http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/08/05/london.bombings.blair/index.html

8/5/2005 9:39:04 AM

countries without a constitution/bill of rights kick ass

Quote :

""Let no one be in any doubt that the rules of the game are changing," Blair told a London news conference"

[Edited on August 5, 2005 at 9:51 AM. Reason : `]

8/5/2005 9:44:59 AM

i don't like the the precedent that sets...

btw, this is a perfect picture for a "tony blair advice" thread

8/5/2005 9:51:12 AM

"dont bomb our country, unlike the US, we'll get your ass"

8/5/2005 11:10:55 AM

Its like

"We won't let the terrorists beat us. We will show them our resolve..."



"...by trumping civil liberties and slowly slightly curtailing freedom of speech"

8/5/2005 11:12:47 AM

^^No no no, in britain its "arse"

8/5/2005 11:14:14 AM

So why do other countries hate the US more than the UK?

8/5/2005 11:17:03 AM

ehe

hate advocates are "undesirable"

8/5/2005 11:20:22 AM

Don't get britain wrong, the US doesn't tolerate that crap, either. In fact, in America, YOU can be arrested for hate speech, especially if it results in subsequent violent activity. Also, since hate speech is a crime, once you are convicted you can be deported if you are not a US citizen.

8/5/2005 1:04:55 PM

How can you guys be this fucking stupid?

If these assholes are running around stirring the pot, they deserve it.

8/5/2005 1:30:41 PM

"hate advocation" falls under free speech.

Like RIGHT UNDER it.

8/5/2005 1:36:42 PM

maybe we need to reign in free speech a little

i'm for it

8/5/2005 1:38:27 PM

There's either free speech or there isn't.

No such thing as "a little less free speech."

Thats an oxymoron or some shit.

8/5/2005 1:39:29 PM

Oh well

Better than letting these fucks cause massive problems just for the sake of proving a point. You have to fight shit like this intelligently.

8/5/2005 1:44:22 PM

Well this isn't fighting it "intelligently."

What does "hate advocating" mean anyway.

How do you define that?

Its general enough that any message percieved to be negative by the government could be covered by such legislation.

8/5/2005 1:53:05 PM

Pish, there's no higher aim in this life than proving a point.

8/5/2005 1:53:06 PM

Anything can be easily abused by the government.

Just in case you forgot, they're the ones with the heavy weaponry.

Just because this enemy is hard to define and doesn't march under a national flag doesn't mean you don't take out those who seek to further their goals. Speech, to this enemy, is as potent a weapon as anything else. Sometimes you have to disarm your enemy.

8/5/2005 1:57:00 PM

Quote :

"countries without a constitution/bill of rights kick ass"

8/5/2005 2:00:43 PM

gg woodfoot

Where's the 'it begins' pic?

8/5/2005 2:01:25 PM

Then there is no point to democracy and we should alter our government accordingly.

If you can't have freedom of speech, how do you check the government's power? How do you stop the creation of a potential police state?

Furthermore, banning hate advocation in western countries isn't going to shut down religous fanaticism in Iran or Pakistan, for instance.

8/5/2005 2:05:22 PM

Quote :

"Speech, to this enemy, is as potent a weapon as anything else. Sometimes you have to disarm your enemy."

You're a facist.

If someone comes up to a cop and threatens to blow up a specific building then I guess I'm okay with you arresting him.

More general threats, though, aren't really threats.

8/5/2005 2:07:51 PM

On a somewhat related note, I think it's funny that the Muslim community in the UK is complaining about police profiling people they decide to search in the subways. There was a piece on NPR about it yesterday, about how a couple police spent half a day down there an only searched one person, a teenager from the UAE. He was walking around with a video camera taping stuff in the subway. Well no shit, he's Arab looking and he's video taping the subway, I'd question him too.

If what, 99%+ of these kinds of crimes are happening by 20-30 year old Arab males, why the hell should they waste the time of a 75 year old white haired lady searching her bags? The Muslim community needs to talk some sense into the fuckfaces who are doing the bombings and then there wouldn't be any cause for police to be doing the searches in the first place.

8/5/2005 2:12:27 PM

^ why are you focusing on the muslim bombers? why not consider the americans and british who are killing thousands of iraqis and palestinians?

8/5/2005 2:19:18 PM

Quote :

"Furthermore, banning hate advocation in western countries isn't going to shut down religous fanaticism in Iran or Pakistan, for instance."

exactly. that's exactly where we want all this bullshit TO happen.

8/5/2005 2:21:49 PM

not that we want it to happen there, but if it must happen, then yes, it would be better for it to happen in the fanatic's own backyard

8/5/2005 2:23:03 PM

Quote :

"Then there is no point to democracy and we should alter our government accordingly."

Good thing this isn't a democracy anyway. We won't have to remodel much.

Quote :

"If you can't have freedom of speech, how do you check the government's power? How do you stop the creation of a potential police state?"

How do you stop it anyway? I'm not arguing about free speech here, I'm arguing about people who basically drive others to crimes like this. You can't fucking scream "fire" in a crowded theatre. Why not? Pretty much the same reason you shouldn't be able to manipulate others into suicide bombings.

Quote :

"You're a facist. "

And you're a sensationalist fuckstick.

Quote :

"More general threats, though, aren't really threats."

It depends on what they're intentionally causing, right? Free speech isn't a black and white issue.

8/5/2005 2:26:02 PM

If the US were to do the same thing, TWW would be shut off and all of us would be posting from Bangalore.

8/5/2005 2:31:14 PM

bangalore sucks and so does any place within 1000 miles of it

8/5/2005 2:32:39 PM

which is why the US shouldn't follow Britain's lead.

8/5/2005 2:35:03 PM

30thAnnZThese guys all went apeshit after going to pakistan and studying with extremists there. This won't stop extremists from being created and it won't stop them from getting into western countries. It will just give the government a tool the export anyone saying anything that falls under this broad umbrella.

Its not going to end the world or cause Hitler to raise from the grave, but its just another small strike against civil liberties.

Quote :

"We won't have to remodel much."

Actually we might. For instance, all my "omg Die IRL. anyone this fucking stupid needs to die. Die die die etc JESUS CHRIST KILL YOURSELF FAGGOT" postings on this website fall under "hate advocation." I don't want RPD treating me like jackleg because of what I say as opposed to what I do.

I like the freedom of being an asshole at times, thats the American way.

Quote :

"How do you stop it anyway? I'm not arguing about free speech here, I'm arguing about people who basically drive others to crimes like this."

Nobody drives a person to a crime. People who choose to blow themselves up do it for complicated reasons. They aren't forced, they willing give themselves up. Furthermore, this solution doesn't effect people in the far east. Terrorists will never be in short supply so long as more difficult, global social issues are not addressed.

8/5/2005 2:37:07 PM

^ Are you suggesting that people can't be manipulated?

Let's free Charles Manson immediately.

8/5/2005 2:40:20 PM

Let's be honest here...much of American progress in the economic sense depends on hatred.

8/5/2005 2:45:40 PM

8/5/2005 2:46:41 PM

Quote :

"And you're a sensationalist fuckstick."

Is that a threat?

It sounds like hate-speech to me...

Quote :

"It depends on what they're intentionally causing, right? Free speech isn't a black and white issue."

For some of us it is.

8/5/2005 3:11:51 PM

Quote :

"It sounds like hate-speech to me... "

Only to somebody playing stupid to illustrate a point. Newsflash: you can intentionally misinterpret almost anything to spearhead a witchhunt. But the key issue here is a valid one: we shouldn't allow these people to fucking recruit in our country.

8/5/2005 3:14:24 PM

Quote :

"Newsflash: you can intentionally misinterpret almost anything to spearhead a witchhunt."

Good job exposing the danger in your own position

8/5/2005 3:15:17 PM

Oh my god, slippery slope!

Edit: Seriously though, your position basically boils down to this: "A sword can be turned against its user."

Well no shit. Any weapon, whether political or otherwise, can be misused or turned against the user if circumstances are right. Does that mean we should roll unarmed?

[Edited on August 5, 2005 at 3:17 PM. Reason : .]

8/5/2005 3:16:16 PM

Quote :

"we shouldn't allow these people to fucking recruit in our country."

If we catch them planning an attack, by all means, let's throw 'em in jail.

Otherwise it's just talk.

8/5/2005 3:17:50 PM

Quote :

"^ Are you suggesting that people can't be manipulated?"

Not at all. However I will challenge you to come up with any example of a person being manipulated against his or her will to commit a crime. If you give up your right to reason, that is your failing, not someone elses.

Quote :

"Oh my god, slippery slope! Edit: Seriously though, your position basically boils down to this: "A sword can be turned against its user." Well no shit. Any weapon, whether political or otherwise, can be misused or turned against the user if circumstances are right. Does that mean we should roll unarmed? "

You don't have to "roll unarmed." There are other "weapons" to deal with terrorism, ones that are far more effective then slowly turning your nation into a police state. For instance, taking a hard look at the failure of western policy towards the middle east and africa. I find it interesting that terrorist attacks have seemingly increased since the invasion of Iraq along with recruitment worldwide.

I'm not a fan of "slippery slope" logic but I can with full reason expect government to abuse or miss use any expanded power it has.

Quote :

"Otherwise it's just talk."

This is exactly it. Before arguing against this, go ahead and search TWW for "just talk" that you , me, and some other long term users have posted. It most certianly would fall under "hate advocation."

[Edited on August 5, 2005 at 3:31 PM. Reason : .]

8/5/2005 3:31:07 PM

Hey, let's all get together and go burn down Harrelson Hall. I hate NCSU profs.

[OMF, I'm going to JAIL.]

8/5/2005 3:43:12 PM

see
if you look at my initial post
i thought i made it plain that england can do this because they aren't america

if america starts doing shit like this
i'd totally be rallying for free speech etc
because thats how our country works

but england don't work that way
never has, never will
i mean, thats a big reason we left in the first place

but see
i'm not one of these republicans who thinks our country should be the model of everyone everywhere
so when i see a country different from us doing something cool/effective
i salute it

8/5/2005 4:34:00 PM

There's an obvious difference between saying something and between waging an ongoing campaign.

I understand that the government would have the opportunity to abuse this. If it were kept within some well defined boundaries, however, I think it's reasonable. Remember why we have Charles Manson in jail? It's because there's a serious difference between what he did/what these clerics do, and between saying "I hate my professor, that motherfucker should croak".

8/5/2005 4:59:49 PM

"Without free speech no search for truth is possible... no discovery of truth is useful... Better a thousandfold abuse of free speech than denial of free speech. The abuse dies in a day, but the denial slays the life of the people, and entombs the hope of the race."

Charles BRADLAUGH
British social reformer (1833-1891)

---

"Liberty is meaningless where the right to utter one’s thoughts and opinions has ceased to exist. That, of all rights, is the dread of tyrants. It is the right which they first of all strike down. They know its power. Thrones, dominions, principalities, and powers, founded in injustice and wrong, are sure to tremble, if men are allowed to reason…
There can be no right of speech where any man…[is] compelled to suppress his honest sentiments.
Equally clear is the right to hear. To suppress free speech is a double wrong. It violates the rights of the hearer as well as those of the speaker."

Frederick DOUGLASS
In famous plea for free speech in Boston 1860
American abolitionist, author, orator (1817-1895)

---

"To speak his thoughts is every freeman's right, in peace and war, in council and in fight."

HOMER
The Iliad
Principal figure of ancient Greek literature (before 700 B.C.)

---

"Freedom of expression must be considered sacred and thought can only be corrected by counter thought."

Naguib MAHFOUZ
Egyptian novelist and screenwriter (1911-)

---

"I may disagree with what you have to say, but I shall defend, to the death, your right to say it."

Francois Marie Arouet VOLTAIRE
The Friends of Voltaire, 1907
French philosopher and writer (1694-1778)

8/5/2005 5:12:55 PM

Quote :

"but see i'm not one of these republicans who thinks our country should be the model of everyone everywhere so when i see a country different from us doing something cool/effective i salute it"

This ain't about Republicans or America. Those people who split off used words like unalienable and universal.

8/5/2005 5:14:08 PM

So, does everybody think we should free Charles Manson, or what?

8/5/2005 5:23:47 PM

Quote :

""I may disagree with what you have to say, but I shall defend, to the death, your right to say it." Francois Marie Arouet VOLTAIRE The Friends of Voltaire, 1907 French philosopher and writer (1694-1778)"

well, thats a load of bull. THem bloody frenchmen aint defended shit. The only thing got down is the dying part

8/5/2005 5:57:32 PM

All the quotes about free speech are nice, but we live in a world where there is no such thing as free speech. We place restrictions on speech all the time, and we do it for the purposes of making society as a whole better. Now whether this qualifies is one debate, but let's not pretend this is a new thing, speech is heavily regulated throughout society.

8/5/2005 7:53:50 PM

I don't understand this soap box need of trying to prove a weak point by throwing in extreme statements aimed at pigeonholing the person you're debating with as supporting something evil.

Its pathetic and stupid.

Premeditated murder, McDanger is illegal. As is conspiracy to comit murder. As is aiding and abetting in committing murder.

Charles Manson wanted white people killed so that he could start a racial revolution. Then he went about the planning and execution of his plan.

Furthermore, he already had a extensive criminal record before he had the Family go on a killing spree.

A better example would have been "so do you think Richard Butler should just walk around free?" to which I would reply: "unless proven guilty of a serious crime, yes."

8/5/2005 9:53:40 PM

Quote :

"why are you focusing on the muslim bombers? why not consider the americans and british who are killing thousands of iraqis and palestinians?"

Is nerdboy for real? Nobody can be this stupid.

8/5/2005 10:52:45 PM

Quote :

"why not consider the americans and british who are killing thousands of iraqis and palestinians?"

We are! If these americans and british were killing thousands of people in your city, wouldn't you want them searched for weapons?

8/5/2005 11:49:37 PM