RE: Freedom can go to hell! (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

LadyEllen -> RE: Freedom can go to hell! (1/12/2010 7:21:48 AM)

ah but - these dickheads are making all Muslims look bad and so dividing British society in a way that is uncalled for and dangerous. They provoke great anger in otherwise reasonable and tolerant Brits of all stripes, which is inevitably identified with other Muslims, like the guys who walk up and down past my house to and from the Mosque, who look very much alike to these idiots. It can be a direct impact effect (some Muslim getting beaten senseless) or more insidious (everyone regarding Muslims with suspicion and dislike) but either way it divides us and sets us against one another - when all the time we all agree that these wars are disagreeable.

E



Moonhead -> RE: Freedom can go to hell! (1/12/2010 7:42:31 AM)

The muslim tolerance association website had to be shut down for a couple of weeks after the 2005 tube bombings, didn't it?



SL4V3M4YB3 -> RE: Freedom can go to hell! (1/12/2010 7:42:41 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyEllen
"Islam will dominate the world - freedom can go to hell" read the banner held high today by the five British Muslims

I saw that banner and thought: what a moronic thing to say considering their attempts at free speech, in any case who is going to say "Yeah great let's have some tyranny I'll vote for that." This is kind of why I never fear such groups like the far right does because ultimately we all enjoy our religious and other freedoms and nobody in this country is going to give them up in any vote. This group will only attract people that want to make a name for themselves and have a cause to fight, as a political organisation it will never get off the ground.

I think the group has been banned now whatever that means in real terms?

As for the freedoms of speech arguments they just don't stand up because what they were saying amounted to public slander. You can't go around lying about people or organisations as part of your protest. If they had toned it down a bit and restricted their message to 'the war is wrong' then there wouldn't have been a case but they went further shouting malicious lies and defamatory remarks intended to incite hatred in other ignoramuses.

There was another protest by a supposed related group that wanted to carry empty coffins to represent all the killed Muslims through Wootton Bassettt (the town that stands out and honours our war dead as they are brought back). I understood the sentiment of that march/protest but not the reason why they wanted to conduct it at that location. It would have been akin to me going to the funeral of someone I don’t like and saying “I hated that prick”. Those events are more for the families and friends and should be non political. There is no question related to freedom of speech in respect to this coffin protest idea as I do think in London outside the Houses of Parliament it would have been valid. People however should recognise that where opinions about something are polarised to the extent that it could lead to violence if a protest takes place then you can’t have that protest realistically. It’s a bit like the orange march in N.I. you have to be sensible and realise things that can lead to violence need to be stopped. The problem with that is it leads to the idea that violence can stifle legitimate peaceful protest.

'Freedom can go to hell' is such a stupid thing to say it's hilarious[:D], these people have never known a world without freedom. They've probably grown up in the west and take it for granted, like the rest of us. I'd love for them to live in a world without freedom. Perhaps our freedoms aren’t the best freedoms in the world but others don't have anywhere near as much freedom as we do. Perhaps they meant their freedom can go to hell and are happy to go to prison for holding unpopular opinions??? I just can't figure out the meaning here.

http://www.metro.co.uk/news/808599-wootton-bassett-islam-protest-group-islam4uk-banned-under-terror-laws



LadyEllen -> RE: Freedom can go to hell! (1/12/2010 8:38:56 AM)

dont know MH. What I do know though is that my friend, a girl of Turkish extraction but adopted by white British parents and more English than most, took to wearing a crucifix in 2001 - out of fear of being identified as Muslim and targetted by idiots. Its this sort of insidious effect that is so often overlooked I think - she was put in fear (maybe even of her life), so how much more were everyday Muslims?

E



Silence8 -> RE: Freedom can go to hell! (1/12/2010 10:55:41 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: AquaticSub

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

I am surprised they were imprisoned for exercising free speech..that would not have happened in the US..Ironic that our boys and girls are fighting for the rights of people like them.

Butch


Free speech is not a right to say anything anywhere. They would have to apply for a permit to hold a protest like anyone else.


I don't think anyone should need a permit to protest, not even aquatic superheros. Also, sounds like a waste of money.



LadyEllen -> RE: Freedom can go to hell! (1/12/2010 11:07:24 AM)

Just imagining how one might go about protesting against the requirement to get a permit to mount a protest. Surely, one would not bother applying for a permit......?

E



LadyEllen -> RE: Freedom can go to hell! (1/12/2010 11:18:21 AM)

Just reported on the news - the organisation the nutters belong to has been proscribed.

E



Silence8 -> RE: Freedom can go to hell! (1/12/2010 11:22:14 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyEllen

Just imagining how one might go about protesting against the requirement to get a permit to mount a protest. Surely, one would not bother applying for a permit......?

E


Yes, actually a sort of vortex would appear at the protest sight and none of the participants would ever be seen again...



DCWoody -> RE: Freedom can go to hell! (1/12/2010 11:52:06 AM)

Lady Ellen - That sort of thing has happened. There was some great footage of a few policemen running round in circles chasing clowns.

I forget why they were clowns.



philosophy -> RE: Freedom can go to hell! (1/12/2010 11:59:35 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DCWoody

Lady Ellen - That sort of thing has happened. There was some great footage of a few policemen running round in circles chasing clowns.

I forget why they were clowns.


...wasn't that the G8 conference in Scotland?




LadyEllen -> RE: Freedom can go to hell! (1/12/2010 12:00:29 PM)

I was gonna say - I'm sure I was at that play party myself.

E



Moonhead -> RE: Freedom can go to hell! (1/12/2010 12:37:23 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyEllen

Just imagining how one might go about protesting against the requirement to get a permit to mount a protest. Surely, one would not bother applying for a permit......?

E

Didn't Mark Thomas do a routine about that?



NorthernGent -> RE: Freedom can go to hell! (1/12/2010 2:23:16 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyEllen

ah but - these dickheads are making all Muslims look bad



That's the sort of bullying mentality which is 'making this country look bad' (were you to take your argument to its logical conclusion). So a few people act like idiots and somehow that's representative of 2 million muslims? So much for English tolerance eh.

Have you ever watched debates with christians and muslims? It's embarassing. The muslim lot are the tolerant ones saying something along the lines of: "look - we came to this country because we respect it - don't hold us accountable for the fringe elements - we respect your religion". And the christian lot say something like: "ah but your book advocates violence - ours doesn't - and while ours is not open to interpretation yours is and of course you'll interpret it in your favour". Have you ever heard anything so fuckin' ridiculous?

And then there's the coup de grace: "why aren't muslims condemning the actions of the terrorists?" Totally pathetic - why should people get involved in something that is nothing to do with them? Because the majority demand it? That is bullying. And the Muslim Council of Britain is making a rod for its own back because the more they defend the actions of the few - actions that have nothing to do with them - the more the mob will continue to beat them with a stick.

And why isn't it legitamate protest to challenge Britain's involvement in waltzing into someone's country and rearranging the furniture? It is legitimate protest of course. And people don't like it because the response to the British government's bullying is not in the rules set out by the British government and associates? It's absolutely comical - why on earth would they let someone take over their show and in effect accept it by responding with tactics that the British government can deal with no problem.



Moonhead -> RE: Freedom can go to hell! (1/12/2010 2:29:14 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyEllen

dont know MH. What I do know though is that my friend, a girl of Turkish extraction but adopted by white British parents and more English than most, took to wearing a crucifix in 2001 - out of fear of being identified as Muslim and targetted by idiots. Its this sort of insidious effect that is so often overlooked I think - she was put in fear (maybe even of her life), so how much more were everyday Muslims?

E

There was an awful lot of that. A couple of mosques were firebombed, iirc, and there were a lot of beatings. Some taxi driver got kicked to death in Hanley.

I'm with NorthernGent: as he says, there's over two million muslims in the country. If they wanted to live under sharia law they'd have stayed in some backwater in pakistan or middle east where women don't get to speak. These are mostly the more progressive elements of their religion, so treating them as a homegenous mass of jihadists because a few wankers think it's still the fourteenth century isn't on at all.



NorthernGent -> RE: Freedom can go to hell! (1/12/2010 3:01:41 PM)

P.S. Yeah...read your post again....same as mine.....ah well...



FirmhandKY -> RE: Freedom can go to hell! (1/12/2010 5:11:50 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: philosophy


quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic


Could you clarify what you mean by this, Phil?  As I'm reading it, I have to disagree in the strongest of terms.  We have our individual state variations of course, and there are always skirmishes along the fringe, but I don't think that is what you mean.


...happy to oblige.

The answer comes in two parts.

The first part you yourself referred to in a later post.
"Most of our nonsense restrictions are regarding sex and dirty words broadcast on the public airwaves"
In large part there are bizarre and nonsensical restrictions on the type of language useable in public settings. i freely admit it's a small thing, but if you're going to suggest that the US is the land of free speech because people are free to taunt mourners at a funeral the very least you can do is let the word 'fuck' be used on tv.

The second part i'm fairly sure you'll disagree with, but here goes. Free speech is only free when speech is free of restriction. This doesn't just mean you're free to say something, it also means you're free of consequences. In the US there are consequences to speaking certain things. Try going to a local bar and then, in a loud voice, suggest that the US should take responsibility for creating the climate in which Islamic terrorism occured. Think there'd be a sanction applied to you? Probably.

Now, you'd quite rightly point out that speech always has consequences. i'd agree. and this is why i say that there is only an illusion of free speech in the USA. Because speech always has consequences, it is always conditional. In effect there is no such thing as free speech. It's an impossibility. The USA is the only country that tries to maintain an illusion that speech can be free.

Hope that clarifies my position Rich. i always enjoy debating with you :)


philo,

If being challenged by other free citizens exercising their right to free speech, makes "free speech" an "illusion", then we have very different concepts of both rights and responsibilities.

In fact, your definition makes the concept of free will moot, and reinforces a victim mentality.

Firm



philosophy -> RE: Freedom can go to hell! (1/12/2010 5:24:50 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

philo,

If being challenged by other free citizens exercising their right to free speech, makes "free speech" an "illusion", then we have very different concepts of both rights and responsibilities.

In fact, your definition makes the concept of free will moot, and reinforces a victim mentality.

Firm



...sorry Firm, you're missing my point. i really am saying there's no such thing as free speech as espoused by most US posters here. There is an illusion of it, but as you suggest, the fact that other people can respond as they will creates conditionality. Essentially, it mitigates against unpopular uses of free speech, while leaving popular uses of speech alone. This is not free speech as defined by most Americans. What it does do is reinforce the cultural status quo, at the expense of cultural radicalism.
As for how it makes free will moot and a victim mentality, you'll have to explain that further to me. Because as the moment that just looks like a non sequitar.



SL4V3M4YB3 -> RE: Freedom can go to hell! (1/12/2010 5:26:40 PM)

No such thing as free speech exists in reality, we all know this.



marine87 -> RE: Freedom can go to hell! (1/12/2010 6:06:17 PM)

My definition of free speech is speaking without fear. I hold it along the same lines of free will except thats the act instead. Anyone who decides to say what he wants with no regard is speaking freely maybe that person can careless if what he's saying is harmful. From what you are saying is that everyone in US and world are afraid, I beg to differ.



SL4V3M4YB3 -> RE: Freedom can go to hell! (1/12/2010 6:16:43 PM)

You can't say what you like in any environment, so your speech is restricted to saying things that will not cause alarm, panic or instigate violence. Shouting obscenities at a funeral process or site associated with such is as insensitive as shouting "There a bomb everyone is going to die" on a plane. Or indeed a less extreme example; just raising your voice of displeasure in such a secure environment.

You might have freedom of opinion but that isn't quite the same, perhaps I am however getting a bit caught up in philosophical specifics.



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875