[Vercetti27]

I'm bigoted now?


deary me

EDIT-

sivispacem, I'm not sure why you have to go about this sub-forum, prowling around looking for oppurtunities to call people out on your favourite words "ignorance", "bigoted", "derogaotry", in an attempt to prove your intelligence or whatever. I only tried to tell the australian fellow that in england we suffer from a minority of anarchist twats trying to start some kind of revolution without a cause or target. And the fact that the majority of them happens to be liberal and wealthy (they attend university, one of them is the son of a rockstar) would go without saying. However I'm sure judging a person by they're wealth, economic standing or political stance can be down to bigotry, as of course any view on a person's class, race or anything else for that matter is down to bigotry if you read the right newspaper.

Burning poppies is legal, well I don't really care. Loads of things that are legal and aren't shouldn't be. I don't see why it matters as the burning of poppies by either ignorant anarchists or islamic radicals is always going to generate fury. Whether I'm patriotic or not doesn't matter, I'm not proud of everything my country has done (how could I be) its what the poppy stands for. The freedom to do it is of course down to our tolerant, liberal society. The fact some immigrants take advantage of our tolerant nature is frustrating, how anyone can argue against that becuase "they have the right to do that" I don't know. Its like you don't care what they do and would rather tell people that get emotional or angry about it how to feel instead and that we're all bigoted and ill-informed. No-one on this thread said all muslims are like this, but it's been said about 3 times in this thread that that isn't the case, just so we don't seem to sound ignorant. We all know that already, the fact we feel we have to say that speaks volumes about modern life. Les just protect ourselves from possibly offending someone, we don't want to sound like those ghastly nitwits that vogte BNP do we now?

As for robinski "covering everythig" he basically came out with the standard politcally correct speech on the subject. There is still a lot that hasn't been covered and I have a freedom to say it, I don't care if i isn't the opinion shared by the mods that over-zealously run this place (especially this sub-forum) and talk down to people that don't share the standard view or don't speak english very well.
The sensationalist crap annoys me too, I'm not buying into it but it doesn't mean that whats happening isn't. Its just being overplayed. There are still many immigrants that live of the welfare system with zero repsect for this country or it's culture, even though without it they might not be living such a comfortable life.

If loving his own country and standing up for it against people who would rather pose and wank themselves off as the "informed" kind that knows the truth and will stand up for the people in OP's post well then I'm guilty. If you'd rather blame people that inspire such dramatic hatred of our country than the people that buy into the sh*t the radicals spew, the same ignorant people that will use just about any excuse to attack our country for living differentlythen maybe you don't actually care about this country at all? Obviously you picked up on the fact it sounds more intelligent and well advised to have a go at ignorant, xenophobes than the human filfth that sh*t on the country with its desacration of war memorials and such. Well you came across just as how you wanted to, thank god you stopped us from having our stupid, pointless ill-advised debate. I'm sure Robinksi will give you a pat on the back. I apoligise for any bigotry on my part, obviously I hate the BNP, and I love all immigrants that come to our country. Of course reading the daily mail would have you believe that there are muslims in this country that abuse it daily, and have no respect for our culture while living as british citizens. But this is all rubbish written to anger people like myself, silly me for being so naive. I'm off to burn my english flag and tell myself we live in a terrible, capitalist country.

This post has been edited by Vercetti27 on Monday, Nov 28 2011, 15:24

[Butters 2011]

QUOTE (sivispacem @ Monday, Nov 28 2011, 13:45)

2) Burning poppies is not illegal. You can express moral outrage all you want at it, but, save for in occasions where it could be interpreted as breach of the peace, it's not a fundamentally illegal act. Now, if you are arguing that there is some grounds for producing a law for use against individuals disrespecting the UK, then present that rather than just semantics- at least that's a logical line of argument.

I know it's not illegal, but surely it should be? I bet if I went to, say, Pakistan, and started burning something that offended their people, I'd be arrested for it. The point to this though is, why do the likes of the BNP get so much censor on them, and only get a mention when they step out of line, usually taken out of context, yet when someone such as Abu Hamza opens his mouth, he's all over the media and the news.

[sivispacem]

QUOTE (Butters 2011 @ Monday, Nov 28 2011, 16:10)

QUOTE (sivispacem @ Monday, Nov 28 2011, 13:45) 2) Burning poppies is not illegal. You can express moral outrage all you want at it, but, save for in occasions where it could be interpreted as breach of the peace, it's not a fundamentally illegal act. Now, if you are arguing that there is some grounds for producing a law for use against individuals disrespecting the UK, then present that rather than just semantics- at least that's a logical line of argument. I know it's not illegal, but surely it should be? I bet if I went to, say, Pakistan, and started burning something that offended their people, I'd be arrested for it. The point to this though is, why do the likes of the BNP get so much censor on them, and only get a mention when they step out of line, usually taken out of context, yet when someone such as Abu Hamza opens his mouth, he's all over the media and the news.

So, you're saying that we should be more like an oppressive quasi-police-state, run by powerful clans and the military in an incredibly corrupt and illiberal democracy, with almost no regard for the views or desires of the population? You would be arrested for it, yes, but do you really want that kind of governance? Look at Europe, look at Canada, Australia and the ex-Colonial territories. Do they have problems with Islamism about as serious as those in the UK? Yes, in most cases they do. Is their press filled with sensationalist bullsh*t, senseless rhetoric and deluded idiots spouting their bigoted diatribes off at the slightest provocation? Well, in some cases yes, but is it to the same extent that it is witnessed in the UK? No. These arguments always blow out of all proportion both the severity of Islamism in the UK, and it's frequency, and use it as some kind of blunt tool for so-called "patriots" to attack other cultures for no real reason other than an unexplained sense of indignation.

I put it to you that you are reading the wrong papers, first off. But to some extent it's a fair question- why is so much press attention given to Islamism over right-wing extremism in the UK? Well, I'll take your BNP example first. They're a political party- not a very good one, a very successful one or one with much support, but a party nonetheless. That implies that they do have a modicum of popularity, at least in certain parts of the UK. The "best way" to deal with far-right extremism is to deny it a platform from which to spread its message- which the media do, to some extent. Islamism is different- people aren't radicalised by reading about Islamic extremism in the papers- they're radicalised on the internet, in prisons, in universities or in small social groups. Press coverage is given to this so that the population can be aware that these instances are happening. Whatsmore, the thread posed by the BNP and the like is completely different to that of Islamic extremism. The BNP, to a greater or lesser extent, still want to function inside the confines of current political and social structures, and those that don't have neither the popularity, the training nor the materiel to conduct a "war" (if you wish to call it that) against Western society. This is not true of violent extremist groups, who possess all three of the hallmarks of true capability- support, motivation and resources. Ergo, they constitute a true "threat", whereas right-wing extremism does not unless it suddenly starts becoming much more violent.

[ajbns87]

Butters you ain't the only one mate, but you got to remember it isn't as bad as the papers like the daily mail make it out to be.

My girlfriend and her family came to the UK as muslim immigrants from Iran, they worked hard everyday whilst here, and still are whilst living in quite poor conditions.
They always speak of their distaste for other immigrants that come here and then take away our benefits and do no work (I'm fully aware there is enough fcking british idiots that feel no shame in never working a day in their life, that live off benefits too), with British people paying tax for the majority of their lives,they are basically looking after immigrants and their oversized families that have been here for just a few months and contributed nothing. The soft touch, and liberal do gooding society which we now live in, would never allow such an immigrant family to starve or suffer whilst here, why not? why can't we just say tough, you either work and earn your right to benefits or you suffer.

I'm sure this argument will get ripped apart by sivis and robinski, but never the less, I'm just getting something off my chest which I know a lot of people like butters are maybe feeling, we don't have any problem with the people that come here (very little point in branding us as racists etc), it's just the political system that is in place with which there is a major problem, to me it seems the goverment have very little courage or the god damn balls to openly speak out against it (immigration/benefits/unwillingness to accept british customs/learn the english language) or do something drastic about it, the fear of being branded a far right xenophobic racist bigot is probably what puts them off, politics is all about appealing to god damn everybody, and at the moment there is not a single major politician that would step out and do the right thing and what most people want.

I think if someone was going to stand for prime minister had the backing of a few rich friends, and spoke honestly, and was proud to call himself/herself British and openly declared that any Immigrants who protest against our soldiers, burn our poppies or define us as the infidel in their mosques, will be forcefully removed from our country, would be pushing Mr Cameron out of number 10 in no time, ain't ever going to happen, but it's my opinion.

Anyways I'm not the best person with words and expressions, so I apologise if it's a load of incomprehesive gobblydegook

[Butters 2011]

QUOTE (ajbns87 @ Monday, Nov 28 2011, 16:08)

I'm sure this argument will get ripped apart by sivis and robinski, but never the less, I'm just getting something off my chest which I know a lot of people like butters are maybe feeling, we don't have any problem with the people that come here (very little point in branding us as racists etc), it's just the political system that is in place with which there is a major problem, to me it seems the goverment have very little courage or the god damn balls to openly speak out against it (immigration/benefits/unwillingness to accept british customs/learn the english language) or do something drastic about it, the fear of being branded a far right xenophobic racist bigot is probably what puts them off, politics is all about appealing to god damn everybody, and at the moment there is not a single major politician that would step out and do the right thing and what most people want. I think if someone was going to stand for prime minister had the backing of a few rich friends, and spoke honestly, and was proud to call himself/herself British and openly declared that any Immigrants who protest against our soldiers, burn our poppies or define us as the infidel in their mosques, will be forcefully removed from our country, would be pushing Mr Cameron out of number 10 in no time, ain't ever going to happen, but it's my opinion.

At the moment, a Goverment who were to stand up for British Pride would probably start to gain more votes. Just take a look at the last election, where the BNP gained a couple more seats. Now, it wasn't any major landmark in terms of politics, but in terms of society, this must say something. You get the young idiots who just 'believe' in the BNP because they are 'cool racist kids', but then you get the real ones who just see the BNP as a party who are trying to restore some pride back into this country, and put the hard working English person first. If you're telling me not to go by what is said in the news and media, then how do we know what the BNP are really like, without always getting taken out of context on the slight mention of them being racist. It seems that anyone who dares stand up for the pride of England gets jumped on and attacked, so we allow a Government who have basically opened the border and allowed millions of illegal immigrants into this country, happy to allow them to have massive families in houses paid by those who work, and not work at all or, even at the extreme, not conform to anything English. The BNP once mentioned about getting rid of illegal immigrants, and he got attacked for it and called racist.

Sickens me how the likes of Abu Hamza are claiming benefits, all the while preaching about their hatred for the West, and how Islam will take over.

QUOTE

So, you're saying that we should be more like an oppressive quasi-police-state, run by powerful clans and the military in an incredibly corrupt and illiberal democracy, with almost no regard for the views or desires of the population

Do you enjoy over-exaggerating and taking things out of context? What I want is a Government who stand behind the REAL British person, someone who is sick of all these hate preachers getting what they want in a country they prepare to 'destroy' with their extremist views, sick of seeing them get all the attention for ruining a day designed to remember some British War Hero, all the while forcing us to take down anything slightly related to showing our pride for England.

You mentioned about the 'white people' who are desocrating some war memorial in some way, but, and I know this can come across as exaggerated, but might not this be related to the lack of pride from this country, from the youth of today? I remember growing up in a village as a kid, and we had this 'feud' with the village next to us. Their way of getting at us was to graffiti the War Memorial in our village, which was seen as a massive disrespect to us. In all my life of living in that village, that was the only time it got vandalised.

Mult-culture can survive in cities, and I've personally witnessed it. The only people ruining it are the very people who claim to be behind this country, our own Government.

[leaflinks]

We live in the Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

There is no such entity/territory as the English state, it is artificial and has been since the Union was founded. You can say I am wrong, but it is the truth.

England is more of a territory, not defined by the forty eight counties by law. In the Irish nation they have counties which are recognised by law with borders.

Just recently, in a small town/village in County Berkshire or Surrey, there was one resident Roger Henry, a black man who didn't like seeing the Union flag flying in the village on a flag pole because it reminded him of typical British national party rhetoric.

He had his view, but him being first a British citizen, the fact that he happens to be black shows that he doesn't feel welcomed in a Southern English town on the Island nation of Great Britain.

At the end of the day he has his rightful view, but it is a view that nobody agrees with in the town. It is the flag of the union so naturally there are those out there who are Unionist supporters than nationalist supporters or perhaps they are both, as strange as that is.

Where is his Unionist flag or national flag. Somebody could put that question to him.

There are those who are from a Southern Asian or Black/African or Carribean background who don't integrate or don't feel they can integrate because of a predominately White elistist society.

I'm personally an English republican nationalist/independence supporter, I'm not a unionist. I used to say I was British, as that was my citizenship, but I seperate the British and English, so I consider myself an English citizen as I'm from Southern England, the capital city.

There are others out there who are British republican nationalists. Or even just British republicans without the interest of a coherent national identity.

[Robinski]

QUOTE (Vercetti27 @ Monday, Nov 28 2011, 14:59)

As for robinski "covering everythig" he basically came out with the standard politcally correct speech on the subject. There is still a lot that hasn't been covered and I have a freedom to say it, I don't care if i isn't the opinion shared by the mods that over-zealously run this place (especially this sub-forum) and talk down to people that don't share the standard view or don't speak english very well. The sensationalist crap annoys me too, I'm not buying into it but it doesn't mean that whats happening isn't. Its just being overplayed. There are still many immigrants that live of the welfare system with zero repsect for this country or it's culture, even though without it they might not be living such a comfortable life.

See, here's one thing I don't get. The argument that gets all angry at a wvague whiff of"Political Correctness gone mad" is a complete strawman. At the very core, PC simply means not being a dick to people.It's not about wrapping people in cotton wool or hiding your identity. The main rule of PC is "don't act like a dickehad". But anyway, I digress.

This "stuff" (something we should really nail a definition for down) does happen, but it gets to distorted and manipulated by people with an agenda (whether that's hate or money) that whenever you hear about it it might as well be about geese on Mars for how close it is to the truth. And even then, in its inception it's usually an extremist on either side who couldn't form a coherent argument in his language of choice for love nor money.

As for the point that there are many immigrants who "live off the welfare system", that's dwarfed infinitely by the number of people who live off it as born or naturalised citizens. Both camps have people who are legitimately looking for work and can't find it (that is, the majority, both immigrants and citizens) and people who sponge. Next comes the argument that surely, if they aren't citizens, they don't have as much right to sponge as they haven't contributed, which gets you into the circular logic of "they're stealing our jobs". Not to mention the idea of Asylum seekers who it would be barbaric to turn away, even if they are incapable of work.

Just as an off topic point too. The mods here aren't unfair. because they have power does not mean that they have to have neutral views. i see nobody in this topic, or any other, that's been banned simply for their views. Hell, it'd be downright stupid to have a mod who is neutral on everything and didn't contribute, because where's the motivation for them then?

And as a final point. Anybody who unironically reads the Daily Mail needs to just get the f*ck out of this section. They've already proved an inability to think critically.

[ajbns87]

QUOTE (Robinski @ Monday, Nov 28 2011, 18:36)

And as a final point. Anybody who unironically reads the Daily Mail needs to just get the f*ck out of this section. They've already proved an inability to think critically.

Lol this comment.

Anyhow don't bring the lazy british born citizens into this argument about immigrants and benefits, and the political party's lack of courage to stand up for Englishness and Christianity. They're irrelevant to the points being made, and whilst I'm not sure about the others, I'd be more than happy to kick out these scrouging scum along with the handful of freedom hating, hate preaching and advantage taking immigrants that flock to these shores once known as Great Britain...

[Irviding]

QUOTE (Username482 @ Monday, Nov 28 2011, 09:24)

QUOTE (vertical limit @ Sunday, Nov 27 2011, 22:16) Irviding, you starting to sound like a dick especially after you wrote this. QUOTE Muslims are easy to hate ever since 9/11 I respect people's culture and their beliefs. You are blaming a whole religion just because of a minority of idiots. You have that avatar "We will never forget" and there is a picture of the Twin Towers burning, but what about the Americans, Bin Laden didn't attack the Twin Towers out of the blue. I am not saying that what he did was right. But listen, I am not trying to be hostile or anything but your patriotism is making you ignorant. You are blind. The Arabs/Muslims are not terrorists, you don't have to blame them for the actions of one. The Arabs don't support Al-Qaeda in any way. The Arabs hate Al-Qaeda as much as you do, they ruined our image of how we appear to the world. Why don't you read his text again? You missed something.

What the 5 people who have called him out for misunderstanding my post are correct. It seems almost like vertical limit purposely went for that one statement, cut everything else I said out of the quote, and then attacked me on that. Not sure why. I don't believe English is his native language so if it was a genuine accident it's not a problem. Anyway, sorry for not contributing more than just clarfiying that b/c I am on my cell now but I don't think anything I said earlier was called into question anyway... this discussion is getting too British for me

[Melchior]

QUOTE (ajbns87 @ Tuesday, Nov 29 2011, 05:33)

Anyhow don't bring the lazy british born citizens into this argument about immigrants and benefits, and the political party's lack of courage to stand up for Englishness and Christianity. They're irrelevant to the points being made, and whilst I'm not sure about the others, I'd be more than happy to kick out these scrouging scum along with the handful of freedom hating, hate preaching and advantage taking immigrants that flock to these shores once known as Great Britain...

This sounds like a coherent political strategy, make they're kids feel totally helpless and marginalised, ship them off for being less than the rest of society. Could that lead to class and race based animosity? Would such animosity be detrimental to national pride? Almost certainly, yes.

[Butters 2011]

QUOTE (Robinski @ Monday, Nov 28 2011, 18:36)

As for the point that there are many immigrants who "live off the welfare system", that's dwarfed infinitely by the number of people who live off it as born or naturalised citizens.

Why is this even being brought into the argument? If someone is born in this country, then it's up to our Government to sort this out. I'm getting at the Illegals who flood into this country, find the loophole in the benefits system, and take advantage of it.

[ajbns87]

Melchior, you got to realise that within the unemployed such as myself - currently, there are those looking for work and unable to find any, volunteering and trying their best to make ends meet, whilst at the same there are those that are perfectly happen to not contribute, feel no shame when collecting their Jobs seekers allowance and even purposely make no effort to find work. Without a shadow of any doubt, before removing any of the british born scrougers along with the excess of immigrants wrongly soaking up our benefit systems like leeches, you'd have to deport people on an individual basis, case by case, never going to happen , logistics and so forth, and ultimately you are right, it would be detrimental to pride, hence why I am never going to be a politician lol !

[sivispacem]

QUOTE (Butters 2011 @ Monday, Nov 28 2011, 17:42)

Do you enjoy over-exaggerating and taking things out of context? What I want is a Government who stand behind the REAL British person, someone who is sick of all these hate preachers getting what they want in a country they prepare to 'destroy' with their extremist views, sick of seeing them get all the attention for ruining a day designed to remember some British War Hero, all the while forcing us to take down anything slightly related to showing our pride for England.

I fear you have missed my point somewhat. The issue is that the outlawing of "free speech"- or at least some freedom of expression- is endemic of autocratic dictatorships and corrupt regimes. Now, there are boundaries that cannot be over-stepped- wishing violence, encouraging murder or hatred of others based on origin, culture and the suchlike- but these work both ways. How many of these people do you really think there are? Across the entire country, maybe a couple of hundred- there certainly weren't more than 100 or so out on Armistice Day. I'm equally sick of seeing the platform that the gutter press provides hate-speech and radical Islamism, but I hold the press responsible for that, and not the government, or the Islamists, or anyone else. The press have an agenda to stoke up tensions and to present events in an out-of-proportion way- sensationalism sells, and damn the consequences. The simple fact of the matter is that you can't tar everyone with the same brush- some individuals have perfectly legitimate concerns about British government and British policy, which they should be free to express. Those who wish violence, racial hatred or segregation on others should be dutifully punished for doing so, but that must apply to those who attack Islam as a religion, as well as Islamists who attack British society. All must be equal in the eyes of law, otherwise you end up with a segregated society and issues of radicalisation becoming worse.

QUOTE (Vercetti27 @ Monday, Nov 28 2011, 15:59)

If loving his own country and standing up for it against people who would rather pose and wank themselves off as the "informed" kind that knows the truth and will stand up for the people in OP's post well then I'm guilty. If you'd rather blame people that inspire such dramatic hatred of our country than the people that buy into the sh*t the radicals spew, the same ignorant people that will use just about any excuse to attack our country for living differentlythen maybe you don't actually care about this country at all? Obviously you picked up on the fact it sounds more intelligent and well advised to have a go at ignorant, xenophobes than the human filfth that sh*t on the country with its desacration of war memorials and such. Well you came across just as how you wanted to, thank god you stopped us from having our stupid, pointless ill-advised debate. I'm sure Robinksi will give you a pat on the back. I apoligise for any bigotry on my part, obviously I hate the BNP, and I love all immigrants that come to our country. Of course reading the daily mail would have you believe that there are muslims in this country that abuse it daily, and have no respect for our culture while living as british citizens. But this is all rubbish written to anger people like myself, silly me for being so naive. I'm off to burn my english flag and tell myself we live in a terrible, capitalist country.

I just cannot believe the utter hypocrisy of most of what you say. You aggressively and without basis accuse entire swathes of the population of inspiring hatred and attacking the United Kingdom, yet the only person bringing the country into disrepute in this argument is yourself. From your interpretation, there's a radical, firebrand preacher on every street corner, backed up by an army of indifferent and self-hating upper-middle-class Guardian readers, positively welcoming Islamists and violent radicals in by the dozen and demanding the end of the democratic system. It's a work of hyperbole, utter Daily-Mail-esque dystopian fiction with no bearing on reality at all. How many radical Islamists do you think there are in the country? In reality, there aren't more than a few hundred- you're more likely to find an anti-Semite than you are an Islamist. The problem is, this gutter-press fiction actually breeds a new generation of radicalism and makes things worse for everyone concerned. Why do you think the far right has seen such a resurgence in the last few years? It's sure as hell not because the Islamist threat has increased to any measurable proportion; it's merely stupid and naive people being illogical and reactionary about issues that they mostly don't understand, palming their responsibility for their own failures onto others. "Oh, I'm too lazy to get a job, I'll blame the immigrants". It's utterly absurd and little could be further from the truth. The whole thing is a self-perpetuating cycle- if the press demonises Islam and inspires individuals to openly display xenophobia towards immigrants- or in many cases second or third-generation families who are just as British as those who attack them- then radicalisation is going to get worse, not better.

Yes, there are Islamists in this country who perform actions that demonstrate a disregard, even a hatred, for British values. Yes, there are native individuals who perform actions that are offensive to British culture, and to the British way of life. But I can categorically say that in both cases, they are an extremely small minority that has been blown out of all reasonable proportion by certain elements of the media. Besides, what's more of an affront to the British culture? Foreign individuals who mock the war dead and desecrate cenotaphs, or British citizens who fire-bomb mosques and Synagogues, conduct anti-Semitic attacks whilst all the while claiming to be a bastion of the "British way of life"? Personally, I think they're as bad as each other. That's right, bigots are as bad as Islamists. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that in many cases the bigots are worse than the Islamists. There are certainly more of them, and at least political Islam has some kind of cohesive idea of identity, rather than this confused, muddled notion of "British nationalism" which seldom serves as anything more than a vessel for racism, xenophobia and violence against others.

A true patriot should never preach senseless aggression against others, regardless of their actions. They should support the democratic system, the freedoms of other individuals to express their views, and other fundamental rights; should act as a group to prevent the actions of groups that undermine the idea of Western societal values and culture, but always logically, with sensible argument, rather than descending into bigotry and rhetoric. There are ways of dealing with the threat of militant Islamism which maintain the agreeable "face" of British values without descending into violence and racism.

[OldMugginsPartridge]

No one has any national identity, what f*cking difference does it make if someone is born on the same piece of land as you?

[Robinski]

To be fair, the press only publish what sells, and that applies to nearly all publications. Even the "gutter press" is actually quite left wing on the inside, it's just the type of person the profession attracts, same as teaching. It just happens that those in the right-wing press are a little looser with their morals. It's a vicious cycle: people believe this sh*t because they read it in the papers, and they read it in the papers because they always buy them when they hear about it.

Also:

QUOTE

self-hating middle-class Guardian readers

You leave me out of this!

[Butters 2011]

QUOTE (sivispacem @ Tuesday, Nov 29 2011, 22:19)

QUOTE (Butters 2011 @ Monday, Nov 28 2011, 17:42) Do you enjoy over-exaggerating and taking things out of context? What I want is a Government who stand behind the REAL British person, someone who is sick of all these hate preachers getting what they want in a country they prepare to 'destroy' with their extremist views, sick of seeing them get all the attention for ruining a day designed to remember some British War Hero, all the while forcing us to take down anything slightly related to showing our pride for England. I fear you have missed my point somewhat. The issue is that the outlawing of "free speech"- or at least some freedom of expression- is endemic of autocratic dictatorships and corrupt regimes. Now, there are boundaries that cannot be over-stepped- wishing violence, encouraging murder or hatred of others based on origin, culture and the suchlike- but these work both ways. How many of these people do you really think there are?

Honestly don't know, but what I can tell you is that one of the most prolific preachers in the UK is somehow receiving benefits, in a country he wishes destruction upon. Now, I'm not sure if is still receiving said benefits, but the very fact that he was earning them is a disgrace, and mockery of our country. I understood you're point exactly, and it's funny to see you mention this so-called 'Free Speech' thing, of which seems only available to anyone who doesn't dare mention the state of this country.

I'm not asking for this far-right nation you speak of, but a country that stands up to anyone and anything that makes a mockery out of it.

[sivispacem]

QUOTE (Butters 2011 @ Tuesday, Nov 29 2011, 23:48)

Honestly don't know, but what I can tell you is that one of the most prolific preachers in the UK is somehow receiving benefits, in a country he wishes destruction upon. Now, I'm not sure if is still receiving said benefits, but the very fact that he was earning them is a disgrace, and mockery of our country. I understood you're point exactly, and it's funny to see you mention this so-called 'Free Speech' thing, of which seems only available to anyone who doesn't dare mention the state of this country. I'm not asking for this far-right nation you speak of, but a country that stands up to anyone and anything that makes a mockery out of it.

If you are talking about Abu Hamza al-Masri, he's currently in HMP Bellmarsh awaiting extradition to the US on charges that could see him executed, so isn't getting any kind of benefits. In fact, there's a £1m+ civil lawsuit currently being enacted against him to seize all of his assets. If you are talking about Anjem Choudary, he's a British national born in South London and therefore has exactly the same right to exploit our useless benefit system as any other citizen does. He's also been very careful in his use of language- he's maintained a clean criminal record by actively supporting Al-Muhajiroun and Islam4UK/Muslims Against Crusaders whilst never taking the step of directly wishing violence on British citizens. He's a xenophobic, racist and utterly despicable radical, but he's also a trained lawyer so he knows what he does sits just on the "legal" side of the law. That's not to say that he's not being investigated for links to terrorist organisations, or under constant surveillance by the security services, but much of what he's said and done is technically legal, though disgusting.

The problem is, it's difficult to pass legislation preventing people from "making a mockery" of a country as you put it without infringing on people's right to freedom of expression. There's a clear legal boundary where inciting violence or hatred is concerned, but it's much harder to apply the kind of rule you suggest without severely impacting on the concept of "free speech" (I use inverted quotation marks as "free speech" doesn't actually exist in reality, but I'm referring to clauses claiming to encourage freedom of expression in the British legal framework and ECHR). I mean, it's evidently targeted at Islamists in this case, but it could also be used against armchair pundits who denounce government policy; against political radicals on both the left and the right who support fundamental changes in our political or legislative system, people who express dislike of "classic" British institutions, those who disagree with our foreign policy and all manner of other circumstances that, if implemented, would border on the illiberal.

[GTA_stu]

I think if you asked the average person who held a right-wing view if they had actually witnessed first hand any of the so called "making a mockery of the country" incidents that a few people in here have mentioned, a vast majority would say no. It's just not as bad as the media make out, not even remotely close. Any little "anti-britsh" incident gets such a great deal of attention and it is just a complete and absolute misrepresentation of the actual reality.

It's a complete mockery, and a reminder of the sad state of affairs that our media and particularly tabloid newspapers are in. The redtops are glorified celebrity magazines with very little actual "news" and even then it's usually completely biased. Unfortunately they are read by the masses who believe the vitriolic nonsense which is hissed out. You'd get a better perspective of things by just reading the daily thought of the page 3 girl.

"kelly 22 from baseldon thinks the marriage of coleen and wayne is a good thing as it teaches young kids the importance of marriage and instills important social values." > rest of the bullsh*t

[Melchior]

QUOTE (Butters 2011 @ Wednesday, Nov 30 2011, 08:48)

QUOTE (sivispacem @ Tuesday, Nov 29 2011, 22:19) QUOTE (Butters 2011 @ Monday, Nov 28 2011, 17:42) Do you enjoy over-exaggerating and taking things out of context? What I want is a Government who stand behind the REAL British person, someone who is sick of all these hate preachers getting what they want in a country they prepare to 'destroy' with their extremist views, sick of seeing them get all the attention for ruining a day designed to remember some British War Hero, all the while forcing us to take down anything slightly related to showing our pride for England. I fear you have missed my point somewhat. The issue is that the outlawing of "free speech"- or at least some freedom of expression- is endemic of autocratic dictatorships and corrupt regimes. Now, there are boundaries that cannot be over-stepped- wishing violence, encouraging murder or hatred of others based on origin, culture and the suchlike- but these work both ways. How many of these people do you really think there are? Honestly don't know, but what I can tell you is that one of the most prolific preachers in the UK is somehow receiving benefits, in a country he wishes destruction upon. Now, I'm not sure if is still receiving said benefits, but the very fact that he was earning them is a disgrace, and mockery of our country. I understood you're point exactly, and it's funny to see you mention this so-called 'Free Speech' thing, of which seems only available to anyone who doesn't dare mention the state of this country. I'm not asking for this far-right nation you speak of, but a country that stands up to anyone and anything that makes a mockery out of it.

Withholding benefits based on political beliefs would set quite an unattractive precedent, I think.

[Irviding]

"The real British person"... what does that mean? White Protestants only?