It looks like free speech in the UK is now on the slippery slope.

[oldbadger]

That there is an abyssal difference between expressing an idea about a religion, and inciting hatred towards people. Since religions are abstract concepts...they are not people.

If religions are not people, then religions cannot post unlawful communications via IT. So we won't have any trouble with them, eh?

But people can post communications via IT which can be harmful, and there there does need to be control of these.

Suppose somebody communicated about you or yours, inciting others to Jarrad, victimise or frighten, or inciting crimes against you?

Suppose a family member committed suicide because of IT Comms?

Just think about it. But equally, when a judge rules that an act was reasonable, then that's fine, subject to appeal.

Or did you have an example
in mind which which makes sense of your point to me?

 

[oldbadger]

Some people just do not get it.

So give us an example which makes any sense of your points whilst remaining lawful?

 

[GoodbyeDave]

That there is an abyssal difference between expressing an idea about a religion, and inciting hatred towards people.

And how can you encourage people to hate a belief without the risk of their hating its practitioners as well?

PS "abyssal" means "relating to the ocean depths" or, figuratively, "unfathomable". You meant "fundamental" There are so many foreigners here telling us how to run our country …

 

[Estro Felino]

And how can you encourage people to hate a belief without the risk of their hating its practitioners as well?

PS "abyssal" means "relating to the ocean depths" or, figuratively, "unfathomable". You meant "fundamental" There are so many foreigners here telling us how to run our country …

Yes...sorry...we use "abyssal" referring to difference, when it deals with "big difference"...ours is a very metaphorical language.

As for " many foreigners" telling you etc...
Well...apparently, Sadiq Khan has already said he doesn't want our Salvini in London...

And I wonder why...


View attachment 37046

 

[Estro Felino]

Or did you have an example
in mind which which makes sense of your point to me?

Yes...a good example.
Sadiq Khan has said he doesn't want Salvini in London ...
And we all know why...Salvini evidently is famous for being incredibly outspoken and merciless, when it deals with the Londoner Mayor's religion.

 

[Notanumber]

So give us an example which makes any sense of your points whilst remaining lawful?

People can criticise my right of centre ideology all they like or even call me a bigot and you will not find me complaining, never mind contacting the Thought Police.

 

[oldbadger]

Yes...a good example.
Sadiq Khan has said he doesn't want Salvini in London ...
And we all know why...Salvini evidently is famous for being incredibly outspoken and merciless, when it deals with the Londoner Mayor's religion.

Let's see if you know......
What exactly is Sadiq Khan's religion?
What exactly has Salvini spoken out about it?

Sadiq can choose whom he likes as a colleague, I expect, but that doesn't have to mean that Salvini has committed any crimes with his speech. Sadiq wouldn't want me in his team either..... my comments about London Transport systems would knock me for six.

So exactly what has Salvini said, and about what religion 'exactly'?

 

[oldbadger]

People can criticise my right of centre ideology all they like or even call me a bigot and you will not find me complaining, never mind contacting the Thought Police.

You did not give a single example then, of an exact communication for discussion.

But, Yes, anybody can call you a bigot and the police will not take any notice of any such complaints! But if somebody wrote (for 'made-up' example only) on your front door , 'A nasty rightist bigot lives here, why don't you throw a righteous leftist stone thru his bedroom window?' then we would have a crime! You would be a victim! Easy.

Your ideas about our Police are rubbish imo, because we don't live in a police state.

 

[Stanyon]

the U.K. has been going this direction for quite a few years haven't they?

 

[Estro Felino]

Let's see if you know......
What exactly is Sadiq Khan's religion?
What exactly has Salvini spoken out about it?

Sadiq can choose whom he likes as a colleague, I expect, but that doesn't have to mean that Salvini has committed any crimes with his speech. Sadiq wouldn't want me in his team either..... my comments about London Transport systems would knock me for six.

So exactly what has Salvini said, and about what religion 'exactly'?

 

[oldbadger]

I knew that you would not or could not answer either of my questions directly.

You could not name Sadiq's exact religion, nor could you tell me exactly what Salvini had said for Sadiq to tell us that he does not want Sadiq in London.

Truth is...... A quick 'google' search tells me that Salvini could face an Italian trial for deliberately holding refugees offshore on a boat and refusing to let them land or receive humane treatment. He has also upset the women of the world, it seems, with his extremist views........

If Sadiq has said he doesn't want Salvini in London then he was speaking freely. I shouldn't think that many Londoners would want him there, you know.

But Salvini should face any Italian indictments before he goes anywhere! And his Human Rights violations seems quite horrific..... and there is you wanting to use him as an example of how nasty the IK has become? Not a good example.

 

[Estro Felino]

I knew that you would not or could not answer either of my questions directly.

You could not name Sadiq's exact religion, nor could you tell me exactly what Salvini had said for Sadiq to tell us that he does not want Sadiq in London.

Truth is...... A quick 'google' search tells me that Salvini could face an Italian trial for deliberately holding refugees offshore on a boat and refusing to let them land or receive humane treatment. He has also upset the women of the world, it seems, with his extremist views........

If Sadiq has said he doesn't want Salvini in London then he was speaking freely. I shouldn't think that many Londoners would want him there, you know.

But Salvini should face any Italian indictments before he goes anywhere! And his Human Rights violations seems quite horrific..... and there is you wanting to use him as an example of how nasty the IK has become? Not a good example.

Ok...just explain me what His Majesty means here, then.

 

[oldbadger]

Ok...just explain me what His Majesty means here, then.

Openess and diversity....... yep, that's the majority of Londoners, and 'yep', I reckon that Sadiq is right about Londoners not wanting to see or hear Salvini in London.

You mix up warnings with bans. You mix up indictments with free opinions. Before Salvini can get to London he needs to defend himself in Italy over charges of human rights violations and international crimes.

Look.... if you like this guy, why don't you go on holiday to Italy and listen to him there? You've got the freedom, I expect?.

And you should research to discover what Sadiq'a exact religion is... and most Londoners are agnostic, I reckon, and they wouldn't want to hear Salvini for long, although Hyde Park Corner is open to everyone. ......... so long as they don't incite crime!

 

[Estro Felino]

Openess and diversity....... yep, that's the majority of Londoners, and 'yep', I reckon that Sadiq is right about Londoners not wanting to see or hear Salvini in London.

You mix up warnings with bans. You mix up indictments with free opinions. Before Salvini can get to London he needs to defend himself in Italy over charges of human rights violations and international crimes.

Look.... if you like this guy, why don't you go on holiday to Italy and listen to him there? You've got the freedom, I expect?.

And you should research to discover what Sadiq'a exact religion is... and most Londoners are agnostic, I reckon, and they wouldn't want to hear Salvini for long, although Hyde Park Corner is open to everyone. ......... so long as they don't incite crime!

Well...first of all...we are speaking of the most voted person in Italy, the most powerful right-wing-populist in Europe...
Mr. Khan is free to say " Salvini is not welcome here".
I do hope if he goes to London, thousands of Londoners will protest on the street.
It will signify he is rightfully the "European Trump"

 

[oldbadger]

Well...first of all...we are speaking of the most voted person in Italy, the most powerful right-wing-populist in Europe...
Mr. Khan is free to say " Salvini is not welcome here".
I do hope if he goes to London, thousands of Londoners will protest on the street.
It will signify he is rightfully the "European Trump"

Mr Salvini ain't a UK citizen, so we can tell him to stay away.
Our government has just decided to refuse entry to all low-skill folks after next January 2021, so you can see that the UK can decide who to give visas to before they have said a word. You see?

Mr Salvini is obviously very popular in Italy. But then, so was Mussolini, and remember what happened to him?
During the war we took Oswald Mosley's freedom away, so yeah, sometimes we have to take extreme steps in extreme circumstances, but mostly we support free speech..... BUT IT MUST NOT INCITE ANY CRIME!

 

[Estro Felino]

Mr Salvini ain't a UK citizen, so we can tell him to stay away.

Well...if you guys do, our newspapers will have something juicy to write about for the next 10 years...
I guess Salvini's popularity would rise to stars....

Btw...Salvini has never incited any crime...he has just vowed to fight against the Islamization of Europe...nothing more.

 

[oldbadger]

Well...if you guys do, our newspapers will have something juicy to write about for the next 10 years...
I guess Salvini's popularity would rise to stars....

Btw...Salvini has never incited any crime...he has just vowed to fight against the Islamization of Europe...nothing more.

Well he is going to stand trial over his treatment of those boat refugees, or so we hear.
With any luck he won't come here, is my opinion. We have many Muslims here and they are all good UK citizens. One or two criminals cannot tarnish a whole religion, culture or group.

 

[Shad]

Hm...your description makes the latter sound worse to me.

It seems like both are attempts to thwart criminal activity, but the UK example only violates rights in the form of forcing a private business to police the users of their product, which I suppose could be likened to the rules governing attendance at a public space like a concert.

FB isn't a public space. A public space is property. Attendance is localization within that public space while FB users are not. Violence in a public space is a localized event that can be a threat to those that attend. A threat of violence on FB is not a threat to all FB users.

Do not conflate this with a company choosing to report a user to authorities. It is government oversight I have an issue with. More so in consideration that established media can interview AQ, Taliban and other terrorists directly and indirectly, broadcast propaganda, etc with no issue. More so FB and Google have no issues with censorship in China in order to operate.

The American example feels more invasive: The government has records and access to personal material and property, even in the private sphere of our homes.

Facebook has a lot of data from it users which provide it freely as it is a social network. Hence why Obama used FB in his elections. The difference how government power is used.

Keep in mind this is the same UK that went after a gay for teaching his g/f's dog to do the Nazi salute as a joke. The government's case against him was solely from social networks.

 

[Notanumber]

You did not give a single example then, of an exact communication for discussion.

But, Yes, anybody can call you a bigot and the police will not take any notice of any such complaints! But if somebody wrote (for 'made-up' example only) on your front door , 'A nasty rightist bigot lives here, why don't you throw a righteous leftist stone thru his bedroom window?' then we would have a crime! You would be a victim! Easy.

Your ideas about our Police are rubbish imo, because we don't live in a police state.

When the likes of Alastair Stewart are forced out of their jobs because of offence taken over tweets, we do not need the police getting involved with “Thought Crimes”. They should concentrate on the real crimes that we pay them to deal with.

Rather obtusely, what you are giving examples of are real crimes.

They were Mr Justice Knowles ideas about our Police and they were not rubbish imo.

 

[Shad]

You did not give a single example then, of an exact communication for discussion.

But, Yes, anybody can call you a bigot and the police will not take any notice of any such complaints! But if somebody wrote (for 'made-up' example only) on your front door , 'A nasty rightist bigot lives here, why don't you throw a righteous leftist stone thru his bedroom window?' then we would have a crime! You would be a victim! Easy.

Your ideas about our Police are rubbish imo, because we don't live in a police state.

For consideration granted it is not documentation of the reports nor case.