Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Hypocrisy of Freedom of Speech
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 121314
Author
  Share Topic Share Topic  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Northman View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar

Suspended

Joined: 30-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4262 		  Quote Northman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Hypocrisy of Freedom of Speech
    Posted: 21-Mar-2008 at 02:02
Originally posted by SearchAndDestroy

Thanks North, I never read up on it extensivily, I just remember reading something along the lines that Jews were looked down upon around the world at that time, or something to that extent.

I didn't see it on the map, but is Helsingor a town where the founder, Erling Kiaer came from?
YVW S&D
Yes - but on the map the spelling is a bit different, Elsinore. This town is actually better known for the castle, Kronborg. The castle of Shakespere's Prince Hamlet.
Erling Kiaer founded "Helsingor Sewing Club" - a cover for one of the many resistance groups in operation during the last 2-3 years of the occupation.
During november last year I completed a website about a resistance groups from my city,  based on actual journals from the group. It was a present to the founder of that group for his 85 year birthday. Its in Danish, so no point in a link.
- and we better stop hi-jacking this thread Wink
 
~ Northman
 
 
 
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7035 		  Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Mar-2008 at 11:07
Originally posted by Mortaza

They didn't suffer because they were demonised. They suffered because they were starved and killed. That was of course a horrendous crime, but the demonisation of itself wasn't.
 
They could have been demonised as much as you like, but if they hadn't been mistreated they wouldn't have suffered.
 
So what is reason of mistreated? why did they mistreated jews but not mistreated english people?
 
There should be a reason.
I don't think you and I can be living on the same planet. On this one the Jews were mistreated essentially because Hitler hated them, and got together a gang of people with the same views, and they also provided a useful scapegoat for the economic problems of Germany. On the other hand they quite admired the British.
 
That is totally irrelevant to the point that calling people names ('demonising' them) is not of itself harmful.
You should put murderers in prison: how is that 'respecting his rights'? Or are you really saying murderers shouldn't be punished at all?
 
No, I am not saying this. do you? I explained myself already.
You said murderers' rights should be respected. How is putting a murderer in prison 'respecting his rights'? You haven't answered that or explained anything 'already'. You have just ducked the question again, because you realise you are in a moral impasse.
 
I don't have that dilemma because I don't believe you should respect a murderer's rights, so I can put him in prison with no contradiction at all.
 
Discrimination against Muslims on the basis of their religion probably exists and is undoubtedly wrong. I'm not denying evil exists or that people do wrong things. But we're talking about saying or writing things against Muslims, not discriminating against them. I'm holding the position that you should be able to say or write anything about anybody. That's certainly not discrimination. You are saying that people whould not say or write anything critical about Muslims and Islam - THAT is discriminating.
 
Uh, I am not talking about critics, do I? I am talking about demonizing. What is the reason of discrimination?  may demonazing have effect over discrimination?
'Demonising' is criticising. Unless you literally mean turn someone into a demon, which would take this whole discussion out of the world of reality.
Or demonizing an ethnic and discrimination against them have no correlation?
I don't know what the correlation is. They are however different things. After all there's a correlation between preferred type of music and liability to be in prison, but that doesn't mean everyone should be forced to listen to Beethoven.
 
You mean you want members of all religions to be protected against discrimination by Muslims? You're opposed to, say, the regimes in Saudi Arabia and Iran? You want censorship in Syria and Jordan and Pakistan (among others) forbidding the publication of anything critical of any other people?
 
You seem to me to have been justifying what happens in those countries.
 
do I? I am not just aware of it. so what is my ideas about football? Maybe you can inform me about this topic too. So I can learn what is my idea about football.
 
By the way, why are you accusing me without any evidence?
No-one has to do anything but look at what you have written. If you want to confirm that you are opposed to, say, the regimes in Saudi Arabia and Iran, just say so. I'll take your word for it. That's why I asked - and I note you didn't answer me.
 
 
 
Back to Top
Mortaza View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar

Joined: 21-Jul-2005
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3711 		  Quote Mortaza Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Mar-2008 at 11:35
I don't think you and I can be living on the same planet.
 
Most probably.
 
On this one the Jews were mistreated essentially because Hitler hated them, and got together a gang of people with the same views, and they also provided a useful scapegoat for the economic problems of Germany. On the other hand they quite admired the British.
 
Yup, before it, everything is good for jews at europe. Hitler got 47% of people vote with his anti-jewish ideas.
 
You said murderers' rights should be respected. How is putting a murderer in prison 'respecting his rights'? You haven't answered that or explained anything 'already'. You have just ducked the question again, because you realise you are in a moral impasse.
 
No, I am not and this discussion is becoming nonsense. I am seeing not to be tortured as his right, not be jailed without a court is also his right ext. You should stop to talk instead of me.
 
That is totally irrelevant to the point that calling people names ('demonising' them) is not of itself harmful.
 
Yes, result of this calling is harmful.
 
During the 1930s and 40s, the Nazis used racist propaganda in an attempt to demonize the Jews.
'Demonising' is criticising. Unless you literally mean turn someone into a demon, which would take this whole discussion out of the world of reality.
 
criticize, UK USUALLY criticise   Show phonetics
verb
1 [I; T often passive] to express disapproval of someone or something:
The government is being widely criticized in the press for failing to limit air pollution.
We'll get nowhere if all you can do is criticize.

2 [T] to give an opinion or judgement about a book, film, etc:
We're a group of artists who meet to discuss things and criticize each other's work.
demonize, UK USUALLY demonise   Show phonetics
verb [T]
to try to make someone or a group of people seem as if they are completely evil:
During the 1930s and 40s, the Nazis used racist propaganda in an attempt to demonize the Jews.
 
 
It looks like cambridge dictionary(I accept my english is not good enough so I used dictionary.) also not living at same plane with you.
 
 don't know what the correlation is. They are however different things. After all there's a correlation between preferred type of music and liability to be in prison, but that doesn't mean everyone should be forced to listen to Beethoven.
 
During the 1930s and 40s, the Nazis used racist propaganda in an attempt to demonize the Jews.
No-one has to do anything but look at what you have written. If you want to confirm that you are opposed to, say, the regimes in Saudi Arabia and Iran, just say so. I'll take your word for it. That's why I asked - and I note you didn't answer me.
 
Still, you did not answer me, why are you accusing me something I never said?
 
If I see enough reason to answer, I will. Your unfound accusation is absolute not enough reason.(not even near.)
 
why should I support Saudi arabia or iran?
 
Back to Top
King John View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 01-Dec-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1366 		  Quote King John Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Mar-2008 at 14:36
Originally posted by Mortaza


On this one the Jews were mistreated essentially because Hitler hated them, and got together a gang of people with the same views, and they also provided a useful scapegoat for the economic problems of Germany. On the other hand they quite admired the British.


Yup, before it, everything is good for jews at europe. Hitler got 47% of people vote with his anti-jewish ideas.



Surely you are not serious! Everything was not good for the Jews in Europe. You are forgetting the Pogroms that took place in Eastern Europe and Russia. You are also forgetting about the anti-Jewish sentiment in Europe that led to the production of things like the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. In Germany alone relations with Jews held a bloody past. During the Hep-Hep Riots in 1819 many Jews were massacred and their possessions destroyed. Also after WWI many accused Jews of not fighting for the country, this led to the Stab-in-the-back mythology. If we go back farther into European history we will see that everything was not good for Jews. Learn some history before you make stupid comments like this.
Back to Top
Seko View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar
Spammer

Joined: 01-Sep-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8595 		  Quote Seko Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Mar-2008 at 15:39
Try making some sense out of his statement King John. Of course he is being sarcastic while making his point. You condemn him anyway for your lack of understanding that. 
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7035 		  Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22-Mar-2008 at 12:17
Originally posted by Mortaza

I don't think you and I can be living on the same planet.
 
Most probably.
 
On this one the Jews were mistreated essentially because Hitler hated them, and got together a gang of people with the same views, and they also provided a useful scapegoat for the economic problems of Germany. On the other hand they quite admired the British.
 
Yup, before it, everything is good for jews at europe. Hitler got 47% of people vote with his anti-jewish ideas.
You were referring to the Holocaust. Of course Jews suffered badly at other times. It would help the discussion if you refrained from smartass cracks like that. It would save misunderstandings like King John's.
 
It would also help you seem reasonable.
 
You said murderers' rights should be respected. How is putting a murderer in prison 'respecting his rights'? You haven't answered that or explained anything 'already'. You have just ducked the question again, because you realise you are in a moral impasse.
 
No, I am not and this discussion is becoming nonsense. I am seeing not to be tortured as his right, not be jailed without a court is also his right ext. You should stop to talk instead of me.
So you just make up rights to suit the point you want to make? Are you saying people in general have no right to go freely around the streets, and to live in their own homes, withut being forced to stay in a jail cell?
 
Personally I believe they have those rights. I also believe they should be taken away from a murderer. If you believe they have those rights, then how can you justify taking them away from a murderer when you assert that 'his rights must be respected'? Why is one right more to be respected than another?
 
That is totally irrelevant to the point that calling people names ('demonising' them) is not of itself harmful.
 
Yes, result of this calling is harmful.
OF ITSELF is the point. How are you materially harmed if someone calls you a bad name, and nothing else happens to you?
 
During the 1930s and 40s, the Nazis used racist propaganda in an attempt to demonize the Jews.
'Demonising' is criticising. Unless you literally mean turn someone into a demon, which would take this whole discussion out of the world of reality.
 
criticize, UK USUALLY criticise   Show phonetics
verb
1 [I; T often passive] to express disapproval of someone or something:
The government is being widely criticized in the press for failing to limit air pollution.
We'll get nowhere if all you can do is criticize.

2 [T] to give an opinion or judgement about a book, film, etc:
We're a group of artists who meet to discuss things and criticize each other's work.
demonize, UK USUALLY demonise   Show phonetics
verb [T]
to try to make someone or a group of people seem as if they are completely evil:
During the 1930s and 40s, the Nazis used racist propaganda in an attempt to demonize the Jews.
 
 
It looks like cambridge dictionary(I accept my english is not good enough so I used dictionary.) also not living at same plane with you.
To 'make someone or a group of people seem as if they are completely evil' is ciritcising them, no? It isn't flattering them, or expressing approval of them.
 
 
 don't know what the correlation is. They are however different things. After all there's a correlation between preferred type of music and liability to be in prison, but that doesn't mean everyone should be forced to listen to Beethoven.
 
During the 1930s and 40s, the Nazis used racist propaganda in an attempt to demonize the Jews.
Do you really think I don't know that? Of course they used racist propaganda. Of itself racist propaganda doesn't hurt anyone. What was serious was that they put them in concentration camps (and earlier fired them from their jobs and so forth).
 
These forums occasionally contain racist propaganda. It doesn't harm anyone. It's banned because it's unpleasant and unproductive and gets nowhere, but the banning is a voluntary code of conduct that members are asked to respect, or they lose their membership.
 
But it still doesn't harm anyone.
 
No-one has to do anything but look at what you have written. If you want to confirm that you are opposed to, say, the regimes in Saudi Arabia and Iran, just say so. I'll take your word for it. That's why I asked - and I note you didn't answer me.
 
Still, you did not answer me, why are you accusing me something I never said?
In this context I'm not accusing you of anything. What accusation are you talking about?
[QUOTE] 
If I see enough reason to answer, I will. Your unfound accusation is absolute not enough reason.(not even near.)
I made no accusation, founded or unfounded. I simply asked a question. I said I would take your word for the answer. But you refuse to give it.
 
[QUOTE] 
why should I support Saudi arabia or iran?
 
I don't know. I'm asking whether you do or you don't. (And I did say the regimes, not the people or the countries.)
 


Edited by gcle2003 - 22-Mar-2008 at 12:18
Back to Top
Bulldog View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 17-May-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2800 		  Quote Bulldog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Mar-2008 at 03:48
Gcle2003
I don't think you and I can be living on the same planet. On this one the Jews were mistreated essentially because Hitler hated them, and got together a gang of people with the same views, and they also provided a useful scapegoat for the economic problems of Germany. On the other hand they quite admired the British.
 
That is totally irrelevant to the point that calling people names ('demonising' them) is not of itself harmful.
 
The Jews were demonised in Europe on and off for over a millenia, the hate incited by the Nazi's wasn't anything new, they just prayed upon the existing widespread hatred felt towards Jews.
 
Thus, demonising is very harmful, when a group of people are blamed for all that is wrong and collectively guilty when a few individuals comit a crime, the majority can loose sympathy for them and allow events like Nazism, the Spanish Inquisition or other expulsions to occur.
 
Today, a situation is arising where its "socially acceptable" to slander, demonise and vilify muslims, the amount of mis-information and propoganda being spread about people's of this faith is starting to draw parallels with the "Blood libels" spread against Jews.
 
Here is an examples of a medievel blood libel against Jews
 
 
 
County of Flanders, c. 1250

An early blood libel against Jews appears in Bonum Universale de Apibus ii. 29, 23, by Thomas of Cantimpr (a monastery near Cambray). Thomas wrote "It is quite certain that the Jews of every province annually decide by lot which congregation or city is to send Christian blood to the other congregations."

"A very learned Jew, who in our day has been converted to the (Christian) faith, informs us that one enjoying the reputation of a prophet among them, toward the close of his life, made the following prediction: 'Be assured that relief from this secret ailment, to which you are exposed, can only be obtained through Christian blood ("solo sanguine Christiano").' This suggestion was followed by the ever-blind and impious Jews, who instituted the custom of annually shedding Christian blood in every province, in order that they might recover from their malady."
 
 
 
Let's imagine it today,
 
 
Jyllands-Posten - SHOCK HORROR, MUSLIMS DRINK CHRISTIAN BLOOD!
 
We have been informed by our sources that muslims have began drinking young Christian childrens blood!.............
 
Its the same "theme" just a different era.
 
As for, is it a "hypocrisy of Freedom of Speech".
 
Let's just put it this way,
 
What would be the response to drawing cartoons of Black people as slaves and calling them certain words, or of Jews as pigs, fat cats and drinking Christian kids blood.......
 
Who would be defending those images as "freedom of speech", they'd be internationally "condemned" and be a source of national embarrasment and humilliation for Denmark.
 
Its a total hypocrisy.
 
However, this doesn't excuse a violent reaction, in learning the art of negotiation you are taught when dealing with unreasonable people intent of attacking and trying to cause provocation the best weapon is, "silence". The trick is to turn their attack into your attack.
      What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.
Albert Pine

Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7035 		  Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Mar-2008 at 11:57
Bulldog, I'm aware of all that.
 
The point is no-one ever died because of just being 'demonised'. No-one ever lost an eye or a leg or an arm because of just being 'demonised'.
 
They died because someone shot them or hanged them or burned them. They lost eyes, legs, arms because someone was physically violent to them. Those are the crimes, and, yes, I've said before that someone who instigates a crime that actually takes place deserves to be punished in the same way as a criminal.
 
But just going around saying that Jews (or anyone else) drink children's blood does not of itself harm anyone. You should not punish people for saying something just because a crime might be committed as a result of it.
 
Back to Top
Mughal e Azam View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel
Avatar

Joined: 10-Jul-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 646 		  Quote Mughal e Azam Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Mar-2008 at 12:18
So, in short we agree that although the cartoon was a cartoon, you dont eff with Muslims because they are full of pride for their religion. 
Mughal e Azam
Back to Top
Parnell View Drop Down
Suspended
Suspended

Suspended

Joined: 04-Apr-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1409 		  Quote Parnell Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Mar-2008 at 12:51
In principle, yes. I don't think the cartoons publishment should be prevented though or I don't think the cartoonists could have been expected to get such an outcry. We're still amazed about that over in the west.
Back to Top
Bulldog View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 17-May-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2800 		  Quote Bulldog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Mar-2008 at 13:27
Gcle2003
But just going around saying that Jews (or anyone else) drink children's blood does not of itself harm anyone. You should not punish people for saying something just because a crime might be committed as a result of it.
 
The verbal demonation cannot cause physical harm, however, the constant villification of a group of people over time can create an environment where the majority feel "justified" in attacking and killing people of a certain ethnic or religous group.
 
The process of demonisation is a force which can drive the persecution of a group of people making it very dangerous and not just some harmless fun.
 
The pyhcological impact demonisation can have cannot be ignored.
 
A few centuries ago, Black people were deemed to be created for the purpose of serving white people, there were scientists, theologians and scholors who spread information that Black people are physically built to be slaves. This gave people jusfitication for their actions, it was considered a "social norm", Black people were viewed as being inferior and in some cases sub-human.
 
Blood Libels were often spread about Jews, resulting in mass murders against their communities.
 
Here is another basic example, a guy likes a girl, the girl rejects him, the guy goes around spreading rumours and lies that he slept with her and so did his friends, the girl is demonised, her family find out, her friends leave her, the girl can't take it anymore and comits suicide.
 
 
Mughaal
So, in short we agree that although the cartoon was a cartoon, you dont eff with Muslims because they are full of pride for their religion.
 
Pride? a more suited word would be ignorance, those people who used it as an excuse to go around burning buildings and rioting didn't do themselves or the image of muslims any favours. They put shame on themselves and gave the cartoon publishers the justification they wanted and further fuel to use in their anti-muslim rhetoric.
 
The cartoons won't stop, the more some small group of muslims make a big scene going crazy on the streets, the more they'll want to provoke, it makes good news for them to show muslims behaving like that then trying to convince people that its just typical behaviour of the average muslim.
      What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.
Albert Pine

Back to Top
Chilbudios View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 11-May-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1900 		  Quote Chilbudios Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Mar-2008 at 13:30
I don't see why a society cannot take preventive measures. It is already experienced that demonisation led to millions of deaths. Whose interest really serves punishing a handful of people (the real executioners) for that? The real interest is to avoid crimes happening not just punishing them, that's why I feel it's really useful to hold instigation as a crime.
 
If I persuade a man to kill his wife and eventually put a knife or a gun in his hand, do you really believe I should get away with that if that man is changing his mind in the last moment?
 
Back to Top
SearchAndDestroy View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 15-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2728 		  Quote SearchAndDestroy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Mar-2008 at 21:41
So you think we should start curbing freedoms? You really want the government to start parenting us by telling us whats morally acceptable? Because thats all this is, you can use this case as a reason for it, but where does it end? Are we to allow the authorities to make the judgement call? Sounds like a quick route to facism or totalitarianism, sorry but I'd fight for freedoms before I went for the idea of the government telling us whats PC and enforcing it.
 
"A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government." E.Abbey
Back to Top
Bulldog View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 17-May-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2800 		  Quote Bulldog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Mar-2008 at 22:28
SearchAndDestroy
So you think we should start curbing freedoms? You really want the government to start parenting us by telling us whats morally acceptable? Because thats all this is, you can use this case as a reason for it, but where does it end? Are we to allow the authorities to make the judgement call? Sounds like a quick route to facism or totalitarianism, sorry but I'd fight for freedoms before I went for the idea of the government telling us whats PC and enforcing it.
 
This is what I wrote earlier
 
What would be the response to drawing cartoons of Black people as slaves and calling them certain words, or of Jews as pigs, fat cats and drinking Christian kids blood.......
 
Who would be defending those images as "freedom of speech", they'd be internationally "condemned" and be a source of national embarrasment and humilliation for Denmark.
 
Its a total hypocrisy.
 
Are we living in a facist totalitarian state because racially abusing Black people is illegal? or because we arn't allowed to spread Blood Libels have them supported by leading intellects and used as an excuse to massacre Jewish communities?
 
The "freedom of speech" argument is baseless unless you can sit here and defend people using their freedom of speech to do the above.
 
Racist Language in German Army Training
 
Do you support these troops "freedom of speech" to use such language, this was deemed a dispicable act and condemned by the media, it wasn't heralded as the beacon of freedom of speech.


Edited by Bulldog - 29-Mar-2008 at 22:32
      What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.
Albert Pine

Back to Top
Northman View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar

Suspended

Joined: 30-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4262 		  Quote Northman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-Mar-2008 at 00:23
Originally posted by Bulldog

Are we living in a facist totalitarian state because racially abusing Black people is illegal? or because we arn't allowed to spread Blood Libels have them supported by leading intellects and used as an excuse to massacre Jewish communities?
 
No Bulldog, its perfectly fine that racists are limited in their sick agendas.
Hypocrisy thrives everywhere - not only on one side.
 
Lets try to change the perspective a bit....
 
We are not living in a totalitarian state, but we are living in a world where many people already are murdered by terrorists and most of the rest are living under a constant threat of terror. Murder and terror performed by Islamic fanatics and for what?
Writing books? - Making movies? - Working at WTC?
Neither of those things are illegal where we live. 
 
Each time a westerner is murdered, we hear the chant "Alluah Akbar".
The terrorists are guising their deeds under their religion - assigning every kill to Islam/Allah/Muhammed. They want it to be recognised that way.
But when an insignificant cartonist are portraying a reflection of the very same thing(*) in an insignificant newspaper, not only he, but the whole nation is under attack - in fact, the whole western way of living is under attack.
And I guess that is exactly the purpose - it must be very important to keep up that level of fear - for any reason - or no reason at all - just anything that can serve as an excuse.
One can only guess why its so important. I have a good guess of my own.
 
One things is certain, if we cave into this - changing the western style of living and values, it wouldn't last long before we in fact, would be living under a totalitarian Islamic regime and like Seko said earlier - that is, what he feared the most.
 
~ Northman
 
 (*) And this is exactly why the cartoon isn't meant as an insult to Muhammad or all muslims for that matter - but to reflect the terrorists, and what they do in the name of Islam. 
If any mainstream muslim fails to see that connection, he will get his feelings hurt. That was not the intention, but so be it - however, we can tell him we are sorry he got his feelings hurt.
 


Edited by Northman - 30-Mar-2008 at 00:26
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7035 		  Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-Mar-2008 at 12:29
Originally posted by Mughaal

So, in short we agree that although the cartoon was a cartoon, you dont eff with Muslims because they are full of pride for their religion. 
 
I'm not sure who you mean by 'we', but don't include me in that.
 
The lesson, if any, is that you need to be careful what you say about Islam because there are a lot of violent Muslims about, childishly eager to defend their 'honour'. Rather as in the US you have to be careful about exercising the right to abortion in case you run into a bomb or a sniper. Or, eighty years ago, if you were a black in the deep South you had to be pretty careful about exercising your right to vote. Or, pretty well anywhere until recently, you had to be carefuly about exercising your right to unconventional sexual preferences.
 
Civilisation cannot afford to give way to the violent.
 
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7035 		  Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-Mar-2008 at 12:31
Originally posted by Chilbudios

I don't see why a society cannot take preventive measures.
Neither do I. The maxim in the US (until recently anyway) was that there needed to be 'clear and present danger' of a crime (or other disaster). Not just the possibility of one. Not even the probability of one.
It is already experienced that demonisation led to millions of deaths. Whose interest really serves punishing a handful of people (the real executioners) for that? The real interest is to avoid crimes happening not just punishing them, that's why I feel it's really useful to hold instigation as a crime.
Personally I have throughout made it clear that if a crime happens - if someone is harmed - the instigators (even if their part in it was merely verbal) are also guilty.
 
However, if not crime results, how can anyone be guilty?
If I persuade a man to kill his wife and eventually put a knife or a gun in his hand, do you really believe I should get away with that if that man is changing his mind in the last moment?
One point is that putting a knife or gun in someone's hand is not exercising freedom of speech. As far as I'm concerned even possessing a gun should be a crime.
 
If the man changes his mind, neither he nor the instigator is guilty of murder. There is no murder to be guilty of.
 
Back to Top
opuslola View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar
suspended

Joined: 23-Sep-2009
Location: Long Beach, MS,
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4620 		  Quote opuslola Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09-Nov-2009 at 13:01
It is mostly interesting to go back and read these old and thankfully dead sites! But, at the same time it is depressing to see 14 pages of mostly drivel! Arguments about arguments, etc.! Some of it has to do with language, thus one lacking the native tounge of English has a hard time understanding a lot of the vagarities found within it, things that are usually immediately noticed by a native speaker (assuming some education). If fact, it seems that most of the debate concerned a few people who were not really at odds with each other, they just seemed to each want to have the last and deciding word!

But, I too have been upon that bridge! I regret most of it, but it sure was fun for a while!
http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/history/
Back to Top
opuslola View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar
suspended

Joined: 23-Sep-2009
Location: Long Beach, MS,
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4620 		  Quote opuslola Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04-Feb-2010 at 09:34
Also, I would like some clarification of the rules? Northman, who is dead and gone, I presume, wrote the rules to the Minefield, and within his rules is this sentence;

"Before posting, you might want to brush yourself up on these rules, and please remember, while we want to promote the highest level of freedom of speech, we do focus vigorously on faul behavior, personal attacks, negative attitude etc."


Can any current administrator please define "negative attitude, etc.?"

Just how can one argue in the "negative" to a proposition without having a "negative attitude?"

But, I guess I'm just being somewhat "negative?" Laugh!

Oh! I guess I could have also complained about the meaning of "faul behavior!" But that might well "faul" things up? chuckle

Regards to ?

Edited by opuslola - 04-Feb-2010 at 09:37
http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/history/
Back to Top
opuslola View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar
suspended

Joined: 23-Sep-2009
Location: Long Beach, MS,
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4620 		  Quote opuslola Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-May-2010 at 18:25
Gcle 2003, a former member of this site, and one of its strongest posters left no doubt about his political stance when he wrote these words above!

"One point is that putting a knife or gun in someone's hand is not exercising freedom of speech. As far as I'm concerned even possessing a gun should be a crime."

So, there he still sits, enconsed within the safe and unarmed walls of his tiny state, still spouting within one list or another on the Net!

But, I wonder just what is the crime rate in Luxembourg?

It seems Luxembourg enjoys "the highest per capita GDP in the world!"

Gcle 2003, must be well heeled indeed?

But here are some stats:

http://www.osac.gov/Reports/report.cfm?contentID=45973

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_pri_per_cap-crime-prisoners-per-capita

It seems that this is a very safe nation, or maybe they are just not concerned with imprisoning people?

Maybe he will reply? He is certainly a very intelligent person!

By the way; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ankh-Morpork

It would be good to have his views again expoused on this site!

I think?



Edited by opuslola - 17-May-2010 at 19:01
http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/history/
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 121314

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.047 seconds.