By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
SamuelRSmith on 08 May 2009
Edit Thread
Nirvana_Nut85 said:
SamuelRSmith said:
Nirvana_Nut85 said:
SamuelRSmith said:
And here was me thinking that this would be a thread about Michael Savage being banned from the UK.

Instead, I get an article citing two cases, each which happened 7 and 3 years ago respectively, and each where the people were released and later cleared.

The fact that these people were freed shows that they didn't break the laws set fourth by the Government, rather that other people misinterpreted them (particularly the school incident).

If it really was a Government initiative, don't you think they would have gone after some larger fish? Like the BNP, for example. Or some of the more right-winged news papers.

 

 No, those were just examples, which regardless was ridiculous in the first place for them to be arrested.

Now, the point of the article was to show how the British people are loosing their freedom of speech and the ridiculous of how a politically incorrect joke,ect can land you up to 7 years in jail.

But a politically incorrect joke won't land you in jail for 7 years. Hell, if we actually had these policies the BNP (British National Party) will NOT exist. Simple as that, and yet it does.

The head of the BNP is a man called Nick Griffin. An anti-semite, a holocaust denier, and a general, all round, arsehole. And, yet, he's allowed not only to say what he wants, but he often gives speeches rallying up other people, he heads a fucking political party that actually have nationalist bullshit in their manifesto. He did get arrested a few years ago because he was suspected of rallying people up to go out and basically kick the shit out of any immigrant they found, but he walked out of court a free man (despite tonnes of video evidence that went on to be broadcast on the BBC).

At this point no, but with the legaslation that they are pushing through your parliament, it will be. That is the problem. Also it apparently looks like it is going to pass as well.

 

 

 Sorry... what legislation? Here are all the Bills going that the Government are drafting/putting through the system: http://www.commonsleader.gov.uk/output/Page2641.asp what one of them limits freedom of speech in anyway?

Actually, three of the bills (Community Empowerment Bill, Equality Bill, and the "Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Bill") all serve to increase democracy, freedom and equality in the UK. Two of the Bills actually serve to reduce the Government's power - and that's not the first time that Labour have done that since they got in power (this is in argument to the totalitarian stuff, not the freedom of speech stuff, btw):

- The Constitutional Reform Act of last year heavily reduced the amount of influence that the legislature have over the judiciary. Before, all of the Law Lords (the highest court in the UK - much like the Supreme Court in the US) sat in the House of Lords (the upper chamber of Parliament), this meant that the two pillars had a hell of a load of overlapping. Now, they've lost their ability to vote on bills, and once the current set of Law Lords die, no further judge will have a seat in the House of Lords.

- The Freedom of Information Act: this means that we, the people, can demand to know everything but the most top secret of information from the Government. Increasing transparency hardly seems totalitarian, and neither does....

- Reducing the power of the Government. Labour have devolved many Governmental powers to other, completely individual bodies. They've created a Scottish Parliament and a Welsh Assembly, whilst also creating a London Assembly and introducing the concept of elected Mayors to several towns and cities (they wanted to devolve more of their powers, but it got blocked in a referendum).

- And, finally (from what I can think of), Labour introduced the Human Rights Act. This means that, for the first time, the European Convention on Human Rights was actually incorporated into British law. Which, really, is the complete reverse to what you are suggesting.