advertisement


Aristocrat guilty over Gina Miller post

merlin said:
It is indicative of society that idiots like Paul would rather defend the rights of fascists to not be subjected to threatening posts than he would defend the right to freedom of expression. Hence the need for posts that are necessarily vague.

One person will complain about non specific references and another with far right, fascist sympathies will lie in wait because they feel threatened by the Gina Millar case and want to flip its ruling.

My opinion is that we ought to be allowed to call a spade a spade on line. The fact that fascists on PFM cannot differentiate between openly calling for the elimination of those responsible for mass suffering and those openly offering to pay for the elimination of human rights campaigners again speaks volumes about their distorted and abhorrent right wing views of the world IMO.
Click to expand...

Just to make it clear any exremism whether its hard right or hard left with their distorted and abhorrent left wing or right wing views is not generally beneficial for this country nor rest of the world.
 
sean99 said:
I don't know what Merlin intended, but I think the American healthcare system might qualify, and especially if the Republicans manage to push it back into the dark ages.

Merlin didn't word his post well, so here's my take.

Americans are taught that Isis is their feared enemy, to be wiped out by any and all means. OK so far.

However should the republicans repeal Obamacare far more Americans will die of preventable causes than Isis could ever hope of killing. Hundreds of thousands of Americans will die prematurely because of unnecessary legislation aimed to give a small (<2%) tax cut to the wealthiest Americans. Hundreds of thousands, maybe millions more will be bankrupted should they ever get sick.

We have a severe problem with enemy identification. If radical Islam ever managed to kill a tenth of the number that this healthcare "overhaul" will kill Fox news et al would be screaming the "end of days".
Click to expand...

Indeed Sean - the concept of radical capitalism is no different IMHO to that of radical Islam, that the masses become subservient to a doctrine that makes many suffer whilst those who speak out against it are ruthlessly crushed. In radical capitalism, corporate profit is placed above all else. In radical Islam, the Koran is given a similar prominence.

The difference is that radical capitalism continues to kill more and cause more misery than radical Islam has and yet there are those on here who actually live by and vote for its doctrine.

It's a jump too far for many to see the doctrines in the same light - but try to look at the two from a purely moral perspective and the levels of consideration given to the masses in the pursuit of them. Consider also the environment in which you grew up and were educated.

Your example of the American health care industry is indeed a good example on one level.
 
merlin said:
My opinion is that we ought to be allowed to call a spade a spade on line. The fact that fascists on PFM cannot differentiate between openly calling for the elimination of those responsible for mass suffering and those openly offering to pay for the elimination of human rights campaigners again speaks volumes about their distorted and abhorrent right wing views of the world IMO.
Click to expand...

The trouble is that your definition of 'those responsible for mass suffering' seems very broad, to judge by those you've named as deserving to be killed. You also seem to have a 'thing' about Jewish people, and about women in the media, several of whom you've deemed worthy of 'a slapping'. Added to which, you have a 'thing' about those you deem to be 'vulgar' or 'chavvy'. Indeed, the range of your intolerance embraces so many people/groups that it's highly amusing to see you posing as a champion of human rights.

Of course, in reality you're not going to kill, or even slap anybody. The most you'll do is barge into them, and I'm guessing you wouldn't even do that if it was a group of Millwall fans outside their local rather than some toffs sipping Pimm's at Henley.
 
Your dishonest link doesn't say one little word about the actual offensive part of the video
Click to expand...
When does what you find offensive become criminal?

DonQuixote99 said:
You maybe can still make a case for innocuous satire, but the case gets a little harder....
Click to expand...
Your qualification of 'satire' by 'innocuous' is unnecessary and somewhat telling.

I have no problem if you want to gas the jews, or if merlin wants to murder Pimms drinkers. Many people have all sorts of extremely unpleasant views. It should only cross into law when thoughts start to become movements.

We're unfortunate in Europe, and in the UK we threw it away with the HRA, not to have the freedoms of the US.

Paul
 
Joe Hutch said:
The trouble is that your definition of 'those responsible for mass suffering' seems very broad, to judge by those you've named as deserving to be killed. You also seem to have a 'thing' about Jewish people, and about women in the media, several of whom you've deemed worthy of 'a slapping'. Added to which, you have a 'thing' about those you deem to be 'vulgar' or 'chavvy'. Indeed, the range of your intolerance embraces so many people/groups that it's highly amusing to see you posing as a champion of human rights.
Click to expand...

I assume you are making ridiculous generalisations to point out the broadness of those I consider worthy of getting the Saddam treatment.

Let's be clear. I consider anyone of any demonination, race, sex or creed who cares not about the oppression and suffering of the masses caused in the pursuit of an agenda, to be equally abhorrent. I think that's a perfectly reasonable attitude to take and one that many, encumbered by various primitive tribal allegiances, simply fail to grasp.

As for the rest , we all have people in society we connect with and those we find objectionable. Some of you even find "cyclists" to be abhorrent.
 
Paul R said:
When does what you find offensive become criminal?

[...]
I have no problem if you want to gas the jews, or if merlin wants to murder Pimms drinkers. Many people have all sorts of extremely unpleasant views. It should only cross into law when thoughts start to become movements.

We're unfortunate in Europe, and in the UK we threw it away with the HRA, not to have the freedoms of the US.
Click to expand...

Movements tend to start with ideas, which are propagated by repetition and publication. That, as I'm sure you know, is why hate speech is deemed illegal (to answer also your first question) - it either incites gullible and stupid people to do things, or it creates fear in people who might expect to have those things done to them, neither of which is something which should be tolerated in a civilised society.

The HRA has many sensible and necessary checks and balances. For every right decreed by the Act, each article then sets out the circumstances in which the state is permitted to interfere with that right. We threw nothing away when we adopted it, and will likely throw away plenty if we discard it.

As I'm sure you have been told many times before.
 
Joe Hutch said:
Of course, in reality you're not going to kill, or even slap anybody. The most you'll do is barge into them, and I'm guessing you wouldn't even do that if it was a group of Millwall fans outside their local rather than some toffs sipping Pimm's at Henley.
Click to expand...

Joe, there's a touch of the vaudeville in your description. Millwall- are they well 'ard?
 
Do you think Baron Strange of Knockin has been advised to say in a calm, assertive voice "I'm Millwall" in the event he's confronted in his cell by boat jumpers?
 
Paul R said:
When does what you find offensive become criminal?
Click to expand...

When and as the lawmakers may agree. I think in countries that do outlaw hate speech, "gas the jews" is just the sort of thing they mean. Advocates murderous violence against a persecuted minority, doesn't it?

Paul R said:
Your qualification of 'satire' by 'innocuous' is unnecessary and somewhat telling.

I have no problem if you want to gas the jews, or if merlin wants to murder Pimms drinkers. Many people have all sorts of extremely unpleasant views. It should only cross into law when thoughts start to become movements.

We're unfortunate in Europe, and in the UK we threw it away with the HRA, not to have the freedoms of the US.

Paul
Click to expand...

The 'innocuous' was not a fair reading of your position? The fellow was just 'taking the piss' wasn't he?

I have no problem with what you want either. It's what you do, to include, in some cases, what you say in public. BTW, looks like movements all over, not that that's the test...

3746778998.PNG
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top