#Mark Meechan | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

gettothestabbing · 5 years

Text

Personal: MindsIRL!

I went to this event and it ROCKED.

Although I haven’t set up a Minds account yet, I follow a lot of political YouTubers like Sargon of Akkad, Tim Pool, Blaire White, Aydin Paladin, etc. And then I heard they’d all be together and I squealed and bought a ticket immediately.

10:45 AM – 11:20 AM Doors Open

11:20 AM – 12:20 PM The Great Migration: A Discussion on Digital and Physical Immigration Moderated by: Stephen Knight. Panelists include: Lauren Chen, aka Roaming Millennial, Michael Rowlands, Daisy Cousens, Tara Devlin

12:25 PM – 1:25 PM NSFW: How Prohibition Amplifies Problems Moderated by: Melissa Chen. Panelists include: Aydin Paladin, Karen Straughan, Alice Vaughn, Meghan Murphy

1:30 PM – 2:30 PM Demonetized: What Role Should Corporate America Play in Activism? Moderated by: Bill Ottman. Panelists include: Rucka Rucka Ali, Jeff Waldorf, Graham Elwood

2:30 PM – 3:20 PM Lunch

3:20 PM – 4:20 PM Nuance, Context and the Future of Comedy Online Moderated by: Stephen Knight. Panelists include: Mark Meechan, aka Count Dankula, Blaire White, Hunter Avallone

4:25 PM – 5:25 PM Changing Minds: How to Admit When You're Wrong Moderated by: Lauren Chen, aka Roaming Millennial. Panelists include: Tim Pool, Melissa Chen, Carl Benjamin, aka Sargon of Akkad

5:30 PM – 6:30 PM The Effects of Political Violence. Panelists include: Bill Ottman, Andy Ngo, Tim Pool

6:40 PM – 7:40 PM Bringing Them Back from the Edge. Panelists Include: Daryl Davis, Bill Ottman

Unfortunately Antifa took offense to an event literally titled “Ending Racism, Violence, and Authoritarianism” because some of the featured speakers were right-wing. They threatened the original venue, in Pitman, NJ. Rather than cancelling the event, Minds sent all attendees an email the day of to tell us the new venue, a casino in Philadelphia. A casino with ample free parking, might I add!

They set up a debate station, with a packet of suggested topics. There were almost always two people sitting there, often with a crowd of 10-40 people around them to watch and comment. It was a totally non-violent and intellectual atmosphere. (Wish I had a photo, but I didn’t want to get anyone’s faces which I’d have to blur with my nonexistent photo-editing skills.)

There was casino security and police officers both inside and outside the casino. Coming in, you had to show ID and be scanned by a guard. There was enough concern about violence that both Blaire White and Sh0eonhead didn’t show, unfortunately. But I stayed until the last ten minutes of the event, and I never saw any violence or attempted violence. If there were protesters present, they didn’t reveal themselves.

The closest thing to a protest was a heavy lady and her long-haired boyfriend. They stood just outside the conference room and would conduct interviews with attendees. During one Q&A session, an attendee warned us not to talk to them because, despite their polite guise, they were taking images and information about those they interviewed and slandering those people as racist and such on their Twitter accounts. Security was not asked to interfere, because freedom of speech includes the right to lie, and most of us were not interacting with them anyway.

I won’t lie, I didn’t attend all the events, The third debate had no one I knew of on the panel, so I used that time to get food and walk around. Aside from that, I can say that most of the contributors did well! It was exciting to see Tim and Carl, whom I’ve followed for years, as well as Roaming Millennial and Aydin Paladin. (Tim and Carl tend to play off each other well - they’re more talkative and like to tell stories, so sometimes we had trouble shutting them up!)

Probably the worst contributors were:

The Marxist from the first debate. He was very active in contributing to the discussion, but not always in a friendly manner. He mischaracterized another speaker’s criticism of social media’s political bias as a hatred of capitalism. The funniest moment was, rather than one of his many attempted jokes, when he declared the Trump administration to be extremely anti-gay, to which a third of the audience responded, “What?!” He also believed in the Muslim ban, but as he’s a progressive, it’s no surprise.

Melissa Chen. I’ve never followed her, and she didn’t express any odd or dumb opinions. She’s very cute. But she wasn’t a strong moderator. She was moderating the “NSFW” panel, but she set it up like an awkward PowerPoint to start, and then gave them signs with a circle with a line through it to hold up if they wanted to ban something. No one used their sign except Karen Straughan, who dominated the panel by sheer hilarity. She would hold up the sign and say, “I’m banning the banning of hate speech!” And we all cheered.

Coolest moments:

Everyone telling Andy Ngo they loved him and supported his work, regardless of how it must change for his own safety

The Minds founders being present, one as host () and one as panel-contributor (Bill Ottman)

The frequent jokes at the expense of the socialist conference (”Quick point of personal privilege!”; We all waved our hands instead of clapping and burst into laughter at one point.)

Lauren Chen giving out milkshakes to all the people on her panel

Getting to see Carl, Tim, and Andy! (I could probably have talked to them if I’d gotten closer, but I was way too nervous XP)

People chanting U-S-A at least three separate times

The wild, long applause for the female Jewish owner of the bar for the after-party, who came to the event, asked questions, and was standing strong despite having also received Antifa threats

The friendly conversations people had during our breaks, short though they were

The entirety of the panel on comedy (Count Dankula ruled the room)

Karen Straughan telling us about her teenage son’s plan to wear a hat saying “Not gay but $20 is $20″ and a shirt saying “Look out ladies, world’s biggest virgin coming through” to high school, which she fully supported

Daryl Freaking Davis!

So our last event, which was a surprise to most of us, was Bill Ottman interviewing Daryl Davis, the guy who befriends and deradicalizes KKK members!! He’s been doing it 30 years now. He told us stories about his work and emphasized the importance of direct action, making America into the country we want it to be. There was a moment early on where he talked about the need for further progress, and his first example was “women only earn 79 cents.” There was a quiet murmur through the back of the room. But since we all respected him so much, it died pretty quickly. We were all kinda in awe of him.

It was so, so nice to go to a good political event while living in New Jersey. I only wish I’d gotten onto Minds earlier, so maybe I could’ve talked to more people.

#pers com #personal #Minds #MindsIRL #Daryl Davis #Karen Straughan #slander #Lauren Chen #Tim Pool #Sargon of Akkad #Carl Benjamin #Andy Ngo #Bill Ottman #Count Dankula #Mark Meechan #Hunter Avallone #Rucka Rucka Ali

1 note · View note

werewolf-cuddles · 6 years

Text

Offensive humour is not something that should be classified as a hate crime.

#FreeDank #free speech #Mark Meechan #count dankula

2K notes · View notes

robint95 · 5 years

Photo

Drew a quick Sketch of everbody's favorite Dog-Sitter Count Dankula. If you don't know who he is go check out his YouTube Channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC7SeFWZYFmsm1tqWxfuOTPQ … , his Absolute Mad Lads-Series alone is worth it! (Also he needs support due to YouTube’s recent demonetization-rage)

#Count Dankula #absolute mad lads #grossly offensive #fanart #artists on tumblr #watercolor #nazi pug #sketch #paint tool sai #drawing #scottish #youtube #youtuber #fan #mark meechan #edgy #free speech

1 note · View note

thesnakesoup · 6 years

Photo

METAL GEAR 2: SOLID SNAKE TIP: Use the CASSETTE TAPE to distract Zanzibar Land dogs. The national anthem that plays causes them to salute, allowing you to easily sneak past without incident! (NOTE: Does not work in UK releases)

#metal gear 2 #mg2 #metal gear 2: solid snake #msx #classic gaming #dogs #zanzibar land #Mark Meechan #Count Dankula #uk #msx2 #not a hideo kojima game #thesnakesoup

40 notes · View notes

thenuanceddebater · 6 years

Text

A Legal Analysis of the Count Dankula Case- Nazi Dogs and What the Law is Versus What the Law should be

On March 20, 2018 Mark Meechan, or as he’s better known online Count Dankula, was found guilty of communicating a grossly offensive video in a UK court. Friends and supporters of Meechan have recreated very negatively to the verdict; citing the fact that Meechan’s video was intended to be a joke to his girlfriend and a private group of friends, as well as the fact that he did not possess criminal intent in performing his actions. Free speech advocates have also pointed out that this case represents a challenge to the idea of freedom of speech. In my research to determine whether or not the verdict was legally correct, I determined that the majority of arguments from outside observers in this case really don’t hinge on what the law is but rather what the law should be.

Let’s start with a basic review of the two main principles of establishing guilt in criminal law. In order to properly establish guilt, the prosecution needs to prove that the defendant had “guilty mind” (mens rea) or negligence and “guilty action” (actus reus). More plainly, the prosecution needs to prove that the defendant knowingly and/or willingly committed actions that broke the law, or was negligent to actions that a reasonable observer would not have been negligent to that broke the law. I’ve discussed how negligence factors in here before, but this case really doesn’t involve negligence so we can ignore that for now.

Notice that mens rea does not refer to the intent to commit a known crime. There is no requirement for foreknowledge that a given course of action will result in a crime in order for a person to have mens rea. That’s a very common misconception. Yes, some crimes do have a requirement for intent (such as the legal definition for genocide or first or second degree murder), but not every crime needs to have been committed intentionally with the knowledge that the act would have been a crime in order for mens rea to apply. Please keep that in mind as it will be incredibly relevant in just a bit.

Now, let’s move onto the facts of the case. Meechan created a video where he said various offensive phrases related to the Nazis such as, “gas the Jews” (which he repeated 23 times) or “Sieg Heil” and his girlfriend’s dog, a pug, would raise one paw in a mock “Nazi salute”. This video was posted to Meechan’s YouTube channel CountDankula where he had only 8 or so subscribers, all of whom were personal friends or family. The video was called “M8 Yur Dug’s a Nazi” Meechan’s video was eventually posted on reddit and acquired over 3 million views before Meechan’s arrest in April 2016 for offensive content. Meehcan denied any wrongdoing and claimed that the video was made to annoy his girlfriend Suzanne Kelly.

That brings us to the trial and specifically to the law that Meechan was accused of violating. To the best of my research, it seems like Meechan was accused of violating Section 127 of the Communications Act of 2003 which reads as follows:

Improper use of public electronic communications network

(1)A person is guilty of an offence if he—

(a)sends by means of a public electronic communications network a message or other matter that is grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character; or

(b)causes any such message or matter to be so sent.

So, let’s do a quick analysis of this law in order to determine what Meechan would have need to have done in order to be determined guilty of breaking it. There are three main parts to this law: 1. The use of a “public electronic communications network”, 2. the creation of a message or “other matter”, and 3. The content of that message or “other matter” as offensive, indecent, obscene, or menacing.

The hardest part of this law to parse is the “public electronic communications network” which could mean a variety of different things. Fortunately, the UK government has included a definition in section 151 of the Communications Act of 2003 which states:

an electronic communications network provided wholly or mainly for the purpose of making electronic communications services available to members of the public

And section 32 of the Communications Act of 2003 which states:

(1)In this Act “electronic communications network” means—

(a)a transmission system for the conveyance, by the use of electrical, magnetic or electro-magnetic energy, of signals of any description; and

(b)such of the following as are used, by the person providing the system and in association with it, for the conveyance of the signals—

(i)apparatus comprised in the system;

(ii)apparatus used for the switching or routing of the signals; F1...

(iii)software and stored data[F2; and

(iv)(except for the purposes of sections 125 to 127) other resources, including network elements which are not active.]

So essentially, a public electronic communication network is any service that the public can sign up for in order to send or receive any electronic signal (such as a video). Thus, the internet definitely counts as an electronic communication network and is even given as an example in the UK government’s own helpful write-up about the Communication Acts of 2003. So based on that information, we can certainly say that Meechan’s case used a public electronic communication network.

The easiest part of this case to decipher is the second part. It’s pretty clear that Meechan’s video would be considered a message or “other matter” as even if it doesn’t neatly fall into the first category (although it does according to the act itself) it would still fall under the more umbrella terminology of the second category. So, this applies to Meechan’s case as well.

The most interesting part of the case is the content of the video and whether or not it counts as offensive, indecent, obscene or threatening. This is really the linchpin that hold the entire case together. And it’s actually more clear than you might initially assume. From an outside observer’s perspective, I can say that the phrase “gas the Jews” is likely going to be considered offensive. And the prosecution agrees with me. And Meechan might as well.

According to an article in The Independent, Meechan admitted that he likes “offensive comedy”. The judge in this case, Sheriff O’Carroll, made the point that Meechan chose “gas the Jews” because the offensive nature of the phrase added to the comedy of the joke. Also, Meechan created a second video after “M8 Yur Dug’s a Nazi” where he explained that he meant no offense to the Jewish community. This implies that the first video could be easily (or at least somewhat easily) taken in an offensive context and thus warranted an apology or a clarification. Meechan’s use of less offensive language less-often in the video such as “Sieg Heil” also paint the repeated use of “gas the Jews” in a bad light. Meechan’s defense argued that the video was intended as a joke, and that the phrase “gas the Jews” was being taken out of the comedic context it was originally intended in, and thus that Meechan lacked the intent to commit wrongdoing.

However, this is where our previous discussion of mens rea comes back in. Meechan obviously did not intend to threaten Jewish communities or perhaps even to offend a single person. However, he did intend to post the video, he did intend to train his girlfriend’s dog to respond with a pseudo Nazi salute to phrases such as “Sieg Heil” and “Gas the Jews”, and he did intend to say those phrases. And if those three actions constituted breaking the law, then that means that Meechan does have mens rea even if he did not intend to do anything wrong. Arguments that it was a joke are irrelevant if the joke itself constituted breaking the law. Regardless of whether or not one likes the law (and I certainly don’t in this case), the law is still the law. And if you break it there are consequences.

One of Meechan’s lawyer’s other arguments is that there was no complaints o the police against Meechan prior to his arrest for the video. But, there doesn’t need to be. A violation of the law is not determined by whether or not a person complains, but instead by whether or not the law was broken. For the same reason a consensual BDSM encounter between adults can be prosecuted for domestic violence, assault, battery, and a variety of other crimes even without the compliance of the so-called “victim”, so too can Meechan be sued even without a victim. As for the implied argument that this means the video wasn’t offensive, I’ve seen plenty of offensive videos, and have felt the need to call the police or notify authorities zero times. Granted that evidence is anecdotal, but it serves to prove the idea that it is entirely possible for a video to be offensive and not be brought to the attention of law enforcement.

Meechan’s lawyer’s final argument is that the video was meant to be relatively private between Meechan and his friends and that the leaking of the video by one of his friends was unforeseeable. Ignoring the fact that this argument has nothing to do with mens rea or the law in this case, Meechan really didn’t take precautions to keep the video from being shared. He didn’t make the video private, he didn’t only show the video to his girlfriend and not post it on his channel, he didn’t delete the video once it was leaked, etc. The most he did was upload a second video after the first video to clarify his positions in the first video-- which indicates that simulataneously he was thinking about the first video and didn’t see a reason to take it down. So, while Meechan may have intended the original video to be private mainly because he didn’t have very many subscribers, from his actions it’s not apparent that he only wanted the video to be seen by a small group of friends. Thus, I don’t think this argument is either true or relevant.

Based on the facts of this case, I think the judge made the right decision. While the offensiveness of the video is slightly arguable, I think there’s more evidence than not that the video is offensive and that Meechan likely knew that the video could be seen as offensive, and there’s no argument about the other two parts of the law at all.

In fact, most of the arguments used by Meechan his lawyer, and his supporters seem tangential to the actual law at best. Most people disagree with the decision because the law “isn’t fair” or because Meechan “only made an offensive joke”. But neither of those two things is legally relevant here. It’s fine to disagree with a law. Again, I don’t like this one. I think it’s too restrictive, and I don’t support any law that tries to create broad bans on the content of speech. But just because you don’t like the law doesn’t mean you get to ignore the law. And just because the law isn’t fair doesn’t mean that you didn’t break it. Whether or not you agree with the law, I think it’s fairly obvious that Meechan broke the law here. And when you break the law, the judge typically finds you guilty and sentences you-- unless the law violates one of your rights and is unconstitutional. But the UK doesn’t have a written constitution so that really doesn’t apply here.

So, that means that Meechan is likely going to be sentenced. And that’s simultaneously very, very unfortunate from a moral and ethical standpoint but entirely justifiable from a legal one. It’s the difference between looking at what the law is and arguing about what the law should be. And the current law is the domain of the court. Not what any individual judge thinks an ideal law would or should be.

#nuance #legal analysis #mark meechan #nazi dog #uk #law #legal opinion #what the law is versus what the law should be

12 notes · View notes

unironix · 6 years

Text

here is the petition to free dankula

case you haven’t heard, a man has been convicted in the UK for telling a joke, here is the petition to have him freed.

https://www.change.org/p/the-police-free-count-dankula

#freedankula #count dankula #free speech #freedom of speech #mark meechan #uk #scotland #hate speech #sjw

8 notes · View notes

ryanmorwood · 5 years

Text

This Week in My Head: 10th June.

“This is an idea for a feature I’ve had for a while now but not ever quite actualised, until now. The Week in My Head is a weekly roundup of all the things driving my head further towards what I’ve been informed is known as “The Edge.” What? No, not the U2 guitarist, what would that even..? Forget it. The Week in My Head is essentially where I’ll be unleashing all of this week’s venom, vitriol,…

View On WordPress

#Carl Benjamin #Count Dankula #Donald Trump #EDL #Mark Meechan #Nigel Farage #Politics #Sargon of Akkad #Tommy Robinson #UKIP

0 notes

politiciandirect · 6 years

Text

YouTuber Count Dankula Refuses to Pay ‘Gross Offence’ Fine, Donates Money to Children’s Hospital

YouTube comic Markus Meechan, better known as Count Dankula, is refusing to pay the £800 fine handed to him by the courts for a ‘grossly offensive’ joke, donating the money to Glasgow Children’s Hospital instead.

The Scotsman was handed the fine for uploading a comedy skit which shows him trying to turn his girlfriend’s pug dog Buddha into the “least cute thing that I could think of, which is a…

View On WordPress

#breitbart #Breitbart London #Count Dankula #free speech #Freedom of expression #Freedom of speech #grossly offensive #hate speech #Mark Meechan #Tech

0 notes

dailybrian · 6 years

Text

YouTuber Count Dankula Refuses to Pay 'Gross Offence' Fine, Donates Money to Children's Hospital

New on www.DailyBrian.com

https://www.dailybrian.com/news/2018/04/30/youtuber-count-dankula-refuses-to-pay-gross-offence-fine-donates-money-to-childrens-hospital/?utm_source=TR&utm_medium=DailyBrian&utm_campaign=SNAP%2Bfrom%2BThe+Daily+Brian

YouTuber Count Dankula Refuses to Pay 'Gross Offence' Fine, Donates Money to Children's Hospital

Link to this Article: Link to this Article: ...

#Breitbart TV #Count Dankula #free speech #freedom of expression #freedom of speech #grossly offensive #hate speech #Mark Meechan #Tech

0 notes

batuniquetidalwavecollector · 6 years

Photo

Ukarano Anglika, który uczył psa oddawać nazistowskie honory #MarkMeechan #nazizm Na grzywnę 800 funtów skazał sąd mężczyznę, który uczył psa należącego do jego dziewczyny oddawać nazistowskie honory na hasło…

#Mark Meechan #nazizm

0 notes

investmart007 · 6 years

Text

LONDON | UK man convicted of hate crime for Nazi-salute dog video

New Post has been published on https://goo.gl/5BKAPA

LONDON | UK man convicted of hate crime for Nazi-salute dog video

LONDON | April 23, 2018 (AP)(STL.News) A Scottish man who filmed a dog appearing to give Nazi salutes has been convicted of a hate crime and fined.

Mark Meechan filmed his girlfriend’s pug responding to phrases such as “sieg heil” by raising its paw, and posted the footage on YouTube in 2016.

Meechan said the stunt was meant as a joke, but he was convicted last month of posting “grossly offensive” material.

On Monday, a judge ordered Meechan to pay an 800 pound ($1,200) fine. Sheriff Derek O’Carroll said the video “contained menacing, anti-Semitic and racist material.” He said the dog was filmed responding to the phrase “gas the Jews,” which was repeated 23 times in the video.

Meechan said his conviction set a “really dangerous precedent” for free speech and he would appeal.

By Associated Press – published on STL.News by St. Louis Media, LLC (R.A)

#contained menacing #grossly offensive #London #Mark Meechan #racist material #Scottish man

0 notes

gettothestabbing · 6 years

Video

youtube

#Count Dankula #Mark Meechan #Scotland #UK #hate speech #video #courts

2 notes · View notes

werewolf-cuddles · 6 years

Text

Mark “Count Dankula” Meechan has been found guilty of hate speech over his Nazi Pug shitpost.

This is fucking bullshit. A joke is not a fucking hate crime. I strongly disagree with the decision that the judge made on this.

#Count Dankula #Mark Meechan #nazi pug #free speech

1K notes · View notes

eretzyisrael · 5 years

Text

Jews Nervous North of the Border?

“Mostly the Jewish community used to feel that Scotland was a good place to be Jewish but for many that has reversed. Many Jews actively discuss leaving Scotland because they feel alienated, vulnerable and not at home.”

So says Ephraim Borowski, director of the Scottish Council of Jewish Communities (SCoJeC), as reorted in a Scottish newspaper yesterday.

It reports, inter alia:

'The claim reflects the figures in the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights report, published last month, which found that 38% of Jews surveyed said that they had considered emigrating from their country over the past five years, with the highest proportions found in Germany, France and Belgium.

The survey also found that three-quarters of Jewish people in the UK perceived anti-Semitism to be generally a very big or a fairly big problem, with 29% having considered emigrating.

.... Borowski pointed to SCoJec research from 2015 in which one-third of respondents explicitly talked about a heightened level of anxiety, discomfort, or vulnerability.

He also said that, as part of the survey, five people told SCoJec without being prompted that they were considering leaving Scotland.

The row on anti-Semitism in the UK last year focused heavily on the response by the Labour party to allegations of anti-Jewish sentiment, with various members either being suspended or expelled.

Leader Jeremy Corbyn, who apologised for the hurt caused to Jewish people, was also criticised for his party’s initial refusal to endorse in full an international code on antisemitism.

Corbyn had originally backed the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition, but not all of its associated examples. He later performed a U-turn.

Mark Gardner, director of communications at the Community Security Trust, a charity set up to ensure the safety of the Jewish community in the UK, said of the Borowski comments:

“This is an accurate summary of the fact that despite the many positives of Scottish Jewish life, many Jews are still considerably more nervous about the state of antisemitism, politics and society than was the case 10 or 20 years ago.

A similar trend can be seen in Jewish communities across Europe and in this context, Scotland and indeed the UK as a whole remain relatively better than elsewhere.” '