STOP THE MEDIA DEFAMING A SECT OF PEOPLE OPENLY

0 have signed. Let’s get to 100!


As many of you are aware in the last 2 months of this year (2017), we have had to face a number of “TERRORIST” attacks with in Britain namely in Manchester and London.

 

I refer to all the attacks in both of these cities mentioned above and anywhere else it has or may occur in the world.

 

What does the world “TERRORIST” mean?

Dictionary definition

The unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.

(source: https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/terrorist

 

British Legal definition

The Terrorism Act 2000 (c.11) is the first of a number of general Terrorism Acts passed by the Parliament of the United Kingdom. It superseded and repealed the Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) Act 1989 and the Northern Ireland (Emergency Provisions) Act 1996. The powers it provides the police have been controversial, leading to noted cases of alleged abuse, and to legal challenges in British and European courts. The stop-and-search powers under section 44 of the Act have been ruled illegal by the European Court of Human Rights.

(source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_Act_2000

 

Defamation Act 2013

The Defamation Act 2013 (c 26) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom, which reformed English defamation law on issues of the right to freedom of expression and the protection of reputation. It also comprised a response to perceptions that the law as it stood was giving rise to libel tourism and other inappropriate claims.

The Act changed existing criteria for a successful claim, by requiring claimants to show actual or probable serious harm (which, in the case of for-profit bodies, is restricted to serious financial loss), before suing for defamation in England or Wales, setting limits on geographical relevance, removing the previous presumption in favour of a trial by jury, and curtailing sharply the scope for claims of continuing defamation (in which republication or continued visibility constitutes ongoing renewed defamation). It also enhanced existing defences, by introducing a defence for website operators hosting user-generated content (provided they comply with a procedure to enable the complainant to resolve disputes directly with the author of the material concerned or otherwise remove it), and introducing new statutory defences of truth, honest opinion, and "publication on a matter of public interest" or privileged publications (including peer reviewed scientific journals), to replace the common law defences of justification, fair comment, and the Reynolds defence respectively. However, it did not quite codify defamation law into a single statute.

(source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation_Act_2013 (should anyone wish to read the full act visit http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2013/26/contents/enacted

Anybody with a sane mind can clearly understand that the act nor does any other dictionary definition state a description of a terrorist apart from the characteristics which you must possess, in order to be branded as a terrorist.

 

So my points todays which are to be highlighted for slander and libel are as follows:

If you are a Muslim you and you have done something you are automatically a terrorist? Considering the attacks in North London on the night of 18/06/2017 possess the same characteristics as the other attacks in London, where by numerous pedestrians where knocked over by a moving vehicle.  So just because this guy had no beard and was not a Muslim, nowhere in the media is the guy called a “TERRORIST”!!

 

WAS HIS ACT HE COMMITTED BY DRIVING A VEHICLE AT INNOCENT HARMLESS WORSHIPPERS NOT AN ACT OF TERRORISM? OR IS IT NOT AN ACT OF TERRORISM BECAUSE IT WAS YET AGAIN FURTHER MUSLIMS THAT ARE DIEING AND IT HAS BECOME NORMALITY TO SEE THEM DIE AND WE TURN A BLIND EYE.

 

Why is the media allowed to openly say Muslim/Islamic terrorists? Do we not get Christian/Jewish (etc.) terrorists?

This is defamation of a society of people with in the British Isles. That means every single Muslim with in Britain (and around the world where the news reaches) is a terrorist, when a statement like that is processed openly.

 

SO THIS PETITION HAS BEEN CREATED FOR THE GOVERNMENT TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERTION AND TO STOP ALL THE POINTS MENTIONED.

1.    IF THE MEDIA IS GOING TO USE THE TERM TERRORIST NOT TO DEFAME A GROUP OF PEOPLE SUCH AS THE MUSLIMS OR ANY OTHER GROUP.

2.    IF IT CAN NOT BE STOPPED THEN ALSO WRITE BRITISH WHITE TERRORIST/CHRISTIAN TERRORIST ETC. JUST LIKE THE BRITISH MEDIA USE BRITSH MUSLIM/ ISLAMIC TERRORIST ETC.

3.    THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT CREATE LAWS AND YET OPENLY USE ITS GREATEST SOURCE NAMELY THE MEDIA TO OPENLY DEFAME A WHOLE SOCIETY NAMELY THE MUSLIM SOCIETY.

4.    IF THE WORD TERRORIST IS TO BE USED BY THE MEDIA FOR IT TO BE USED IN THE CORRECT CONTEXT, WITHOUT INCLUDING MUSLIM/ISLAMIC BECAUSE TERRORISM HAS NO COLOUR, RELIGION, SEX OR RACE. ALTHOUGH THE FACTORS MENTIONED CAN BE USED AS AN EXCUSE FOR TERRORISTS. (BY NOT CALLING THE WHITE GUY FROM THE ATTACKS IN LONDON ON 18/06/2017 A TERRORIST IT CLEARLY STATES THAT ONLY MUSLIMS ARE TERRORISTS AS THE WHITE GUY’S ACTIONS WERE NO DIFFERENT FROM THE PREVIOUS ATTACKS IN LONDON  , HIS ATTEMPT WERE  TO KILL A SECT OF PEOPLE NAMELY MUSLIMS)

SO HELP US STOP THIS NONSENSE AND STOP THE MEDIA PAINTING A FALSE PICTURE.

 

 

 

 

 



Today: Adeel is counting on you

Adeel Mahmood needs your help with “UK Parliament: STOP MEDIA DEFAMING A SECT OF PEOPLE OPENLY”. Join Adeel and 57 supporters today.