Useless Yousef has been hoist with his own petard.
Humza Yousaf has reportedly been hit with more complaints than JK Rowling under the SNP‘s controversial new hate crime laws. More than 3,000 complaints have been made to police since the legislation came into force on Monday.
A police source said the Scottish First Minister received more hate crime reports about a speech he made to Holyrood in 2020 than the Harry Potter author got over her trans comments.
The source told The Sun: “A lot of those complaints were about Humza Yousaf, on the same complaint about his parliamentary rant. JK Rowling has had some, but not as many as Humza Yousaf.”
Wonderful. Couldn’t happen to a more deserving scumbag. This is what needs to happen.
Scumbag LR? You’re being far too polite. Anyone who has seen/heard his “White” speech would agree with me.
Nice moniker. How many of your readers know the significance, Heuchter Even know how to pronounce it?
Pretty please. This is not said in a hateful, racist, sexist, clanist, pictist, and all the restist, way.
Doonhamer.
The Indian Council of Scotland reported the Scottish government to the police because their guidance on the law was particularly critical of young white men.
They said this was likely to stir up hate against white men.
Brilliant by the Indian Council of Scotland
Sounds like “zero tolerance for hatred” to me.
This stupid, stupid, stupid STUPID, vicious and hate filled inadequate, disgusting pustule of inferiority and resentment has just provided the perfect weapon.
Good to see sensible people using it.
This is excellent news. I’m hoping that this runs and runs. Repeatedly nail those responsible for this odious piece of legislation with their own shitty law.
Since the 1950s I have known of no prejudice against any race, gay of either sex, nationality (except English), religion (except the crazy Catlick / Proddy thing among people who never go to Church), race, colour. They are just accepted. A few folk, men, women were known to be homosexual (gay still meant happy), and they knew that we knew. And we knew that they knew that we knew. But, hey, everybody is different. And they do not feel the need to adopt a different accent/dialect.
When we lived in Stevenage (England, England) I was delighted to find that the lady serving at the best chippie in town was definitely Chinese, but with a great Govan, Glesgie accent. Think Rab C. Nesbitt. And we could talk naturally to each other.
This Law is a farce, and all “communidies” will enjoy tearing the arse out of it.
But the “tranz” thing might be step too far. Or then again, just another way for Scots ( of all LBGBQUERTY ++#@l to extract the urine.
Addendum. If you suspect that you may be charged with “HATE” get your retaliation in early because the only reason your accuser could be doing this is…….HATE….. Sounds of Psycho shower scene violins.
Delicious though it would be if the wretched man was hoist by his own petard, I’m pretty certain that the legislation is not retrospective. However, the complaints show that if he ever makes the same sort of racist speech again he almost certainly will be.
That’s the point. We are watching you.
Not retrospective? I’m sure JR didn’t say anything in the last few days and I’m sure he still publishes his speech on YT. He needs to take it down.
This will coming to the rest of the UK when the left-wing vermin get a sniff of power later in the year.
As Thomas Ross KC pointed out, this actually brings Scots Law closer into line with that in England and Wales than it’s been for about twenty years. It sort of leapfrogs it, to be fair, with the dilution of the requirement for intent, the abolition of corroboration in “aggravated” crimes, etc., but the extension of “protected groups” under the Public Order Act 1986 has already happened “down south”.
This is misguided. The pleasure of taking some sort of revenge against Hamza Yousef for his ‘white’ speech, which wasn’t a crime when he made the speech is diverting attention from a very bad law. Already the authorities have said that they won’t prosecute J.K.Rowling for her statements that appear to be crimes under this law. So, a law that won’t be enforced when enforcement would cause problems for the authorities. Try standing in a public square in any Scottish town or city with a placard saying’Mohammed had sex with a 9 year old girl’. Or ‘Mohammed kept slaves and allowed his followers to keep slaves’ and see how long it would take for you to be arrested and prosecuted.
“…diverting attention from a very bad law.”
On the contrary, it is highlighting its absurdity. You cannot legislate people’s emotional responses to each other, any more than you can legislate car manufacturers to sell a particular kind of car. The fact that the authorities will only apply the legislation when it suits them is beside the point, although it goes against every principle of natural justice and is a disgrace to any society that claims to be civilised. Those in favour of this crap need reminding that they themselves could easily be trapped by it if they put a step wrong and go from being right on woke to being one of the bad guys, which can happen in an instant if they say just one wrong thing.
These trans etc issues are just a diversion, the real purpose of this new law is to bring in one-sided blasphemy law through the back door.