At Last! Government grows some balls and stands up to fash nutter

[dylans]

Freedom of speech in this country begins and ends in speakers corner. If it means the freedom to go round making inflammatory, hateful, insulting comments about peoples race, religion and sexuality, I certainly dont care for it. Its overrated. If you want freedom of speech fuck off over to turtle island they love it there.

Thats the dumbest thing i have ever heard. Freedom of speech is our inaliable right. Since when did freedom begin and end where you say it ends? Who the fuck do you think you are to tell me what i can say, hear, read and listen to and where i can say or hear it? Speakers corner indeed!
I will say what i want, and express any opinions I want any place and in any form i choose and i will like wise defend the rights of anyone to do the same. If you find those views offensive, tough. Live with it. I find your views offensive, so i reply to them, i dont scream to the state to protect me by banning you.
Think about what you are saying. "insulting comments" On what basis do you or your nanny state define "insulting" I find the "sun" insulting" I find Jim Davidson "insulting" I find "reality TV "insulting" (the list is endless)Should they (or any of the other myriad of things we all find insulting) be banned. No, of course not. The right to insult is fundamental to free speech and no it certainly isnt "overrated" it is one of the only weapons ordinary people have to protect their liberty and we give it up at our peril. Once we lose it it is gone forever.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Thats the dumbest thing i have ever heard. Freedom of speech is our inaliable right. Since when did freedom begin and end where you say it ends? Who the fuck do you think you are to tell me what i can say, hear, read and listen to and where i can say or hear it? Speakers corner indeed!
I will say what i want, and express any opinions I want any place and in any form i choose and i will like wise defend the rights of anyone to do the same. If you find those views offensive, tough. Live with it. I find your views offensive, so i reply to them, i dont scream to the state to protect me by banning you.
Think about what you are saying. "insulting comments" On what basis do you or your nanny state define "insulting" I find the "sun" insulting" I find Jim Davidson "insulting" I find "reality TV "insulting" (the list is endless)Should they (or any of the other myriad of things we all find insulting) be banned. No, of course not. The right to insult is fundamental to free speech and no it certainly isnt "overrated" it is one of the only weapons ordinary people have to protect their liberty and we give it up at our peril. Once we lose it it is gone forever.

If you live in the UK you have no constitutional right to freedom of speech whatsoever, freedom of speech was never legislated for.

 

[TremulousTetra]

Who would have been doing the protesting then?, the SWP, Respect, Workers Power, nah, they would have been inside as cheerleaders to this 'anti-zionist'

Zionism is a racist philosophy which says jews cannot live with others, they have to be segregated, hence apartheid Israel. I am against Zionism for those reasons, being anti Zionist, does not make me anti Jewish.

 

[TremulousTetra]

Le Pen was allowed in, despite udo's party arguing at the time that he shouldn't be. Of course people pointed out to them at the time that this sort of action would be turned on against all 'extremists' once a precendent was set.

So your against " no platform"?

 

[danny la rouge]

So your against " no platform"?

That isn't what he said.

I do wish people could tell the difference between state censorship and community action. No, really.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

That isn't what he said.

I do wish people could tell the difference between state censorship and community action. No, really.

stop restricting his freedom of speech

 

[butchersapron]

So your against " no platform"?

You still support state bans then? And on this thread - wonderful!

 

[danny la rouge]

stop restricting his freedom of speech

He can say what he likes. Unless Jacqui Smith has him on a list.

 

[TremulousTetra]

That isn't what he said.

I do wish people could tell the difference between state censorship and community action. No, really.

I get your point, but what happens if the state controls the platform?

So for example, you support the community petitioning the pub landlord not to give a platform for a fascist meeting, but you wouldn't support the community petitioning the BBC?

 

[Zachor]

Zionism is a racist philosophy which says jews cannot live with others, they have to be segregated, hence apartheid Israel. I am against Zionism for those reasons, being anti Zionist, does not make me anti Jewish.

Sorry you are considerably misinformed and mistaken. Zionism isn't about excluding non Jews from the land of Israel it is a philosophy based on the premise that the Jews have a right to return to their ancestral lands. Both Ben Gurion and the Balfour Declaration wanted Arab and Jewish co existance and Ben Gurion and the leaders of the Zionist movement even went so far as to accept less of the Palestine mandate lands than he probably could have got in order that there be a peaceful co existence. Sadly this olive branch was stamped upon by the Arab nations with the aquiesence of Britain.

Zionism isn't the same as aparthied and no amount of repetition of that lie will make it so.

I'm a Zionist and I'm fucking proud to be one.

 

[belboid]

"a land without a people for a peolpe without a land" - tht was the famous founding principle of Zionism Zachor, and it is explicitly racist. No surprise you are proud to be so.

I'm sure you're proud of the choice of Avigdor Liebermann as Israel's new foreign secretary too, a delightful hard-line bigot who wants to strip the few remaining Arabs living in the colonist state of their citizenship. And a bloke who our wonderful government will obviously allow into the UK despite his desire for a few thousand more dead.

 

[Zachor]

I'm sure you're proud of the choice of Avigdor Liebermann as Israel's new foreign secretary too, a delightful hard-line bigot who wants to strip the few remaining Arabs living in the colonist state of their citizenship. And a bloke who our wonderful government will obviously allow into the UK despite his desire for a few thousand more dead.

I'm not 100% happy with Lieberman as Israeli FS but I'm mindful that sometimes in Israel its the left that make the concessions but the right make the peace.

I dont' think that Lieberman desires Arabs dead much less than a lot of the Islamist nutters desire Jews to be dead. I dont' have that much of a problem with all citizens of Israel whatever their religion having an oath of allegiance as long as it applies to all.

The situation is worth watching and I hope that peace with security for Israel and some form of settlement for the Arabs in the West Bank and Gaza comes from it.

 

[belboid]

arf arf.

It's 1984 all over again. Thousands dead = 'peace'

 

[danny la rouge]

I get your point, but what happens if the state controls the platform?

So for example, you support the community petitioning the pub landlord not to give a platform for a fascist meeting, but you wouldn't support the community petitioning the BBC?

No; I wouldn't support the state instructing the BBC to censor.

 

[belboid]

Poor Udo doesn't seem to understand the difference between workers doing something for themselves, and the state doing it 'on their behalf'.

 

[Udo Erasmus]

Poor Udo doesn't seem to understand the difference between workers doing something for themselves, and the state doing it 'on their behalf'.

Sorry, I haven't made any comment on this issue on this thread, so please don't misquote me.

 

[danny la rouge]

Poor Udo doesn't seem to understand the difference between workers doing something for themselves, and the state doing it 'on their behalf'.

It's MP3 who is confused on this occasion.

 

[belboid]

Sorry, confusing my imbeciles.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Sorry you are considerably misinformed and mistaken. Zionism isn't about excluding non Jews from the land of Israel it is a philosophy based on the premise that the Jews have a right to return to their ancestral lands. Both Ben Gurion and the Balfour Declaration wanted Arab and Jewish co existance and Ben Gurion and the leaders of the Zionist movement even went so far as to accept less of the Palestine mandate lands than he probably could have got in order that there be a peaceful co existence. Sadly this olive branch was stamped upon by the Arab nations with the aquiesence of Britain.

Zionism isn't the same as aparthied and no amount of repetition of that lie will make it so.

I'm a Zionist and I'm fucking proud to be one.

Depends what form of Zionism you're talking about, as I'm sure you're well aware. It's disingenuous of you to say "Zionism is..." and "Zionism isn't..." without qualifying which Zionism(s) you're actually talking about.

 

[Zachor]

Depends what form of Zionism you're talking about, as I'm sure you're well aware. It's disingenuous of you to say "Zionism is..." and "Zionism isn't..." without qualifying which Zionism(s) you're actually talking about.

Good point. But the basic premise of Zionism as a safe home for the diaspora is one I cannot disagree with. 'Wild West' nutters in Hebron I don't agree with.

 

[danny la rouge]

It's also a bit rich to say ben Gurion wanted peaceful co-existence with the people he sought to expel and dispossess.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Good point. But the basic premise of Zionism as a safe home for the diaspora is one I cannot disagree with. 'Wild West' nutters in Hebron I don't agree with.

The point being that a "safe home" never had to be in historical Israel, except if you were one of the religious schmendricks, and even their philosophy forebade returning until absolutely necessary.

 

[ViolentPanda]

It's also a bit rich to say ben Gurion wanted peaceful co-existence with the people he sought to expel and dispossess.

Perhaps he meant the same kind of "peaceful co-existence" as the New World settlers had with "native Americans"? That's what the historical record (including ben-Gurion's own papers) implies, anyway.

 

[danny la rouge]

The point being that a "safe home" never had to be in historical Israel, except if you were one of the religious schmendricks, and even their philosophy forebade returning until absolutely necessary.

And, if indeed on the soil of Palestine, it did not need to be a majority Jewish state created by expelling or subjugating an existing Arab population.

 

[danny la rouge]

Perhaps he meant the same kind of "peaceful co-existence" as the New World settlers had with "native Americans"? That's what the historical record (including ben-Gurion's own papers) implies, anyway.

Indeed.

 

[belboid]

but they weren't really a people, so they didn't count, did they?

And still dont, of course

 

[danny la rouge]

but they weren't really a people, so they didn't count, did they?

And still dont, of course

They weren't there, and if they were they were racists anyway.

 

[TremulousTetra]

But the basic premise of Zionism as a safe home for the diaspora .

from your own words, that is precisely what is racist about Zionism. It presumes Jews can only be safe in Israel.

The person who most influenced me about Zionism and and Israel, was a man call Tony cliff, who was born in Israel to a Jewish family before the apartheid state of Israel was created. He was imprisoned in Israel for campaigning against the discrimination there was taking place against Palestinians.

 

[TremulousTetra]

Sorry, confusing my imbeciles.

I may be an imbecile, but at least I am not a bunch of ignorant arogant fucks, who pretend to be political, but are not prepared to explain to people there politics.

 

[TremulousTetra]

Poor Udo doesn't seem to understand the difference between workers doing something for themselves, and the state doing it 'on their behalf'.

No, I have a vague understanding of 'anarchist' politics, but as usual trying to clarify the nuances, is like pulling teeth.