The Day Has Come...

[BWare 0]

My point is that in the UK, "inciting hatred" is not inluded in rights to free speech.

 

Therefore, what you call 'Big Brother' laws of the UK, are very similar to the no-threatening-the-president laws of the US, only a little stricter.

 

It has nothing to do with big brother, the law is simply saying that there is no place for hate-mongers in the UK.

 

Thats all Im trying to say.

Nope. I see exactly what you're saying, but you're dead wrong. Laws against "inciting hatred" ARE, in fact, a great example of that kind of "big brother" Orwellian oppression. It's thought crime! Who's to say what's "hate-mongering" or not?? If a preacher were to preach that homosexuality is a sin in the eyes of God (right out of the Bible), or that abortion was a sin, would he be silenced, have his freedoms removed, because, according to the state, he's encouraging hate against homosexuals or abortion doctors? It's a scary-as-hell-slippery slope there my friend. That's easily the most relevant example of Orwellian oppression TODAY.

 

"Hate-mongering?" Give me a break :roll:

[gammyleg 0]

I wont pretend to know the intricacies of UK law, however Im sure that they dont extend as far as your abortion and homosexuality scenarios. Im sure it only ever gets used in obvious cases of 'Inciting Hatred'. I dont think its nearly as dramatic as youd like to think it is, and it gets used for shutting up racists, and the likes of this women at the start of the thread.

 

That being said I might be wrong, and everyone in the UK is living 1984.

 

Anyway, Im not sure how my cheeky little comment about the president turned into me participating in a heated debate, but!

 

I now officially remove myself from any political debate with the all-knowing BWare from now on.

[BWare 0]

I wont pretend to know the intricacies of UK law, however Im sure that they dont extend as far as your abortion and homosexuality scenarios.

I'm sure they don't. The issue is precedent.

 

Im sure it only ever gets used in obvious cases of 'Inciting Hatred'.

Again, who determines what an "obvious case" of "inciting hatred" is? It's a slippery slope dude...

 

I dont think its nearly as dramatic as youd like to think it is, and it gets used for shutting up racists, and the likes of this women at the start of the thread.

Why in the HELL should we silence people like that? Don't you see how dangerous that is? If anything, we should be doing what Hannity and Colmes did there and expose them for everyone to see. Stupidity will reveal itself. Shutting them up only emboldens them and adds a sort of gravitas to what they have to say. That's the brilliance of free speech- don't eliminate ANYTHING from the public forum. Tell me what could be more 1984 than that?

 

Anyway, Im not sure how my cheeky little comment about the president turned into me participating in a heated debate, but!

It wasn't that. It was your equating hateful speech with security threats, which was by all accounts a stupid thing to do.

 

I now officially remove myself from any political debate with the all-knowing BWare from now on.

You know, you can honestly engage in debate WITHOUT being an ass. Really, it is possible. :roll: Grow up dude.

 

 

I'm really sick of people accusing me of this sort of thing. If you disagree, then bring your point of view and discuss it honestly. I'm willing to yield to anyone who has a better point or who disproves me in some way. It's how we learn!

It's idiots like gammyleg here who have to resort to taking shots at me FOR defending my point of view. Ugh. Please, if this is really all you're capable of contributing, DO give joining in a second thought. We'll all be better off without that.

[Doctor Destiny 41]

Again, who determines what an "obvious case" of "inciting hatred" is? It's a slippery slope dude...

My guess is Parliament and not sure if it's the House of Lords or Commons either.

[Guest MadBadger]

Sorry, there's a reason they call it the whiteboard. It's not my rule.

 

(enter long silence where no one speaks)

 

well then give me the black marker

 

 

now that is bloody funny...... but im also betting that the TV requlators got a hell of alot of complaints

 

Its just stupid. yes you should prevent racial hatred and all the other ones but only to the extreame extent

 

We had Abu Hamsa preaching hate in the streets! He was living off the goverment while telling people to blow themselfs up! That should be stoped but then this fuzzy line ensures that ANYTHING that could posibly be seen as preaching hatrid in anyway gets blaimed and put down.

[Doctor Destiny 41]

That still doesn't tell us who decides if certain speech is classes as inciting hatred.

 

For the record, House kicks ass.

[Guest MadBadger]

For the record, House kicks ass.

 

never said it didn't

 

 

Enciting hatred to me is doing what Hamsa did and telling people to blow up the goverment telling MUSLEMS to do it..... start a holy Jhad against the west.... that sorta thing

[Doctor Destiny 41]

Yes, we would all agree that telling someone to destroy the government would be classed as inciting hatred... but who decides that in the government or during trials? That's what we're after, not whether we all agree on something or not.

[gammyleg 0]

You know, you can honestly engage in debate WITHOUT being an ass. Really, it is possible. :roll: Grow up dude.

 

How have I been an ass?

 

I havent once called you names, which is more than I can say about you. Youve called me a Socialist Liberal (why, Im still not sure), an Ass, and then had the nerve to request I grow up (Please, do show me where I was being immature). All because I dont believe that the UK is living in under the oppression of Big Brother.

[BWare 0]

I now officially remove myself from any political debate with the all-knowing BWare from now on.

That was being an ass. You can disagree, but that kind of sarcasm is very obnoxious. I think I'm right- of course I do. Otherwise I wouldn't share my opinion. If you have an honest disagreement, great. Just don't be an ass.

[gammyleg 0]

I simply penanced you for your liberal socialist thing...

Anyway, consider it rescinded, Im tired of arguing over nothing.

[BWare 0]

I simply penanced you for your liberal socialist thing...

Anyway, consider it rescinded, Im tired of arguing over nothing.

Heh, agreed. Just please don't jump on that typical "OMG bware alwayz thinks hez rite lolz!!!11" bandwagon.

[gammyleg 0]

bUt Th0z3 P33pz r SUTCH da K3wl1st!

 

*shudders* that hurts my eyes and my brain.

 

dont worry, i wont be jumping on any bandwagon =)

[BWare 0]

Haha, sorry to put you through reading that gammyleg

[Doctor Destiny 41]

Hey, I thought it was hilarious.

[Cygnus X-1 12]

I read all of that, and now I forgot what I was going to post.

 

....

 

I dont think Britian is under big brother. At least not yet. Although I've heard plenty of "arguments" saying that the US is because of Bush's "Anti patriot laws" ( :roll: )

[Alphabear 11]

We now have anti defermation laws protecting the Prime minister from defermation. He snuck them in with the the Anti-terror laws. Not that anyone actually obeys it as most people dont even realise it was included.

[Cygnus X-1 12]

Someone actually posted a news article about those a while back. Odd, isnt it?

 

I wonder if that is one of the ultimate aims of terrorism. They know they cannot defeat us militariy, so they work against us psychologically and we defeat ourselves with an abundance of laws like that....scary thought, aint it?

[Doctor Destiny 41]

It's a possibility but I don't think these guys are planning on that happening. They're always at work plotting bombings and ambushes. They could defeat us militarily if we keep forcing our men to be fired upon first.

[Cygnus X-1 12]

Not if they put me in command. I think this whole "dont fire unless fired upon" thing is total BS. Look at what happened in Rwanda. The UN couldnt do anything because of "rules" like that. If I see a terrorist or a gun toting Muslim, he/she/it is gone hear it from my M16. If I was in the field and in charge, anyway....

[GeneralZ 0]

shoot first. think later. :lol:

[Cygnus X-1 12]

Yeah, except that when they shoot first, our people die, and we dont do much about it. Look at Rwanda. The UN didnt shoot first, and over one million RWandans were brutally murdered.

 

Pre-emptive strikes are good. If we know where a base of terrorists are, yet we dont strike because those particullar people havent done anything yet? That is stupid. We should strike htem now, while they are off gaurd. Be brutal. War is. They kill our civilians, our medical personel, ect. So does that mean that we should sit back and wait for it to happen again? HELL NO. If they want to kill our people, then they should know that we will retaliate, and now. Not tomorrow, and not later. Take them out sooner to prevent more needless deaths.

[BWare 0]

Hehe, it's VERY good hearing someone defend the legitimacy of preemptive strikes. It's suddenly become like a curse word, and there's no reason for it... that is, unless you're one of the drones hell bent on attacking the president at every turn and for every reason :roll:

[Cygnus X-1 12]

I may sound like a militarist at times, but hell, if we are gona uphold our namesake as the single global superpower, we need to show it. None of this sissyness with terrorists. If they are willing to negotiate, then sure, let them come forth with hte white flags. But all of this "wait until fired upon" crap is what kills people. Remember WWII and Korea? There was none of that. It was kill and/or be killed. Now you have to sit through a committee before getting clearance to fire upon an armed enemy vehicle or even to for permission to dodge a missile.

 

"A pilots favorite commands are "Chow Time!!" and "FIRE AT WILL!!" Why? Because both of those satisfy his needs. An airforce flys on its stomach, and flying = freedom, so when they actually get that freedom to fight, its really quite a sight to see." - Cygnus X-1

 

Politics does not mix well with the military in this day and age.

[Doctor Destiny 41]

Let's hear it for ****ty beaurocracy! If not for that, we could kick some major ass.