosecution.

You say quite reasonably that it is a privilege, not a right, for a foreigner to be allowed into the country to perform. I agree, and I also feel it is quite legitimate for the UK to exercise its discretion and reject entry to undesirables.

However, given that this performer is selling recordings in the UK which are just as objectionable as his live performances, which besides are freely available for viewing in the UK as Brett has demonstrated with his post, what is to be gained by denying him entry, other than to alienate his fans? If the aim is to send out a message that homophobia is unacceptable, then it seems rather arbitrary to suppress one form of his artistic expression but not others — especially as the audience for his recordings is potentially much more numerous than the audience for his live performances. This inconsistency is likely to dilute the intended message and leave only the sense among his fans, rightly or wrongly, that they are being unfairly victimised.

Perhaps a better idea is for Brett and other opponents of homophobia to protest outside the gigs?

I don’t think he should be refused entry to the country, nor should his concerts be banned for two reasons.

Firstly (I actually typed fistly there, how Freudian), I’m a free speech radical, I don’t just believe in free speech for people with whom I mildly disagree, but across the whole spectrum that includes idiocy and malevolence, both of which this guy clearly demonstrates.

Second, I fell the laws that deal with ‘incitement’ are so broad as to be fundamentally an abridgement of the basic right to free speech. I can just about accept that that if a very weak and suggestible person under the spell of a powerful Svengali commits a crime, it might be reasonable to pin a part (only a part) of the blame on the ‘inciter’, but the way it is framed under current legislation is to reduce the responsibility of the people who actually commit crimes, lessening what should be the overwhelming and crucial point that people are totally responsible for their own actions.

This applies in other areas too, I have no doubt that people have been led to believe that Harringey council are to blame for the murder of that baby, when in fact the blame lies solely with the evil perpetrators.

However, given that this performer is selling recordings in the UK which are just as objectionable as his live performances, which besides are freely available for viewing in the UK as Brett has demonstrated with his post, what is to be gained by denying him entry, other than to alienate his fans?

Alienating his fans seems worthwhile to me, if that’s all that’s allowed to be done to the fuckers.

According to some free speech absolutists on this thread, incitement is impossible. Tell that to advertisers. Advertising is proof that incitement can influence behaviour.

The key issue is double standards: racists get banned from the UK and get banned from public platforms. Homophobes who advocate MURDER do not.

The logic of the free speech fundamentalists is that they defend the right of the BNP to urge white folks to MURDER their black neighbours.

The vast majority of black gay people (and many straight black people) in Jamaica and the UK support the campaign against Bounty Killer.

I don’t want to ban opposing homophobia and offensive language. I steadfastly defend free speech, except when it involves incitement to violence and murder. Incitement to murder is qualitatively different from mere homophobia. Bounty Killer is encouraging and glorifying the killing of other human beings because they gay. That is an abuse of free speech.

If people believe the laws against inciting murder should be repealed, please say so.

Ooops! My post above should have read:

I don’t want to ban homophobia and offensive language. I steadfastly defend free speech, except when it involves incitement to violence and murder.

In the US no one would understand what the fuck he is saying. Even if they did, they wouldn’t silence him. For better or worse we let any screaming tard with a mike, their audience.

If people believe the laws against inciting murder should be repealed, please say so.

Peter, there isn’t the grounds for laying a charge of incitement against these artists, for reasons explored above.

If you want to broaden the scope of the incitement laws, then fair enough. But you are going to find it pretty hard to do so without also criminalising what Brett has done in this post — republish the offending performances as a way of drawing attention to the problem. The law is generally an ineffective instrument for changing people’s attitudes.

I’m a free speech radical

Well, in general, it’s probably easy to be if you are not on the receiving end of the incitement. I am keen on free speech myself; however when it can be established that it goes against a chap’s right to saunter down the street unmolested, then there is a case to restrict the right of free speech in that case. That’s because rights have to be balanced, minorities are protected under constitutions, and few rights are absolute in all cases.

God made Adam and Eve,not Adam and Steve.

Eh? Who the fuck made Steve then?

Why are so many people so obsessed with gay sex? I mean, people who don’t like it. I was saying this about the religious right in Ameeeerca, and the same applies here. I mean really mate, write something about being miserable cos you live in a city in the North of England where it rains all the time. Er… well maybe not. David T would like you then ;)

I’ve written loads of songs, and I don’t think any of them express my desire to kill gays. They don’t express my desire NOT to kill gays either. It’s just not something that comes up.

Meanwhile, asking about repealing the “incitement to murder” laws… um… if this is incitement to murder, couldn’t he be, y’know, prosecuted for that?

I smell another citizen’s arrest… (or is it citizens’ )

If the aim is to send out a message that homophobia is unacceptable, then it seems rather arbitrary to suppress one form of his artistic expression but not others

“Artistic expression”? His, er, songs may be replete with homophobic rhetoric, but as the videos make clear, he is also given to punctuating his sets with hate-filled monologues. This particular material doesn’t even have the veneer of the ‘artisitic expression’ defence; he’s simply a bigoted thug preaching violence against a minority group. He’s just doing it from a stage rather than in a pub somewhere. The reaction of some of the audience suggests they have been suitably incited. If incitement laws don’t cover this sort of practice, then I’m inclined to wodner whether there’s any point in such laws at all.

If you want to broaden the scope of the incitement laws, then fair enough. But you are going to find it pretty hard to do so without also criminalising what Brett has done in this post — republish the offending performances as a way of drawing attention to the problem.

Poppycock. This no more true than to claim that relaying the facts of a conspiracy to murder would render one guilty of the conspiracy itself. The law *could* easily accommodate the proscription of such acts without proscribing reference to them in *some* contexts.

“Peter, there isn’t the grounds for laying a charge of incitement against these artists, for reasons explored above.”

That’s nonsense. You keep going on a bout the supposed absense of mens rea an claiming it is all “part of a show”. Well, when Bono exhorts people to donate to various famine relief efforts, do people ignore him because it’s just “part of a show”. Does he not intend for people to open their wallets and be charitable?

Similarly, when Bounty Killer rants from the stage that gays are a threat to the nation’s morals and should be driven out of the community, attacked and killed, is this just showbiz? You don’t think he’s deadly serious about this?

Brett - yes indeed, a lot of people ignore him because it’s all part of the Bono Show, as we all know. Joking aside, your objection is absurd. For a reasonable chance of conviction in a court you need to prove beyond reasonable doubt that Bounty Killer intends to incite audience members to commit crimes; his defence would be that he does not, it is merely part of his act and stage persona, and it would be impossible to prove otherwise given the facts as you have presented them.

Likewise for Brownie saying that “[h]e’s just doing it from a stage rather than in a pub somewhere.” Context is everything. To claim that “the reaction of some of the audience suggests they have been suitably incited” is utter nonsense given that you have not shown that the audience regard Bounty Killer’s performance as anything other than an act to be watched rather than acted upon.

To understand my point about dangerous broadening of incitement laws, consider the hypothetical case of someone who visited HP and watched the Bounty Killer videos that Brett posted, then murdered a homosexual. It would be absurd to hold Brett responsible for inciting the murder, because he would not have mens rea, the intention to do so (quite the opposite).

Sorry, but that’s the way that the law works, and a very good thing it is too. It presumes innocence until guilt is proven, and guilt is not proven by surmise, or by analogy.

For a reasonable chance of conviction in a court you need to prove beyond reasonable doubt that Bounty Killer intends to incite audience members to commit crimes; his defence would be that he does not, it is merely part of his act and stage persona, and it would be impossible to prove otherwise given the facts as you have presented them.

Well, you’ve assumed that it IS part of an “act” that this is all like Harry Enfield’s Loadsamoney or Albarn’s Parklife. Or at least that would be the defence.

In which case I think it would be a worthwhile use of court time to force him to make such a declaration. “Gosh sorry darling, you didn’t think I meant that did you? Oh you silly goose!”

what is to be gained by denying him entry, other than to alienate his fans?

Let’s see John Little say the same of the scrotes that make up the BNP.

“Oh imagine poor John Cuntface of Cheshunt - now you’ve banned his favourite Nazi yacht-rock band from entering the country, he’s NEVER going to change…”

Cock.

From top to bottom.

That is all.

“Why are so many people so obsessed with gay sex’?” asks King Creole.

Homophobia is the subject of this thread and I can’t se any obsession with Gay sex in it: how can people say the incitements to murder are not acted upon? How do they know? There are already queer bashers about. (In an area of London, when I lived there, tough Gays bashed queer bashers and put an end to their activities). Not all that long ago male (not female) homosexuality was a crime in Britain. In Verona some fanatical right-wingers burnt a gay couple alive. These things can and do happen.

I wrote female homosexuality was not a crime. I think the taboo is on the male cock, especially in a stae of erection. Setting aside pornography, many commercial films show females completely nude, males very rarely- mostly a brief glimpse here and there. In soft porn you have to imagine the male organ, whereas the female one is fingered, licked and etc. I think this taboo on the cock has a significant influece on homophobia.

Bounty Killer iz my artiste and alwayz will b. So all o’ ya’ll should just leave him the hell alone. He iz d boss and alwayz willl b d boss.BIG UP D DADZ BOUNTY KILLER

Guys
Leave Bounty Killer alone
why not go talk about crack head - Amy Winehouse or any other crazyass freaks from your side of the world.