UK.gov slams Facebook over Moat fan clubs Prime Minister David Cameron said yesterday that he would make an official complaint to Facebook because it is hosting discussions and support groups for Raoul Moat. But he might start a little nearer to home. The two sites supposedly set up to support Treasury spending cuts and to crowd-source laws which need repealing are …
What the hell is the point of the mock outrage over this? It's nothing more than the permanently teenaged expressing their hormonal right to be offensive. And they're not even managing to be that offensive. I find it way more offensive that our glorious leader thinks that this is a productive use of his and his staff's time.
Instead of this knee-jerk reaction over 'public sympathy' he should be questioning what it is about our society, and in particular how the police are viewed, that makes some people feel as though Moat deserves sympathy. I'm certainly not condoning Moat's actions at all, but there is something rotten in the state if the public (no matter how small a percentage of them) feel as though a police killer is their latest anti-hero...
Facebook is just the medium, if you remove the posts then people will just go elsewhere.
It is highly dangerous that Cameron makes a complaint to Facebook just because he does not like the content, today Moat, tomorrow disagreement with his budget. All that he has achieved is to publicise the postings - the Streisland effect.
"As far as I can see, it is absolutely clear that Raoul Moat was a callous murderer-full stop, end of story-and I cannot understand any wave, however small, of public sympathy for this man"
Really? Not heard the earlier recordings where fearing for his own mental health, he approached the authorities seeking psychiatric treatment, then?
I know, that's too complex a narrative, the world doesn't have any call to be in shades of grey- politicians must be seen to "get tough" and the facts be damned.
People can say what they want. Isn't Clegeron supposed to be giving freedom back?
Moat probably needed psychiatric help rather than a good old tasering. Policy for which Cameron is ultimately responsible. He should have held off rather than comment. Where's the fine judgement? Knee jerk reactions like this mirror most of the fine work Labour did.
This post has been deleted by its author
Two issues;
1. Freedom of speech!!! (in spite of the fact that the facebook site is mostly vitrol and foul language from idiots)
2. Methinks the Prime Minister needs to think before he comments;
a) There is currently an outstanding coroners inquest - this could turn into a manslaughter case against officers of West Yorkshire Police (come on guys, shotgunned taser rounds against a guy holding a shotgun to his own head!)
b) Mr Moat, following further investigation, appears to be a man with fairly serious mental health issues. Issues that were not addressed by the local NHS and may not have been advised to local police.
This should not detract from the fact that he murdered one person and seriously injured two others, but time will tell as to who is remembered as the murderer(s).
Baby P - The professionals who failed are now more culpable, in the eyes of the RedTops and their readers, than the people who actually murdered Peter. Well, one of the professionals anyway. As ever, social workers are the fall guys whilst police and the NHS, in particular its management, get off comparatively lightly.
Moat - I wonder if we will reach the point where the professionals who failed him are treated as more culpable than Moat for his actions ?
Somehow I doubt it.
Nothing to do with a child being the victim in the first case. Oh, no.
We have already created Folk Heroes out of crimminals in the past, think Ned Kelly, Jesse James, Dillinger, Bonny and Clyde, and the list goes on. Raol Moat is simply getting added to the list, as untasteful as that might be to some of us (Sticks hand up). Maybe Moat should have got himself a suit of armour like Ned and people wouldn't be jumping up and down so much? Either that or the Thought police might be banning all Ned Kelly films, books shortly.
Seems people (Politicos) arn't keeping up to date on events, Raoul Moat asked for psychiatric assesment and support, I think the people who decided not to give it to him share some of the blame.
Callous evil killers tend not to ask for help, and if a person is willing to ask for help it means that they have hummanity.
I quite like the idea of the Roal moat is a hero group as it make it much easier for me to see who i want to have on my FB friends list and who i don't. If your so uneducated and stupid that you join the group and didn't actually know Roal Moat on a personal level and i expect to be removed from my friends list shortly afterwards.
The funniest comment i heard over the Roal Moat situation was a woman speaking on the radio about placing flowers outside his house she said ' I didn't know Roal Moat but from what i understand he was just a gentle giant'
Yeah cos i remember is the childrens classic book The BGF the part where the giant shoots his ex girlfriend, kills her new partner and open fires on an unarmed police man possibly blinding him for life.
Where as i dont agree with the sentiment behind the FB group if its not breaking any law then it should remain and Facebook shouldnt be forced into removing something from there site just because our PM asked them too. but then they shouldnt have been made to install a CEOP button because of the 'wont someone think of the children' brigade. There is nothing to stop someone creating an anti Roal Moat group calling him an unbalanced psycho.
What i find strange is that Roal Moat was not really any different that Derrick Bird in that they were both classed as being 'normal' but then pushed over the edge but no one is calling Derrick Bird a hero because he didnt go after the police.
The Prime Minister of the UK announcing on National Televsion that he disagrees with something written on ArseBook. I take it he realises that the first thing most [ignorant] people will do is rush over to said time wasting website to see what all the fuss is about. Smart people will wonder why he's drawing attention to it. Wonder how much extra ad revenue FaceBook is going to be able to put down to the actions of this psychopath. Every cloud...
I don't recall anyone saying that sympathy should only be limited to one person. I feel sorry for the girlfriend, her now fatherless children and the poor cop that was blinded by Moat.
I also feel sorry for Moat himself - normal, mentally balanced individuals do not go on killing sprees. The guy was paranoid and a drug abuser. He needed help, didn't get it and went mad as a result.
A shitty set of circumstances for all involved. One other point - controversial subjects attract trolls like a magnet attracts filings. Does our web-savvy PM really think all those messages are genuine?
Freedom of speech does not exist on Facebook. I have had my account closed on more than one occasion for infringing on the calling Mark Zuckerberg a c*nt policy.
Mark will trumpet on about free speech as long as the content isnt too disagreeable to him and gives no fodder for legal action.
More importantly I think sympathy for Moat is more about general hatred of police in the UK than anything else. If they spent time and money pursuing criminals rather than road users we might be in support of them by default.
He's the Prime Minister. His business is dealing with international diplomacy, promoting policy and heading his party. If some law has been contravened, then that's a process for the courts. It's an abuse of his position to start writing letters saying that social groups should or should not support particular positions because he himself finds them distasteful.
Free speech is free speech is free speech.
I believe we all have a responsibility to act in such a way that we do the best for society as a whole. That's true of organizations and individuals because the actions of all of us affect society as a whole. If you want to believe that legal obligation is a suitable substitute for practical responsibilty, then that's your perogative. But I certainly can judge people and organizations on this basis and have just done so. My views are internally consistent and derived from first principles. If actions have a repurcussion on society, legal obligation or no, then by definition you are responsible for those repurcussions. There are plenty of things that are legal which I deem to be harmful to society and condemn. Facebook has become a focal point of much community discussion which gives it a great deal of potential power over public debate. I disagree that private ownership absolves it of upholding free speech. When 98% of the main areas that community debates occur are privately owned, the practical effects of private ownership equating to rights over discussion, become very serious indeed.
Do you want to point me at non-privately owned places of discussion that are even remotely significant as Facebook? Free speech is free speach and the only argument for intefering with that is an organizational one, not a political one (i.e. "these are the Gentoo forums, hold your Ubuntu discussion somewhere else").
They took too long and used too many people to apprehend him. Since his target was police and not the public why not just go on high alert and wait him out.
Also Mr Moat is the least heinous category of murder - mental issues, perhaps the only category that deserves our help rather than a needle in the neck fit for all the rest that kill, rape, abuse children.
The fact that he had 'mental issues' doesn't necessarily make him mentally ill. It's not the same thing at all. If he'd been caught he might well have been declared sane. Maybe he had some legitimate problems, but it seems he had serious form in terms of beating the crap out of people and treating his children badly, and I don't think this is a straight case of 'man is mentally ill, not responsible for actions'. Not by any means. He was pretty good at blaming others for his own actions, that's for sure, and I'm sure he'd be pleased that others are now doing the same.
Eeeesh. It's all pretty nasty, and while I can almost understand the sympathy - almost - I'll never understand the admiration. There is absolutely nothing admirable about this man or what he did. Any of it.
And it's mostly agreeing. But the legal defence of 'insanity' or lack thereof ('declared sane') has no connection with mental health issues. I work in a voluntary role with mental health charities, and most people are fully aware of what they're doing most of the time, Moat by the sound of it was aware his thoughts were wrong and would almost undoubtedly have been found guilty.
is the anorak.co.uk website which comes out with 'news' stuff copied from Moat's 49 page letter to the cops.
http://www.anorak.co.uk/253095/media/why-raoul-moat-hates-the-police-and-shot-sam-stobbart-to-help-her.html
it reads nothing like the reliable SUN or the MAIL. these Anorak or (Borders eveningexpress.co.uk) independent points of view ought to be banned. it's really a bad idea of the Anorak to publish original source material quotes which put some perspective on the matter , rather than condemning out of hand a cross-dressing peadofile rapist murderer, like our traditional news sources. Anorak seem to be following the Julius Assange journalistic strategy and we all know where that will lead!
It's all very well trying to defend absolute freedom of speech, except that it doesn't really exist. Society (currently, and you're welcome to argue against this stance) places limits on free speech. I am not free to make public statements that encourage violence against homosexuals, immigrants and other minorities, and if I did so in an identifiable way I would be in trouble. What about the friends and relatives of those whom Moat killed and injured, do you think they might be upset by (apparently) thousands of idiots leaping onto the Facebook and other bandwagons?
No doubt Moat had his mental problems (as, arguably, does anyone that commits premeditated murder), and no doubt we're going to see a lot of 20-20 hindsight being flaunted in the newsrags claiming that he should have had earlier or better treatment. But I really doubt that there are simple and affordable solutions out there that will limit this kind of once a decade* event to a once a century event.
* Yes, I know we've had two somewhat similar events this year, but taking a longer view, I think once a decade is approximately the correct figure.
Voters in the NE of england voted for the NF not because they believed in them but because they saw no better party to vote for. My mum voted NF I was shocked but can actually understand why.
Likewise with the NE police - I suspect a lot of the people on the forums are condemming the police because they really really hate the local police - probably because they have beaten a relation and gotten off with a warning - it happens a lot :-(
My sister has a friend who was escorting a load of 12yo's (youth football team) off the train when the plod decided to raid the train full of "football hooligans". They beat him unconcious in front of the kids then set two police dogs on him while he was unconcious. He may never recover use of the hand one of the dogs tore apart.
While recovering in hospital the "CID" turned up to try and threaten him into keeping quiet when he told them to speak to his solictor they walked out. Next a PR officer representing the chief constable turned up to apologise and offer compensation - he told them to talk to his solicitor and they walked out without comment.
They force are now fighting the case and have tried a number of dirty tricks to get him to drop the case including stopping his parents car, stripping it by the side of the road then leaving his aged relative to put it back together.
The officers who almost killed him have yet to be identified.
Can you understand why the police have no public respect and are hated by more and more of the community?
Glad Moat was killed. He was a murdering scum ball with a death wish. It was granted.
Sad Dave feels the need to wank about this when he has far more important things to worry about. He also doesn't appear to grasp the concept of free speech...shows that he is a narcissistic cretin...as if his pre-election poster campaign wasn't enough to prove that.
I like all of Moat's slippery mates exposing themselves to the media...hopefully they'll all be in a field soon theatrically pressing shotguns to their thug heads.
because you have less humanity than a common garden slug you snot nosed little cleft.
The entire story from start to finish is a tragic disgrace, disgrace on the media that showed the live human hunt and the agencies that ignored all the requests to be helped and then to be stopped.
Most of the blame is on the Gubment. Just because Moat asked for help does not mean the social workers should be blamed for not giving it to him. There are more people in need of help than there are resources to give it. If they helped him, some other poor sod would not have been given it, and he could have gone on the killing spree.
You only ever hear about the social workers' work when things go wrong. How about hearing about it when it goes right for a change? That would be more use of Cameron's time than complaining about FB, or pissing about with stupid sites to find laws to repeal.
"As far as I can see, it is absolutely clear that Nelson Mandela was a callous murderer-full stop, end of story-and I cannot understand any wave, however small, of public sympathy for this man. There should be sympathy for his victims, and for the havoc he wreaked in that community; there should be no sympathy for him."
Those setting up the groups have every right to do so. Anyone even saying they agree with Moat killing cops has a right to do so. Cameron has a right to say he disagrees with what they are saying. Cameron, as a person, has a right to complain to Facebook about it. Cameron AS PRIME MINISTER does NOT have a right to put that weight behind the complaint, as this amounts to government-sanctioned censorship.
I am also disgusted that this point has not been raised by Clegg. Although I have slowly lost my support for the LibDems since the formation of the coalition, due to them doing what all politicians have done and put aside personal and party values in order to maintain power, he should at least show some Cojones and challenge Dave on the fundamental right to free speech.
Come on Nick, show the country you are not just a lap dog and stand up for your parties supposed principals AT LEAST ONCE!
There's - what - a billion Internet users and this group has 30,000 followers? Statistically, that's nothing and worries me not one jot.
However, I am concerned that a UK politician thinks it's his right to tell a US-registered company what comments it allows its users to post on a medium that is published outside the UK. Come to think of it, if he really wants to dabble in UK/US relations, he could start with the problems around the extradition of Gary McKinnon! After all, if he think he can tell Facebook where to get off, why stop there! Go Dave! ;-)
Basic problem as I see it: the man killed a cop and threatened to kill more. Of *course* they'll throw everything they can to catch him and treat him with..umm..mild prejudice & this will always produce a counter-reaction in a minority. It wouldn't surprise me if the Taser was used after the shotgun was fired 'to establish any signs of life without risking further casualties' (translation: "he killed my mate, I have a Taser and we all want a peice of his ass"). The Police are a tight-knit bunch and look after their own first and foremost. Adverse reaction? Par for the course; it should have been expected.
Yorkshire? When did someone go postal there?
Oh you must be a southerner... anything north of the midlands is the Peoples Republic of Yorkshire?
Moat shot his victims in Gateshead and Newcastle, thats Tyne and Wear.
He was cornered and shot himself in Rothbury, that's Northumberland.
Shandy drinker...
why is it suddenly prime ministers job to give his ignorant opinion of every news story?
isnt there enough for him to do in office, making the country a better place and all that shit? or does he just sit there watching news 24 all day?
I couldn't care less what PM thinks of recent news story X. When I want opinions I come here. When I want someone to fix pot holes or diagnose my wang problem I go to the government.
"A man goes postal in Yorkshire and announces that he will kill people and indeed does, the police respond"
They responded after he'd started killing people. Just like they did in Cumbria. Only in Yorkshire they got a head start.
Who'd be a cop? Someone who only listens to what suits them, apparently.
Thats right Mr Cameron, lets just wash our hands of the whole situation, he was obviously born evil and callous, society has no part to play in the creation of such people.. Nor can it be held in any way responsible in its failure to aid such people when they seek help... full stop, end of story.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
