UK to ban free speech

[osan]

Germany has been a stupid place for a rather long time. With such a stunning track record as theirs, why should they change anything?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...German-taught-dog-Nazi-salute-paw-jailed.html

As for a revolution in Europe... I am doubtful. I am not sure that there is any indignity to which Europeans might be made subject that would cause them to experience a rush of manly hormones such that they would actually fight back. Talk about a whipped and utterly conquered race of sissies... It is an embarrassment to admit that I am of that extraction. The funniest element there is to watch them posture as if they were all morally superior and evolved... Oh PLEASE... don't embarrass yourselves quite that deeply because it even hurts the rest of us as even a boiled turnip could not avoid the empathic response.

The sad thing is that this is all soon likely to be coming to a theater near you.

 

[osan]

Economic problems will spell the end of the liberal bullshit.

This is almost certainly the case, but what is not at all clear at this time is what, precisely, will be the shape of that end? Will humanity be forced by circumstance to choose between yanking its head from the sphincter and dying, or is there something else lying in wait? There are some frightening technologies out there. I know this to be the case because I have worked on one of them and have no reason to believe that there are not more. Why were these things developed, if not to be used?

And the West will once again start making decisions based on reality and not existential nonsense.

I dare not even hope that this will be the case. The insanity is now deep in the marrow. No doubt there are a lot of rational and good people out there, but will they be among the first to meet with extinguishment?

 

[enhanced_deficit]

US seems to have less free speech than UK going by recent news.
This American teen was allegdely assassinated by SWC team for exercising free speech:






This is next:

Illinois passes historic anti-BDS bill, as Congress mulls similar moves

By Eugene Kontorovich May 18

The Illinois House just joined the state’s senate in unanimously passing a bill that would prevent the state’s pension fund from investing in companies that boycott Israel. Gov. Bruce Rauner has pledged to sign the historic “anti-BDS” bill.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...nti-bds-bill-as-congress-mulls-similar-moves/

 

[europa arise]

41% of Americans Support Criminalizing "Hate Speech"
http://redicecreations.com/article.php?id=33379

 

[heavenlyboy34]

Who won the big wars?

Russians and Soviets.

 

[heavenlyboy34]

QUOTE=DFF;5877989]Germany is still occupied by the United States. It's not fully sovereign.
They don't even have a Constitution. Merkel is nothing but a puppet.[ QUOTE]

Constitutions are for display only, no matter where you go.

 

[Anti Federalist]

I kept having issues with my connection trying to post a snip from the UK Dispatch.

Upshot of the item:

If the government places you on a "watchlist", you are banned from any sort of broadcasting and any internet posting you make, must be submitted to cops for approval prior to posting.

 

[Anti Federalist]

Constitutions are for display only, no matter where you go.

No no no you ridiculous little man...constitutions only fail because of people.

 

[Christian Liberty]

No no no you ridiculous little man...constitutions only fail because of people.

I actually agree seriously with the above sarcastic post. Constitutions fail because people in government are corrupt.

 

[heavenlyboy34]

No no no you ridiculous little man...constitutions only fail because of people.

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Anti Federalist again.

I suppose I ought to go to the Education Centre and have my mind Set Aright, eh?

 

[Republicanguy]

You know, it's always easy to go against positive beliefs like hate speech.

On the one hand, one can't force somebody to think a certain way, but on the other, having a society use all kinds of terms just breeds the old world all over again.

 

[Anti Federalist]

I actually agree seriously with the above sarcastic post. Constitutions fail because people in government are corrupt.

And everybody knows this, and has known it, for centuries.

So if you write a constitution that fails to take that into account, that fails to take people's general tendency toward apathy and tyranny into account, then it is failed document.

 

[Anti Federalist]

You know, it's always easy to go against positive beliefs like hate speech.

On the one hand, one can't force somebody to think a certain way, but on the other, having a society use all kinds of terms just breeds the old world all over again.

So...are you in favor or opposed to government regulating and banning certain types of political speech?

 

[Republicanguy]

So...are you in favor or opposed to government regulating and banning certain types of political speech?

Well, it can depend on the rationality of what is stated. My country has got hate speech banned, the public order Act of 1986 makes it an arrestable offence to use racist language. Isn't that the case in some American states if not all?

 

[Origanalist]

Well, it can depend on the rationality of what is stated. My country has got hate speech banned, the public order Act of 1986 makes it an arrestable offence to use racist language. Isn't that the case in some American states if not all?

Non answer, it was a yea or nay question.

 

[Anti Federalist]

Well, it can depend on the rationality of what is stated. My country has got hate speech banned, the public order Act of 1986 makes it an arrestable offence to use racist language. Isn't that the case in some American states if not all?

No, not at all.

Thankfully, we still have a lingering Bill of Rights. (Although there are some ridiculous Hamiltonians around here that contend that such a thing was/is unneeded)

"Rational", "hate" and "racist" are all loose and subjective terms.

So is "radical".

But hey, what do we know?

Unity through Faith, amirite?

 

[osan]

My country has got hate speech banned,

Yes, but your country is a rank shit hole. I'd sooner live in Syria.

the public order Act of 1986 makes it an arrestable offence to use racist language. Isn't that the case in some American states if not all?

Define "racist language". When I say "define", I mean RIGOROUSLY. Do you understand the meaning of scientific rigor? The length of your definition will demonstrate whether you do understand.

Come on, give it a swag... what's the worst that could happen?

 

[osan]

No no no you ridiculous little man...constitutions only fail because of people.

They are one of the grand examples of people failing to walk their talk.

 

[timosman]

It’s worse than Jerry Seinfeld says: PC is undermining free speech, expression, liberties

http://www.salon.com/2015/07/19/its...undermining_free_speech_expression_liberties/

When Joan Rivers died aged eighty-one in September 2014, tributes poured in for the American comedy legend. To judge by events of the previous months, however, not everybody would have been quite so sad to hear of her passing. Shortly before she died Rivers had been bitterly attacked not only for her caustic and politically incorrect expressions of support for Israel’s air-strikes on Gaza – ‘If New Jersey was firing rockets into New York, we would wipe them out’ – but also for telling the wrong kind of jokes involving race, sexuality and much else. (Asked whether she thought there would ever be a gay president, she told the TV reporter that there already was, since ‘Michelle’s a tranny.’) Worse, her offensive jokes tended to be funny.

When Rivers criticized Justin Bieber’s ‘gangsta’ dress sense on her TV show Fashion Police in August 2014, just a month before her death, it was hard to know which caused more outrage – what she said or the fact that others laughed out loud at it. ‘That little bitch gets on my nerves,’ Rivers said of Bieber. ‘You are not a big black thug, you are just like your shoes – ordinary and completely white.’ The reverse-Voltaires went quickly into action online, and Village People veteran Victor Willis made headlines by apparently tweeting for many: ‘What Joan Rivers said is no laughing matter. It’s Racist and she has a history of this. Time to shut her down. What say you?’ When death finally managed to shut her down just weeks later, there was much smug and charmless talk of ‘karma’ on social media sites.

What some of us say is that Joan Rivers’s great quality was her insistence that nothing ought to be beyond a joke. In contrast to the ‘shut-it-down’ lobby, she believed that there was no such thing as ‘no laughing matter.’ In this she stood in the great tradition of subversive comedians. Unlike many alleged comedians who are coming after her, she also understood that simply trying to be offensive is not enough – you first have to be funny. And unlike many wannabe controversialists today, when what she said caused the expected outrage, she refused to withdraw or apologize. It was just a joke, after all. Rivers even dared to tell a Holocaust joke, saying of the model Heidi Klum’s outfit at the 2013 Oscars ceremony that ‘the last time a German looked this hot was when they were pushing Jews into ovens.’ When that gag enlisted an army of critics, she would not back down or apologize. ‘My husband lost the majority of his family at Auschwitz,’ Rivers said, ‘and I can assure you that I have always made it a point to remind people of the Holocaust through humor.’ She also reminded them that humor was how Jewish people had coped with the horror.

 

[alucard13mm]

Is feminism hate speech? If you listen to a neo-feminists.. they hate and call men all sorts of names, especially white men. Can we ban them? :3...