Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Geert Wilders banned from entering the UK

Wow that was a shit, nasty little movie.
Thing is, without all the publicity, would it have really gone beyond being a shit little movie on the web, along with the numerous other shit little movies, and very nasty real life footage of people being beheaded, blowup, shot, beaten up etc?
 
All book critics are nasty? ,if you dont like a book dont' say a word about it ?if you dont like a cartoon kill a few people, if you dont like your neigbour blow him up? The people of this country freedoms are beening controled by outside forces' no longer democractic? is the Koran a holy book or a {fasicism} hand book? you can read it to find out , I agree with geert Wilders he is right, my freedom to say what is what is NOT stopped by a few brainwashed mullahs.:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:



I find your ideas fascinating and would like to subscribe to your news letter.
 
Thing is, without all the publicity, would it have really gone beyond being a shit little movie on the web, along with the numerous other shit little movies, and very nasty real life footage of people being beheaded, blowup, shot, beaten up etc?

I hope it hasn't gone beyond that. The only merit I could see in this is if it had been made by a Muslim to show how their religion can be hijacked by loons.
 
All book critics are nasty? ,if you dont like a book dont' say a word about it ?if you dont like a cartoon kill a few people, if you dont like your neigbour blow him up? The people of this country freedoms are beening controled by outside forces' no longer democractic? is the Koran a holy book or a {fasicism} hand book? you can read it to find out , I agree with geert Wilders he is right, my freedom to say what is what is NOT stopped by a few brainwashed mullahs.:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Fixed.
 
And people vote for idiots like this.....
Not too many. :D

Mr Huhn joins the list of "have cake, eat" cowardly hand-wringers, regurgitating their hypocritical script. Yawn. Inciting violence isn't an issue of free speech, and banning "hate speech" means you think dangerous views must be censored, which means you don't believe in free speech at all. "Drawing a line" on free speech is a contradiction in terms more bankrupt than purveyors of subprime mortgages.

I'd love to see Mr Huhn and the legions of metro elitists like him debate this with an ACLU spokesperson. Harsh but fun.

As for the free speech debate, that's been done to death over in the World Politics forum. Either you support censorship of political views or you don't. But if you do, have the courage of some posters in that thread and come out and say that you oppose free speech.
 
The only merit I could see in this is if it had been made by a Muslim to show how their religion can be hijacked by loons.

Ahh so it is Ok for Muslims to produce this movie to show how their religion had been hijacked by loons, but not somebody else? Sorry if I misinterpreted your comment, but if you are suggesting that, I don't think that is a good road to go down to be honest.
Religion of all types should not be above criticism. It is a shame though that morons like Wilder decide they want to have a stab at the critcism in a manner that is frankly bigoted crap.
 
The problem is that our friend upthread is fairly typical of the nutballs who will polluting our airwaves and press over the next 48 hours.

this has played into the hands of the bigots and we now have to watch them dance through their hyped up bigot dance.

So some Dutch guy wants to ban the Koran and show a daft film. Like I and others have said, the story would have vanished without trace if he'd been allowed. In that light the decision was as stupid as it was illiberal and undemocratic.
 
"legions of metro elitists"

Wow, we've had "brainwashed mullahs" and now this. what a rich seam is this thread for fans of Cliche Bingo (tm)
 
As for the free speech debate, that's been done to death over in the World Politics forum. Either you support censorship of political views or you don't. But if you do, have the courage of some posters in that thread and come out and say that you oppose free speech.

Yes and that was an interesting thread. I noticed some people still faield to answer my question regarding music, but where happy to keep posing new questions.

Free speech is something I believe in 100% and it is evident that there are many in government who do not.
 
The problem is that our friend upthread is fairly typical of the nutballs who will polluting our airwaves and press over the next 48 hours.

this has played into the hands of the bigots and we now have to watch them dance through their hyped up bigot dance.

So some Dutch guy wants to ban the Koran and show a daft film. Like I and others have said, the story would have vanished without trace if he'd been allowed. In that light the decision was as stupid as it was illiberal and undemocratic.
You can work that out in relation to this, but not your conspiraloon mates. Why not?
 
Ahh so it is Ok for Muslims to produce this movie to show how their religion had been hijacked by loons, but not somebody else? Sorry if I misinterpreted your comment, but if you are suggesting that, I don't think that is a good road to go down to be honest.
Religion of all types should not be above criticism. It is a shame though that morons like Wilder decide they want to have a stab at the critcism in a manner that is frankly bigoted crap.

No, its fine for anyone to make this movie and to criticize religion. Essential actually. I mean that this is such a hopeless piece of one sided shit -stiring that, a Muslim viewing it as a warning against extremism is the only value I can find in it.
 
Yes and that was an interesting thread. I noticed some people still faield to answer my question regarding music, but where happy to keep posing new questions.

Free speech is something I believe in 100% and it is evident that there are many in government who do not.
It was an interesting thread, but it was as comprehensive as I've seen on here, so now I'm more interested in why free speech is near-universally opposed. (While nearly everyone claims to support it, of course.)

Despite my flippant tone, it's dispiriting in the extreme for someone like Mr Huhn to have abandoned the underlying assumptions behind free speech. If the alleged liberals don't support free speech, it's verging on extinction.
 
Does anyone know when censoring "hate speech" became a received wisdom amongst the metro elite? I think it had its roots in "speech codes" in US universities back in the early 1980s. Hate Speech: The History of an American Controversy is a good primer, but I would welcome additional information.
About the same time tories like you became bothered about universal rights?

This pathetic attempt at populism - 'metro elites' do me a fucking favour. Defnce of this iouiot )or more properly, our commonm rights) from the left is substabntially different from the defence by tory clowns like you. So don't start wiping the grease off you palms.
 
You can work that out in relation to this, but not your conspiraloon mates. Why not?


When (for example) Time magazine, Gordon Brown and the FT all do big bits blowing off about a New World Order in a short space of time, and the same weak "leaders" and looting bankers look like setting it up as caused the clusterfuck, it's hardly suprising some people say "hang on, what is this all about?" Some conspiracists are loons, some less so. Few are my mates in either case FWIW.

I think this case is different in a few ways too. It certainly doesnt help that this bigot has been cesnsored. It plays into their hands. I think it is a miscalculation whereas any plans of a global elite to rip us off, control us and generally fuck us over will probably be more considered.
 
When (for example) Time magazine, Gordon Brown and the FT all do big bits blowing off about a New World Order in a short space of time, and the same weak "leaders" and looting bankers look like setting it up as caused the clusterfuck, it's hardly suprising some people say "hang on, what is this all about?" Some conspiracists are loons, some less so. Few are my mates in either case FWIW.

I think this case is different in a few ways too. It certainly doesnt help that this bigot has been cesnsored. It plays into their hands. I think it is a miscalculation whereas any plans of a global elite to rip us off, control us and generally fuck us over will probably be more considered.

It's simple - racists trying to force their view onto this discredits a wider civil liberites argument.

Conspiraloons trying to force their way into the same argument or a wider politcal one do exactly the same.
 
About the same time tories like you became bothered about universal rights?

This pathetic attempt at populism - 'metro elites' do me a fucking favour. Defnce of this iouiot )or more properly, our commonm rights) from the left is substabntially different from the defence by tory clowns like you. So don't start wiping the grease off you palms.
Someone's had a bad week!

Support for ancient common law rights is as essential part of conservatism, as Edmund Burke himself noted. These are fundamentally different to abstract rights. Support for negative liberty was a cornerstone of the liberal tradition, but one that's fallen by the wayside. I think it's important to ask why.

If you're analysis is confined to Beano-esque insults, I sense enlightenment isn't coming from your quarter. :)
 
It fucking is.

Because, for some reason that history itself vomits in rejection, you seem to view the last few centuries as a battle of principles - rather than one of a battle of classes with the dominant class making use of various principles (through the state and other institutions) at various times as need dictates - today negative liberty (sweet sweet negative liberty) is not that useful to that ruling class. It's not a sceret that this is how things actually work.
 
Oooh...stop..you're doing it again :rolleyes: You cant call the same word out twice in such quick succession in Cliche Bingo (tm). It's too helpful to the lazy players.

Havent you read the rules? :hmm:
The cliche is "liberal elite" or "left liberals". I group all political shades together. If you've another term for the Westminster/media class, by all means, let's have it! (Anglo-Saxon oaths aside.)
 
It fucking is.
220px-StandingBuddha.jpg
 
And made me guilty of Hate Thought.

Look people, it's really very simple. This may seem like a good thing when you personally don't agree with the person in question, but if you think about it, it means that they can, with no accountability or discussion, prevent anyone they like from entering the country. If the only people allowed in are those whose opinions are acceptable to people like Jacquie Smith, we're all in the deep shit, yes?

this basically
 
Back
Top Bottom