Brits deal with Free Speech issue like here in USA - Offensive Muslim Extremists act out in a similar manner to Westboro Baptist idiots....

The Tyranny of the Minority is in full effect both here & abroad. We have the thick skulled idiots of the Westboro Baptist Church spewing their filth at soldier's funerals, and the Brits have Muslim extremists degrading a Remembrance Day Memorial by burning poppies to offend those in attendance.

The significant difference is the Westboro Baptists aren't looking to institute a religious law into our society. The fools over in England are trying to institute Sharia law as they want to control all of England....The idiot involved in the case in England says so directly, " We want Sharia law in this country"

This is the type of threat that needs to be addressed head on....I find this type of protest offensive but it is the price we pay for Freedom of Speech. I am not thrilled with this perversion of the law but understand why it has to be allowed.

On the other hand, the " Tyranny of the Minority" is something that can be and should be stamped out. This stupid fool who mocks the War Dead and preaches overthrow of the British Government should be expelled back to his native country. His actions are defiant and his mocking of the authority should be handled with a charge of contempt of the courts...His attitude will only incite others to act out and while protest is allowed by free speech, inciting violence and civil unrest is not.

The English people need to rise up against these fools and show that they are behind their soldiers and against the vile filth that this idiot puts forward. He'll get his just punishment one day along with the stupid fools from the Westboro Baptist Church. These people are the dregs of society...bottom feeding scumbags and will always be regarded as such.


£50 insult to Britain's war dead: Veteran's fury as poppy burner enjoying a life on benefits gets paltry fine and mocks soldiers
By Emily Andrews - UK Mail

Last updated at 7:56 AM on 8th March 2011

Despite saying he would pay more for a parking fine, Choudhury said he would not pay up

As a British citizen, Emdadur Choudhury enjoys benefits including a free council flat and almost £800 a month state handouts.

Yesterday he laughed at justice as he was handed a paltry £50 fine for setting light to poppies on Remembrance Day and yelling ‘British soldiers burn in hell’.

After hearing his penalty, which outraged war veterans, the 26-year-old father of two declared: ‘I don’t have any respect for British soldiers, and if they lose a limb or two in Afghanistan then they deserve it. You expect me to feel sorry for them? Of course I don’t.’

Emdadur Choudhury, who didn't bother to attend the hearing yesterday, claimed the charge levelled against him was 'ridiculous'

Choudhury, from Bethnal Green, East London, was found guilty of using threatening or abusive words or behaviour by District Judge Howard Riddle, following a one-day trial last month.

The maximum fine possible was £1,000, plus legal costs, and Judge Riddle said he had no doubt Choudhury had set out to shock and offend. Yet he fined him only £50, plus a £15 victim surcharge.

Although Choudhury sneered that he would have been fined more than £50 for a parking offence, he is refusing to pay. However the bill will be picked up by his ‘good friend’ Anjem Choudary, the notorious firebrand preacher.

Choudhury could also have been charged under Section 31 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, which is racially or religiously aggravated public order offence. This offence also carries a maximum sentence of six months, but the level of fine can reach £2,500.

The defendant could also have faced charges of an incitement or racial hatred under the Public Order Act.

This offence relates to deliberately provoking hatred of a racial group. Among the offences listed as arrestable are making inflammatory public speeches and inciting inflammatory rumours about an individual or an ethnic group.

Choudhury, whose parents are Bangladeshi immigrants who came to Britain for a better life, was a leading member of a demonstration by the so-called Muslims Against Crusaders on November 11
.
During the two-minute silence he was caught on camera unfurling several large plastic poppies and dousing them in petrol before setting them alight.

The protesters, who had gathered near the Royal Albert Hall close to the finish of a charity walk to commemorate service personnel, also repeatedly yelled ‘Burn British soldiers, burn in hell’.

Choudhury and his co-accused Mohammed Haque, 30, who was cleared of the same charge for lack of evidence, could not even be bothered to attend Belmarsh Magistrates’ Court for the verdict.

The court heard that Choudhury works part time as a satellite engineer and earns £480 a month. He also receives a monthly total of £792 in state benefits, comprising £240 working tax credit; £432 child tax credit and £120 a month child benefit.

Judge Riddle said: ‘Shocking and offending people is sometimes a necessary part of effective protest. Here, an obvious consequence of this process was to show disrespect for dead soldiers.

‘The two-minute chanting, when others were observing a silence, followed by a burning of the symbol of remembrance, was a calculated and deliberate insult to the dead and those who mourn or remember them. If the memory of dead soldiers is publicly insulted at a time and place where there is likely to be gathered people who have expressly attended to honour those soldiers, then the threat to public order is obvious.

‘Here it is hard to imagine that a public order disturbance was not intended.’

Choudary was caught on camera unfurling several large plastic poppies on the ground before burning them at the end of the two-minute silence to honour the war dead

Later, in a park near his home, a defiant Choudhury said: ‘The poppy disgusts me – it’s not to do with World War One or World War Two veterans, it’s all about raising money for soldiers injured in the wars now.

‘I’m not being disrespectful for burning it, I’m being honourable. It’s all about shock and awe, to get these soldiers out of Muslim lands.’

Asked if he would do it again, he replied laughing: ‘You’ll have to find out next time, won’t you? The only reason I even got a fine is cos it’s politically motivated. I would have got a bigger fine for a parking ticket than this.

District Judge Howard Riddle made the decision to impose the fine on Choudhury, something that left Shaun Rusling and fellow veterans 'disgusted'

‘It’s my freedom of speech and I’m exercising that. I’m being persecuted for it. This fine, I will wear it as a badge on my shoulder. I did it for Allah. I did it to raise awareness that these so-called soldiers are the criminals. They are the ones who should be tried for war crimes.’

Sinisterly he promised that he had ‘2,000 youths who will follow me and do whatever I tell them – you don’t want another Afghanistan here do you? We want Sharia law in this country, and Inshallah [God willing] we will get it’.

Shaun Rusling, of the National Gulf War Veterans and Families Association, said: ‘I think the British people would be disgusted with the sentence handed out.

Remembrance Day is very special for those in the Armed Forces, when we remember those who have lost their lives for freedom and fighting for their country.

Mohammad Haque (left) and Emdadur Choudhury (right) pictured yesterday. Choudhury was convicted of a public order offence after he burned a poppy on Armistice Day and fined £50. Fellow defendant Haque was found not guilty of the same offence

‘It is a personal insult to all of them. I am personally insulted, any veteran would be personally insulted by them burning a poppy. I don’t think it is an acceptable sentence at all.’

A spokesman for the Royal British Legion said: ‘The poppy is the symbol of sacrifice and valour. It offers everyone an opportunity to reflect on the human cost of conflicts past and present.

‘The two-minute silence is a time for such reflection, and not for political protests or public disorder. We are confident that this is understood and supported by most people.

SO WHY WAS HE JUST CHARGED WITH A PUBLIC ORDER OFFENCE?

Emdadur Choudhury was charged with an offence under Section 5 of Public Order Act 1986. Under the act, a person is guilty of an offence if they use either, threatening abusive or insulting words, disorderly behaviour, or display any writing, sign or visible representation that he threatening or insulting.

The maximum sentence for this offence is six months, while the highest fine imposable by a court is £1,000. The judge could also have imposed a community sentence such as unpaid work. However because the defendant is understood to have no prior criminal convictions, the judge would not have considered a custodial sentence.

The “New Tammany Hall,” - Jury Rigged Public Pensions and the incestuous alliance between public officials and labor...

New Jersey has become famous for more than a bunch of 20-something MTV idiots in a beach house and the home of Bruce Springsteen. New Jersey has become the "battleground" for the fight regarding public employee pension costs and how much they are crippling the budgets of our states & towns. Governor Chris Christie is a central figure in this fight....I wrote a bit about this subject earlier -- see enclosed link

http://usnavyjeep.blogspot.com/2010/11/our-man-in-nj-keeps-up-efforts-to-bring.html

New Jersey may be the frontlines of this fight presently but my home state of Massachusetts is not far behind.

The anger is due to the fact that private sector employees saw pensions evaporate more than a decade ago, but public employees have an incestuous relationship with politicians which has insulated them from the same experience of seeing pensions disappear or be capped.

I agree that we have an obligation to those, public & private employees who paid into a pension. They took money from their checks and that should be theirs. I highly disagree with those who act like a promise of "money & benefits for life" with no investment of their own are owed what someone promised them 20-30 years ago as that promise was made on "projections" and like a New England weather forecast, those projections have proven to be wrong. Even more unacceptable are those who double dipped and jury rigged the system because of loopholes...These criminals should be held accountable as they are "stealing" by any reasonable person's definition of the word ":theft" and have no remorse about doing so or who it hurts.

" In California, pension costs now crowd out spending for parks, public schools and state universities; in Illinois, spiraling pension costs threaten the state with insolvency. " - When the needs of a minority of connected insiders is placed ahead of the needs of ALL OTHER CITIZENS, you can expect some serious anger.

Reform of a jury-rigged system that rewards insiders and greedy union officials is as much of a threat to the security of our state and local governments as any made by the bastards on Wall Street.....The only difference is that one set of greedy bastards works in Finance and the other group were supposed to be working for the citizens....both groups are greedy and don't care who else must be neglected as long as they get what they want.

Well I feel hopeful because both sides are facing the reality that the majority (the rest of us) will make sure that the best interest of the citizens is the focus of changes that will be made in these jury rigged systems in the very near future. Here's hoping that I am right as if I am, things can only get better. If I am wrong, then things will only get worse. And that is not something we can tolerate.


Public Workers Face Outrage as Budget Crises Grow
By MICHAEL POWELL
Published: January 1, 2011

FLEMINGTON, N.J. — Ever since Marie Corfield’s confrontation with Gov. Chris Christie this fall over the state’s education cuts became a YouTube classic, she has received a stream of vituperative e-mails and Facebook postings.

Marie Corfield, a teacher in Flemington, N.J., challenged Gov. Chris Christie over state education cuts at a town hall meeting in September. Their tense exchange was posted on YouTube.

“People I don’t even know are calling me horrible names,” said Ms. Corfield, an art teacher who had pleaded the case of struggling teachers. “The mantra is that the problem is the unions, the unions, the unions.”

Across the nation, a rising irritation with public employee unions is palpable, as a wounded economy has blown gaping holes in state, city and town budgets, and revealed that some public pension funds dangle perilously close to bankruptcy. In California, New York, Michigan and New Jersey, states where public unions wield much power and the culture historically tends to be pro-labor, even longtime liberal political leaders have demanded concessions — wage freezes, benefit cuts and tougher work rules.

It is an angry conversation. Union chiefs, who sometimes persuaded members to take pension sweeteners in lieu of raises, are loath to surrender ground. Taxpayers are split between those who want cuts and those who hope that rising tax receipts might bring easier choices.

And a growing cadre of political leaders and municipal finance experts argue that much of the edifice of municipal and state finance is jury-rigged and, without new revenue, perhaps unsustainable. Too many political leaders, they argue, acted too irresponsibly, failing to either raise taxes or cut spending.

A brutal reckoning awaits, they say.

These battles play out in many corners, but few are more passionate than in New Jersey, where politics tend toward the moderately liberal and nearly 20 percent of the work force is unionized (compared with less than 14 percent nationally). From tony horse-country towns to middle-class suburbs to hard-edged cities, property tax and unemployment rates are high, and budgets are pools of red ink.

A new regime in state politics is venting frustration less at Goldman Sachs executives (Governor Christie vetoed a proposed “millionaire’s tax” this year) than at unions. Newark recently laid off police officers after they refused to accept cuts, and Camden has threatened to lay off half of its officers in January.

Fred Siegel, a historian at the conservative-leaning Manhattan Institute, has written of the “New Tammany Hall,” which he describes as the incestuous alliance between public officials and labor.

“Public unions have had no natural adversary; they give politicians political support and get good contracts back,” Mr. Siegel said. “It’s uniquely dysfunctional.”

Even if that is so, this battle comes woven with complications. Across the nation in the last two years, public workers have experienced furloughs and pay cuts. Local governments shed 212,000 jobs last year.

A raft of recent studies found that public salaries, even with benefits included, are equivalent to or lag slightly behind those of private sector workers. The Manhattan Institute, which is not terribly sympathetic to unions, studied New Jersey and concluded that teachers earned wages roughly comparable to people in the private sector with a similar education.

Benefits tend to be the sorest point. From Illinois to New Jersey, politicians have refused to pay into pension funds, creating deeper and deeper shortfalls.

In California, pension costs now crowd out spending for parks, public schools and state universities; in Illinois, spiraling pension costs threaten the state with insolvency.

And taxpayer resentment simmers.

Trouble in New Jersey

To venture into Washington Township in southern New Jersey is to walk the frayed line between taxpayer and public employees, and to hear anger and ambivalence. So many Philadelphians have flocked here over the years that locals call it “South Philly with grass.”

These expatriates tend to be Democrats and union members, or sons and daughters of the same. But property taxes are rising fast, and voters favored Governor Christie, a Republican. Bill Rahl, a graying plug of a retiree, squints and holds his hand against his throat. “I’m up to here with taxes, I can’t breathe, O.K.?” he says. “I don’t know about asking anyone to give up a pension. Just don’t ask for no more.”

Governor Christie faced a vast deficit when he took office last January, and much of the federal stimulus aid for schools was exhausted by June. So he cut deeply into state aid for education; Washington Township lost $900,000. That forced the town to rely principally on property taxes. (Few states lean as heavily on property taxes to finance education; New Jersey ranks 45th in state aid to education.) The town turned its construction office over to a private contractor and shed a few employees.

Assemblyman Paul D. Moriarty, a liberal Democrat, served four years as mayor of Washington Township. As the bill for pension and health benefits for town employees soared, he struggled to explain this to constituents.

“We really should not receive benefits any better than the people we serve,” he says. “It leads to a lot of resentment against public employees.”

All of which sounds logical, except that, as Mr. Moriarty also acknowledges, such thinking also “leads to a race to the bottom.” That is, as businesses cut private sector benefits, pressure grows on government to cut pay and benefits for its employees.

Robert Master, political director for the Communication Workers of America District 1, which represents 40,000 state workers, speaks to that difficulty.

“The subtext of Christie’s message to a lot of people is that ‘you’re paying for benefits you’ll never have,’ ” he says. “Our challenge is how to defend middle-class health and retirement security, not just for our members but for all working families, when over the past 30 years retirement and health care in the private sector have been essentially demolished.”

This said, some union officials privately say that the teachers’ union, in its battle against cuts to salaries and benefits, misread Mr. Christie and the public temperament. Better to endorse a wage freeze, they say, than to argue that teachers should be held harmless against the economic storm.

In the past, union leaders, too, have proven adept at winning gains not just at the bargaining table. In 2000, union lobbyists persuaded legislators to cut five years off the retirement age for police and firefighters — a move criticized as a budget-buster by a state pension commission. The next year, the budget still was flush and union leaders persuaded the Republican dominated legislature to approve a 9 percent increase in pension benefits. (The legislators added a sweetener for their own pensions.)

Those labor leaders, however, proved less successful in persuading their legislative allies to pay for such benefits. For much of the last two decades, New Jersey has shortchanged its pension contribution.

Governor Christie talked about tough choices this past year — then skipped the state’s required $3.1 billion payment. Now New Jersey has a $53.9 billion unfunded pension liability.

A recent Monmouth University/Gannett New Jersey poll found a narrow plurality of respondents in the state in favor of ditching the pensions for a 401(k)-type program. Public pensions, however, run the gamut, from modest (the average local government pensioner makes less than $20,000 a year while teachers draw about $46,000) to the gilded variety for police and firefighters, some of whom collect six figures. And then there’s the political class, which has made an art form of pension collection.

Some politicians draw multiple pensions as county legislators, called freeholders, and as prosecutors or union leaders. Back in Washington Township, people tend to talk of state government as a casino with fixed craps tables.

A white-haired retired undercover police officer, whose wrap-around shades match his black Harley-Davidson jacket, pauses outside the Washington Township municipal building to consider the many targets. He did not want to give his name.

“Christie has all the good intentions in the world but has he hit the right people?” he says. “I understand pulling in belts, but you talking about janitors and cops, or the free-loading freeholder?”

Good Jobs, at What Cost?

So how much is too much? On their face, New Jersey’s public salaries are not exorbitant. The state has one of the highest per-capita incomes in the country, and the average teacher makes $66,597, which even with benefits is on par with or slightly behind similarly educated private sector workers, according to Jeffrey H. Keefe, a Rutgers professor who studied the issue for the liberal-leaning Economic Policy Institute.

Mr. Keefe, however, uncovered some intriguing class splits. Blue-collar public workers make more money than their private sector counterparts. For such jobs, public unions have established a higher wage floor.

The sense that public workers enjoy certain advantages is not a mirage. Public employees pay into their pension funds, but health benefits often come at a fraction of the cost of most private sector packages.

Government employment also tends to be more secure. When the economy crashed, federal stimulus dollars safeguarded many public jobs. The alternative, many economists point out, was to force towns and cities into extensive layoffs, even as unemployment hovered around 10 percent and millions of Americans sought help from public agencies.

But it accentuated the perception that public workers, however tenuously, inhabited a protected class. That’s a tough sell in Washington Township.

Ask Michael Tini, 54, who works as a card dealer in Atlantic City, about teacher salaries and benefits and he taps his head, not unsympathetically.

“Look, I understand that teachers are the brains of the operation, O.K.? But my hours are cut, and my taxes are killing me.”

He taps his head again. “They have got to take it in the ear, too.”

WHERE IS THE OUTRAGE??? Thugs overseas burn our flag - Where is the condemnation for their actions from our President????

Nine Years ago today, we were all in shock. The nation & the world watched as the Barbarians stabbed at our heart. They thought we would be mortally wounded, but they were wrong. A Japanese Admiral figured it out right after Japan struck us at Pearl Harbor:

"I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve." — Japanese Naval Marshal General Isoroku 12/07/41

Al Qada accomplished the same thing, as they filled us with a "terrible resolve" to rid the world of their filthy existence. We are now 9 years into the struggle to stop these thugs who are trying to use the Muslim Religion as justification for their criminal acts.

On this day, we saw ceremonies and many recall the day. We also saw the media act as Enabler, as a Florida Preacher acted out and stirred up Muslims with the threat (threat) to burn the Quran.

In response, Muslims went out and burnt (as in actually did it, not just threaten to) American Flags. There were many burnt in countries like Pakistan (who we send billions of aid $$$), Afghanistan (where our sons & daughters die in defense of Afghanistan) and England (where the good British citizens had to watch idiots act out on their streets).

MY question is " WHERE IS THE OUTRAGE?". A Florida preacher "threatened" to burn the QURAN.....he didn't do it - just threatened to. The idiots overseas in multiple countries mentioned BURNED our flag.....they didn't threaten to, they DID IT! So, I ask again, WHERE IS THE OUTRAGE?? Why are our Allies silent??? Why is the Governments of the countries where the flag-burning happened quiet??? WHY isn't the burning of our flag as offensive as a threat to burn their holy book???

Americans and many others should treat this as a greater outrage than a threat to burn the Quran. There should be as much condemnation from our President (a.k.a. Mr. Empty Suit) for the burning of our flag. Instead, he acts like a substitute school teacher who cannot control his classroom and scolds the American people to be patient. MR. PRESIDENT, you SHOULD condemn those idiots overseas burning OUR FLAG as quickly as you are willing to lecture us about tolerance. It is your JOB to defend our symbols, ya know???

WE (America) stand by while we get slapped in the face by idiots who do not represent Muslims, only stupidity. We allow the thugs with guns to act out and we do not punish their actions.

As one who has defended the flag at the risk of my life while in uniform, I AM OUTRAGED. I feel that the actions of these idiots should be reprimanded, and we should show that a "threat" to defile the Quran cannot be a "free-pass" to burn our flag, act out or not be accountable for their actions.

I say hit them where it hurts, take back the aid until the Governments of the Muslim Nations stop these idiots from acting like burning our flag is not as offensive to us as it would be to them if the Preacher in Florida actually burned the Quran.

I'll ask the question again - WHERE IS THE OUTRAGE?