Thought police muscle up in Britain | The Australian
The Government is pushing ahead with legislation that will criminalise politically incorrect jokes, with a maximum punishment of up to seven years’ prison.
Dipshit Jack StrawThe House of Lords tried to insert a free-speech amendment, but Justice Secretary Jack Straw knocked it out. It was Straw who previously called for a redefinition of Englishness and suggested the “global baggage of empire” was linked to soccer violence by “racist and xenophobic white males”. He claimed the English “propensity for violence” was used to subjugate Ireland, Scotland and Wales, and that the English as a race were “potentially very aggressive”.
In the past 10 years I have collected reports of many instances of draconian punishments, including the arrest and criminal prosecution of children, for thought-crimes and offences against political correctness.
Countryside Restoration Trust chairman and columnist Robin Page said at a rally against the Government’s anti-hunting laws in Gloucestershire in 2002: “If you are a black vegetarian Muslim asylum-seeking one-legged lesbian lorry driver, I want the same rights as you.” Page was arrested, and after four months he received a letter saying no charges would be pressed, but that: “If further evidence comes to our attention whereby your involvement is implicated, we will seek to initiate proceedings.” It took him five years to clear his name.
Page was at least an adult. In September 2006, a 14-year-old schoolgirl, Codie Stott, asked a teacher if she could sit with another group to do a science project as all the girls with her spoke only Urdu. The teacher’s first response, according to Stott, was to scream at her: “It’s racist, you’re going to get done by the police!” Upset and terrified, the schoolgirl went outside to calm down. The teacher called the police and a few days later, presumably after officialdom had thought the matter over, she was arrested and taken to a police station, where she was fingerprinted and photographed. According to her mother, she was placed in a bare cell for 3 1/2 hours. She was questioned on suspicion of committing a racial public order offence and then released without charge. The school was said to be investigating what further action to take, not against the teacher, but against Stott. Headmaster Anthony Edkins reportedly said: “An allegation of a serious nature was made concerning a racially motivated remark. We aim to ensure a caring and tolerant attitude towards pupils of all ethnic backgrounds and will not stand for racism in any form.”
Found by Mad Dog Mike.
Ah, so you’re a liberal loon too right then? Since your entire post was ad hominem and all.
#45–Alfie==what an upside down world you fester in.
“Ms Ca. was criticized by many” /// your proof is the cover of the NYT. FOOLLISH.
“Nor were they fascist like you liberal loons…they wouldn’t have denied Miss California the right to her opinion…as Perez Hilton did.? /// Ms Ca. exercised her right to her opinion FULLY as did dipshit Perez. You put words into a sentence like it was a Mr Potato game, with just the same amount of sense. FOOLISH.
“Its a fact, GE is collecting Billions, for promoting Obama in its News Organizations, LYING to the public…and you loons are fine with that.” /// So who was “OK” with that fist-bump Obama cover? Not the lefty loons. It was NOT politically correct, just the opposite.
Poor Old Aflie–confused beyond redemption. Even a lunatic can usually keep his tin foil consipiracies aimed at his imaginary foe. You can’t even do that.
Junk Conspiracy theory of a sort.
Double Dolt Award, or maybe, just maybe, like the shaking baby game, we all really should just kindly wipe away your drool and leave you in your crib.
Alfred – word economy is a direct indicator of intelligence.
#48 –
You didn’t deal with the argument however. You’ve continuously put up a straw man – Perez Hilton, to be precise, although you continue to argue against some undefined “liberal loon” which generalizes all who don’t think the way you do (which is, I fear to tell you, *everyone in the world* – I mean that not by way of insult, but rather, I would hope, by right of *their* education). So your phantom “liberal loon” uses ad hominem 100% of the time, and you cite Perez Hilton as the shining example…
Well, here’s the thing: Perez Hilton is a fucking moron, whose opinion is worth nothing, whose education I highly doubt, and whose voice is incredibly annoying to me. I have neither reason nor basis for listening to his opinion, other than the man freely chooses to give it – it means zip, zilch, nada. And yet you continue to espouse him as the Great Liberal Loon – that may well be true, but to generalize is to, I fear, both attack ad hominem, and to fly a straw man which you can easily tear down.
So here’s the rub: How is using an ad hominem attack, even 100% ad hominem, the sole weapon of the fascist (or the weapon of solely fascists)? Or, to perhaps put it in more logical terms, how does your inductive reasoning work?
#49–Alfred==if I knew the code, I would provide it. I think it is “standard html” coding whatever that may be that is used in most website constructions. “Probably” the instructions can be found fairly easy on the web once you discover the appropriate search terms.
Normally, the editors here are helpful==if they think a link is especially helpful, they will modify your post to show the picture or the video.
Conversely, I can see why the editors here might not allow pictures to be posted by us visitors as they can be quite inappropriate.
This blog needs a “special area” where such issues can be discussed. It might even have such a one. Good luck.
Hah, hah He said: “Inductive Reasoning.”
I won’t hold my breath waiting for a response to that.
At the end of the day, the destruction of Britain is at the hands of the “progressive” left. End of story.
#58 –
Clearly, you continue to fail at making your point.
Yes, the banner calls Britain Fascist- because what they’re doing *is* fascist. They’re locking people away for, essentially, criticizing the government, which I think we can all agree is fascist.
You, however, have stated that fascists, and I’ll quote you here: “Fascists . . . utilize ridicule, slander . . . to bully folks into parroting their PC premises…”
I’m asking you to defend your premise, yet you continue to fail to do this.
My point is of course that ridicule and slander are *not* the sole weapons of the fascist, and that ridiculing and slander are not fascist per se. Yet clearly you continue to disagree… Where is your reasoning?
Here’s the deal.
There is a spectrum. One end is no government, the other is total government.
The further towards the total gov side, the less individual freedom. Britain, and now the US is going towards total gov’t. Forget Dems & Repubs. Who here wants more gov’t & less individual freedom?
Test jpg copy/paste to follow:
Test jpg copy/paste to follow:
#59–Paddy-O==right as far as you go: “There is a spectrum. One end is no government, the other is total government.
The further towards the total gov side, the less individual freedom. /// The implication being that the anarchy of no government offers more individual freedom. I find little freedom in the anarchy that most wingnuts advocate. The fact that you asshats criticize the FACT of the current depression while failing to understand your “less government” mantra DIRECTLY CAUSED IT giving us all less personal freedom is simply revolting.
I wish for a parallel universe where libs and dipshits could be separated. Let the experiment stew and report back every 2-3 years. I predict few would recognize what lawless anarchy would actually bring. I think you (and even Loser but not Alfie) actually understand this on some level, yet you have the unfailing comfort level of mouthing your platitudes.
The failure of a lazy mind.
# 62 bobbo said, “I find little freedom in the anarchy that most wingnuts advocate. The fact that you asshats criticize the FACT of the current depression while failing to understand your “less government” mantra DIRECTLY CAUSED IT”
Correct. Anarchy is not good. Even the articles of Confederation was too little. The Constitution before the Income Tax & Senatorial amendments was probably about right. Yes, the lack of gov’t regulation & control of the money supply (unconstitutional private central bank “The Fed”) is at the root of the financial crisis…
I was in a creative writing class last night. Since Sarah Palin and Barak Obama do not write fiction or poetry, I begged to be taught creative writing instead of the instructor’s opinion on those two individuals.
I will probably be McCarthied for that even though I am careful not to reveal my politics in class. I did pay a lot of money to take the class. I did not pay to take a political science class.
McCarthyism is alive and well anywhere from the university class room to the beauty pageant. It won’t be long until you hear people asking, “Do you or have you ever believed that marriage should be only between one man and one woman?”
#64 – Look, it’s fair enough we’re clearly arguing two different things. So I’m satisfied with that.
However, “the other is Satan controls the world…and the only religion he hates, is Christianity.”
You realize the name “Satan” comes from the Hebrew word “Shaitan” (transliterated as “the Enemy”, though in truth it’s closer to “the Advocate”), and it is therefore incredibly ironic that you now imply that the very people who gave you Satan are now also loved by him?
#63, Agreed. When are you running for President?
Actually allow me to correct myself on 67 – the Hebrew term is Satan’el or Satan’al, Shaitan is Arabic. (The Arabic translation does more closely come to mean “the Enemy”).
Still – only somehow serves to make my point even further.
#59>>There is a spectrum. One end is no government, the other is total government.<<
Well that’s right. So one end of the spectrum is Somalia where there’s no enforcement of anything anywhere and the other is the Soviet Union where you need permission to do everything or you go to jail; ie totalitarianism. For some reason history professors in college teach that there’s some kind of a Right to Left back to Right circle, which is totally incoherent. Go figure.
Anyway it boggles my mind that the Left in this country don’t realize they lean toward totalitarianism. The Right wants to put you in jail if you distribute kiddie porn, maybe some other types of porn, or have an abortion etc., but the rest they are pretty ok with. If the Right wanted to put you in jail for not believing in Jesus, then yeah we would have problems.
The Left wants to put you in jail if you smoke in the wrong place, if you tell the wrong kind of jokes, if you comment incorrectly on someone’s clothing, if you disagree with someone’s definition what is male or female, if you give legal advice that they disagree with (current torture debate), if you don’t want to participate in their global warming ideas, on and on. At least we should have clarity that this maximum enforcement stuff is coming from (and always has come from) the Left not the RIght.
# 69 LibertyLover said, “#63, Agreed. When are you running for President?”
Thanks, but it would take someone with far more “chops” than I to hold that position.
#66–Alfie==tell me its not true?==Tell me thats not a joke you are writing. I’ll take it that way no matter your intent, because I am a LIBERAL and I think the best of my fellow apes whenever ambiguity allows.
#65–Benji==like it or not “edumacation” is more about conforming to social norms than it is about the subject being taught. Understand, adopt, overcome.
#71–smitty==you post as if there is only one continuum. Put any two subjects on a line separated by two inches and you have a continuum==not a circle. Surely your mind is supple enough to grasp the subtlety presented by that concept? Yes—-No.
# 71 smittybc said, “For some reason history professors in college teach that there’s some kind of a Right to Left back to Right circle, which is totally incoherent. Go figure.”
Many professors think AND teach in circles. LOL
#77–Alfie==”And you completely missed his point, or willfully did so. Its the left that is tyrannical…everything Dvorak ridicules about Britain…is from the LEFT, not the right.” //// I did huh? So there is no appropriate continuum from left to right that liberal and conservative can be placed on? OTOH, as usual, it is YOU who have missed the central point of Smitty’s post that Liberal and Conservative Politics in the USA are BOTH FASCIST.
Amusing that your posts are demonstrably dribble and we don’t even have to go to the substance before that is clear.
#75
Well my point was that systems of government are not circular. I don’t know that I would define ideology as a continuum as that suggests a very gradual shift from one authority to another, without any real difference from one to the next (unless we are working off of different definitions). In reality it’s graduated. You reach a certain amount of government controlled things and you end up in a window with the two extreme windows being Anarchy (total Right; Somelia), or Totalitarianism (total Left; Soviets).
So one understands this difference by what government enforces (ie you go to jail or lose your job or government somehow molests you, if you do act A,B, or C ) and what government allows individuals to enforce between themselves.
The very far Left enforces totally (BTW it wasn’t always though that this was a bad idea). It means I can’t interact with someone else in my society individually, that I need to interact through government and then to my neighbor. So if I’m a racist, someone on the Left wants me to lose my job or put me in jail as in this story (maximum enforcement), before I can interact with my neighbor, or anyone else in society. While someone on the Right wants to tell everyone in the society that I’m a racist loon, deal with me at your own risk (no enforcement), but not physically prevent me from interacting with anyone, unless or until I break a minimum rule set that is well defined and enforced (no trespass, no harm to others, etc).
So all I’m saying is that as someone from the Right I need to acknowledge (and most do) that I prefer minimum enforcement, and I seek for individuals to work things out on their own using a common (but not maximally enforced) value set. Hence you hear the term “Judeo-Christian value set” and the word “values” a lot coming from people on the RIght. It’s not to say one needs to be religious, just that it’s expected one respects a certain value set in the society. This has its own set of problems, I fully acknowledge that. But the Left rarely acknowledges that they are totalitarian in nature, and totalitarianism, I would argue, has left a much bigger negative impact on humanity as a whole than the other way around.
“American has been too tolerant…it never should have allowed its schools promote the liberal agenda…”
Wow, just wow.
How ironic that in this discussion ablut censorship, you call for censorship of liberal views.
I said it way back in post #30
THE LEFT AND RIGHT ARE BOTH GUILTY ON THIS ISSUE!!
and you just proved it
#81 – I think Alfie proved it when he started equating everyone who disagreed with Perez Hilton, and accusing them of being “liberal loons”, while in the same breath decrying how poor Ms. Whocares was lambasted out of her crown by people calling her names and saying her opinion didn’t matter.
Has anyone mastered the ability to talk out of both sides out of their mouth better than a hypocrite Christian? Methinks you’re hard pressed to find an answer.
# 82 Alex said, “Has anyone mastered the ability to talk out of both sides out of their mouth better than a hypocrite Christian? ”
Sure, the left. Saying they are Pro-choice for controlling your own body while advocating mandatory gov medical system participation by individuals, no choice. I could go on & on…
NO. You see this is exactly the difference between Left and Right in mindset, and is why one fundamentally doesn’t understand the other. No where in that post does he suggest professors ought to be placed under arrest and put in jail, or in any other way molested by anyone. Just that the Right should have been stronger in its argument for its value set.
In the above story PEOPLE ARE GOING TO JAIL because of what they advocate and will be released from JAIL if they retract their ideas, or at least don’t talk about them in public. That you don’t recognize the difference between the two is the problem.
So, back to my question: “Who HERE wants more gov’t…?”
#75 bobbo said, “#65–Benji==like it or not “edumacation” is more about conforming to social norms than it is about the subject being taught. Understand, adopt, overcome.”
He isn’t teaching anything about creative writing by going into politics. I have a BS in computer science from the school that invented the computer. I’ve been educated on social norms in all the diversity courses I had to take when I got my degree.
I was just taking a creative writing class at the local community college so I could learn to write better fiction. I don’t get Pell grants and loans like I did the first time in college. I wanted to be told how to write better, not how to vote better. Not too much to ask that the teacher give me education for the whole time class is in session.
Posting pictures — see Post #20.