Nathan Eccleston inder investigation for implying 9/11 was an inside job

“R.I.P all 9/11 victims my thoughts are with their family’s and all those that was affected by this tragic accident!”
“I ain’t going to say attack don’t let the media make u believe that was terrorist that did it. #OTIS.”

Liverpool are investigating striker Nathan Eccleston for comments on Twitter that suggested the 11 September attacks were not the work of terrorists.

A tweet that has since been taken down said: “I ain’t going to say attack don’t let the media make u believe that was terrorist that did it. #OTIS.”

OTIS reportedly stands for Only the Illuminati Succeed.

The 20-year-old has made nine first-team appearances for Liverpool.

A club statement said: “The club takes this matter extremely seriously and senior club officials have informed Nathan Eccleston that we are undertaking an investigation into the circumstances surrounding these postings and will decide on an appropriate course of action.”

Eccleston, who has over 39,000 followers on the social-networking site, has since tweeted: “If you don’t like what I have to say un follow me!! Some things get took way out of context…”

The Manchester-born striker has spent time on loan at Huddersfield Town and Charlton Athletic, and has played for the England Under-17 team.

Eccleston’s injudicious tweet is far from being the first time a professional sportsman has got into trouble through their use of social media – earlier this year former Liverpool player Ryan Babel was disciplined for tweeting an image that implied refereeing bias.

In another example, England cricketer Tim Bresnan rowed with a follower in 2009.

And according to a social media expert, clubs will have to bring in more stringent frameworks to cover players’ use of Twitter and similar sites.

“Clubs need to behave like brands and put proper governance in place to dictate how the players – their employees – behave,” Simon Rutherford, managing director of Cubaka:Social told BBC Sport.

“The club has a reputation to protect and in this case, with American owners, there needs to be an understanding of what you can and cannot say. The player’s bio says that he is a footballer for Liverpool so that is why he gets so many followers, He therefore has a duty towards them in what he says.

“Players need to realise just how damaging a tweet can be, even if they hit the delete button, as he did in this case, someone will have a screenshot and it will be all over the internet. Clubs already give their players media training and increasingly we’ll see that include use of social media.”

And of the potential for clubs to ban players from using Twitter, Rutherford added: “That would be an extreme form of governance and if a club decided that the best way to protect its brand was to stop tweets then they could impose it.

“However [they would be better served] trying to embrace the medium and using it to get their message across.”

bhends wrote:Do they have Freedom of Speech in Britain?

I mean obviously they have some level of a right to speech but...I don't think its the same level as we have here

Regardless, this is employer/employee relationship, not citizen/government...so free speech doesn't really apply

EarlyPrototype wrote:Free country. You can say what you want.

bhends wrote:

EarlyPrototype wrote:Free country. You can say what you want.

Employers also have the right to fire you for saying what you want..

bhends wrote:

EarlyPrototype wrote:Free country. You can say what you want.

Employers also have the right to fire you for saying what you want..

VibeTribe wrote:

bhends wrote:

EarlyPrototype wrote:Free country. You can say what you want.

Employers also have the right to fire you for saying what you want..

How is that? How does 9/11 concern a football club?On what basis can he fire him?

EarlyPrototype wrote:

VibeTribe wrote:

bhends wrote:

EarlyPrototype wrote:Free country. You can say what you want.

Employers also have the right to fire you for saying what you want..

How is that? How does 9/11 concern a football club?On what basis can he fire him?

I am guessing because he is a Liverpool player and he is giving the club a bad name.

Doc wrote:I don't know how to make of this. I'm all for freedom of speech but I find they should really charge these crack pot conspiracy theorists for wasting air time or something.

che wrote:

Doc wrote:I don't know how to make of this. I'm all for freedom of speech but I find they should really charge these crack pot conspiracy theorists for wasting air time or something.

this

stupidity should be illegal

VibeTribe wrote:

EarlyPrototype wrote:

VibeTribe wrote:

bhends wrote:

EarlyPrototype wrote:Free country. You can say what you want.

Employers also have the right to fire you for saying what you want..

How is that? How does 9/11 concern a football club?On what basis can he fire him?

I am guessing because he is a Liverpool player and he is giving the club a bad name.

But he's speaking on his own free time,not in a Liverpool jersey.Wouldn't that be discrimination or something?Someone make this clear,I don't understand these things too well.

Bhends shed some light here,you seem to be familiar with this...

KMD wrote:well this thing is sort of an opinion, or his belief. He doen't take it to the extreme. Its not like he said, "I practice sex with dead animals." His statement is supported and is very popular, you can't deny his right to say it just because your boss doesn't believe in it.