Jeremy Clarkson....Another Celeb Loose Lips.

[garinda]

Originally Posted by Meccy

Garinda,

Do you regard your fellow countrymen as of a lesser intelligence than yourself? Are they not able to make up their own minds? For example, we all know that anti-Semitism is abhorrent, as is anti-Islamism and any other kind of anti-ism that you might care to mention.

Look what happened to Mosley - They ran him out of Cable Street because they knew what was right and he was, by and large, discredited. By all means let people preach whatever they want. Right thinking people - by far the majority - will ignore them.

To say that we need laws like these is insulting to the intelligence of the people of this country.

The government already has far too much power. If we don't now say "Enough!", then we condemn ourselves to live in a totalitarian society.

So you're saying you support the freedom of speech that allows hatred to be preached, and vile sexual perversions to be celebrated openly, in the press, on television, from the hustings, and that you'd scrap the laws we currently have that prevents these things from happening?

A simple yes or no will do.

[garinda]

Anyway, I'm bored toying with the jumpers for goal post brigade.

I'm back off to the Premiership.

Ciao.

[Meccy]

There you go again with your rabble-rousing hyperbole. Nowhere did I mention celebrating vile sexual perversion and my owns views re this are documented in the thread.
You can't prove your argument and so you've gone nuclear and pushed the paedo paranoia button. As I said before discussion can hurt no-one in an educated arguement. We don't need politicians telling us what to think. That is the long and the short of it. This is about freedom of speech and the rights of the citizen against the state.

[Meccy]

By the way, watching people play footy in the park is generally much more rewarding than watching a bunch of overpaid Nancies diving for glory in the Premiership.

Mind you, you'll probably want to ban that next, won't you.

[Boeing Guy]

So we curtail a few freedoms, lets segregate some of the more perverted of our society, introduce identity cards and have a DNA database that uses a low count system of comparing DNA samples, put everyone on it, after all you have nothing to lose if you have done nothing wrong.

Then why stop there then, lets take the DNA of these sub human monsters and use the profile to identify similar dna in the general populace, get them before they offend protect, the innocent, once thats done, why stop at perverts, burglars, murderers, any criminal especially those terrible motorists who speed, after all speed kills.

Now we must nationalise all press and media, it is for your own safety and security of course. Control what they say and do.

Have checkpoints to check your papers on every major road and junction, after all this is in ALL your interests.

Before too long we can re-cycle (as in the book Fatherland) the Jews, Africans, Asians, Menatly Ill, Disabled, anyone who does not fit the DNA profile that we have created that is Clean, Decent, Good and not a danger to society.

After all this is in the best interests of YOU all.

Call me a cynic, but Adolf Hitler tried it, Robert Mugarbe tried it, Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge, tried it, numerous African states have committed genocide, the same happened in the former state of Yugoslavia. I do not trust any politician free speech is just what it says it is, you try to stop it and you play in to the hands these people.

[lancsdave]

Originally Posted by Boeing Guy

So we curtail a few freedoms, lets segregate some of the more perverted of our society, introduce identity cards and have a DNA database that uses a low count system of comparing DNA samples, put everyone on it, after all you have nothing to lose if you have done nothing wrong.

Then why stop there then, lets take the DNA of these sub human monsters and use the profile to identify similar dna in the general populace, get them before they offend protect, the innocent, once thats done, why stop at perverts, burglars, murderers, any criminal especially those terrible motorists who speed, after all speed kills.

Now we must nationalise all press and media, it is for your own safety and security of course. Control what they say and do.

Have checkpoints to check your papers on every major road and junction, after all this is in ALL your interests.

Before too long we can re-cycle (as in the book Fatherland) the Jews, Africans, Asians, Menatly Ill, Disabled, anyone who does not fit the DNA profile that we have created that is Clean, Decent, Good and not a danger to society.

After all this is in the best interests of YOU all.

Call me a cynic, but Adolf Hitler tried it, Robert Mugarbe tried it, Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge, tried it, numerous African states have committed genocide, the same happened in the former state of Yugoslavia. I do not trust any politician free speech is just what it says it is, you try to stop it and you play in to the hands these people.

Is the opposite of all that to allow the minority to do what they want and let the majority become victims ? Most of us know murder is wrong and it is committed by a few, should we turn a blind eye ? Unfortunatley most laws are put in place not because the majority of people want to do what they want but because a minority of people will do as they want if they aren't in place. Free speech can be just as dangerous as any weapon.

[jambutty]

Originally Posted by garinda

Well MargaretR, and I presume others, saw what you said as a sly dig at Parkinson's Disease.

Perhaps you're really that funny, you don't even see it.

That’s what you and MargaretR do best. Twist things around and read into statements what isn’t there just so you can try and earn some Brownie points.

You two should really grow up.

[jambutty]

Originally Posted by garinda

We know that.

Sometimes you sit in a disabled parking space, whilst your able bodied passenger does your errands.

Goodness, this freedom to say anything, and for it to be funny, is soooooooooo liberating.

And SOOOOOOOOOOOOO childish to bring up a point from way back.

You see you can’t help putting your own spin on things.

Once is not SOMETIMES.

[cashman]

too much leeway n the majority have already become the victims, Abu Hamza thinks free speech is fine n so do his oppos, some people do not know where to draw the line n that is very dangerous.

[Meccy]

Boeing Guy,

I'm with you all the way mate but I have a sneaking suspicion that we have more chance of finding an honest man in parliament than getting our point across.

It is plainly ridiculous to think that free speech is dangerous. It is only dangerous to those who would subdue it for their own ends. I am quite sure that most of the people on here are moderate and well meaning but, if they cannot divine what you mean from your well made argument (Kudos by the way), then I think that they are a lost cause.

I will never give up in my belief that the right to free speech is fundamental to human existence and will defend it to my dying breath. One thing that has not been said that with rights come responsibilities to your fellow man. Yes we must all behave responsibly and we are all made aware of that from the cradle. The laws are their to protect us from those who reject that. We should always however have the right to speak our minds. Many have died to protect that right and we must guard it closely.

[Royboy39]

Originally Posted by jambutty

That’s what you and MargaretR do best. Twist things around and read into statements what isn’t there just so you can try and earn some Brownie points.

You two should really grow up.

Jim... for the first time in a long, you and I agree.
I think the stamping of feet and dancing on the spot will not be long in coming.
I used the word tactics in a recent thread and was quoted the definition from the services manual, that amused me, if the respondent was to be confronted by anyone other than the one's who think wit is a killer, dream on.
Margaret is good at the Google.

[cashman]

oh so anyone that dont agree with you is a lost cause, well i think you are on acid.

[lancsdave]

Originally Posted by Meccy

It is plainly ridiculous to think that free speech is dangerous. It is only dangerous to those who would subdue it for their own ends. I am quite sure that most of the people on here are moderate and well meaning but, if they cannot divine what you mean from your well made argument (Kudos by the way), then I think that they are a lost cause.

So what you are really saying is that those don't agree with you are a lost cause. That seems to contradict what you say about free speech ?

[Royboy39]

Meccy......keep posting pal.
Let your thoughts be known.
Dont be intimidated by the smart arses......have fun.

[garinda]

Originally Posted by lancsdave

So what you are really saying is that those don't agree with you are a lost cause. That seems to contradict what you say about free speech ?

They seem like schoolboy fantasists, getting themselves giddily excited about some Orwellian conspiracy theory. That if there isn't total freedom for every single person, there isn't any freedom at all. Which is quite franky ubbish.

To protect the freedom of all we have to have limits on what is, and what isn't, acceptable.

We, along with most western democracies, have laws in place that prevent people spouting hatred, lies, and untruths. Just as a society there are laws we must abide by, so society can function. If everyone had the 'freedom' to do just as they like, we'd have anarchy.

We even have rules that must be obyed on this forum, to ensure it's fairness and decency. Is that an attack on member's freedom to say whatever they want, in whatever inflammatory, offensive, language they think they have the 'right' to use?

We also have laws that curtail free speech, which are the laws of slander, and defamation, and rightly so.

Perhaps the people who advocate total freedoms are really just anarchists.

Then again I might be making too many presumptions. Just as it would be wrong for anyone to presume our pilot friend, Boeing Guy, doesn't have the greatest sense of direction in the world. As some would say was evidenced when he gave directions from Gatwick to Euston station, when he really meant Heathrow.

(Always end on a humerous note. It's all the rage...apparently.)