The criminalization of opinion in Britain.

[lightblue]

Originally posted by Ming


HEY... Discuss the issues... NOT THE POSTERS!

If people want to attack the poster, and not the argument, they will find themselves not being able to post for a while.

Sorry, won't happen again (although getting my first warning ever is kinda exciting). Basically the issues are discussed, the points are clear to almost all posters, apart from certain posters who keep asking the same questions/stating the same points because they are biased a particular way, and as such are never going to get convinced of anything we say, so i was just pointing out the futility of it all. I suppose a [/sarcasm] at the end might have been slightly better.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by paiktis22
I don't have to answer any questions since I'm not in Britain's police state.
?

Isnt this a wonderful tactic = Pattycakes asks all the rhetorical questions he likes - then when someone as part of the argument ask HIM something, he refuses to answer and amkes it appear that the perosn asking him is threatening him with persecution. He did that on a thread with me - i had a question he couldnt answer, and i wouldnt let him get away with ignoring it or changing the subject so he asked if i was going to kill him, "like a Palestinian child"


Great trolliing , pattycakes, Im impressed.

[Ming]

lord of the mark

And what part of my warning DID YOU NOT UNDERSTAND.

You are one post away from a restriction.

DISCUSS THE ISSUES... NOT THE POSTERS!

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Ming
lord of the mark

And what part of my warning DID YOU NOT UNDERSTAND.

You are one post away from a restriction.

DISCUSS THE ISSUES... NOT THE POSTERS!

I posted that before i saw your warning Ming.

OTOH i did not discuss anything about patty as a person - i purely discussed the rhetorical techniques he used in this thread, as in others. Is that verbotten??? Or was it calling him the T word??? (IIRC he called me a troll in the other thread that i mentioned)

Just want some clarification.

[Ming]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
I posted that before i saw your warning Ming.

NO DEFENSE... you are attacking the poster, not the argument. You shouldn't NEED A DAMN WARNING.

OTOH i did not discuss anything about patty as a person - i purely discussed the rhetorical techniques he used in this thread, as in others.

BULLSH*T... you directly attacked the poster, and not the issues.

If you don't understand that, you will probably get restricted with your next post.

[Felch]

Paiktis, if he was merely doing research, I don't think it would have been a problem. However, possession of terrorist manuals, or whatever he had, while being publicly in favor of terrorism is a problem.

There is a limit to freedom of expression. When your freedom of expression endangers other people, it should be limited. I personally don't think this should be prosecuted, at least not based on what you said in the original post, but I do recognize that the climate in the UK (especially after the slaying of a police officer investigating ricin possession) tends to encourage the authorities to err on the side of security.

The man arrested was a guest in the country where he was arrested. If you're a guest in a country, they have every right to take your actions more seriously than a citizen's, especially if you openly support a terrorist organization that threatens them and their allies.

[Sprayber]

If one can't question the motives of a generic poster after that generic poster will not answer questions and merely recycle statements, then there is no point in the topic even being discussed. Best to ignore future threads such as described above. It could go on and on till it hit 500 and no ground would be made. Better to nip said thread early on to remove future chances of infractions. The suggestion was to only discuss the topic, but the topic was dead after the first page of recycled material kept.

In fact at first I thought the thread was a victim of an unusual amount of double posts

[Ming]

Well... if you can't discuss the issues, and only want to attack the posters, I suggest you find another site to post at, because the personal attacks are going to stop.

And if you think all the issues have already been discussed in this thread, then don't post in it.

[MrBaggins]

as long as we've won the debate, not posting anymore is fine by me.

Ming> Can you just declare us victorious and close the thread?

[Sprayber]

Originally posted by Ming
Well... if you can't discuss the issues, and only want to attack the posters, I suggest you find another site to post at, because the personal attacks are going to stop.

And if you think all the issues have already been discussed in this thread, then don't post in it.

I'm just trying to fit in

[DinoDoc]

Ming: Why is this thread still open given that you shut down his first one on the very same topic which was started for the exact same reasons as this one?

[Arrian]

I think he explained that, after discussing the matter at length with Patty... err, Paiktis, he allowed the topic to be brought up again with certain limitations. Translation: Paiktis could be mildly inflamatory, but calling Britain a "Facist State" or somesuch was going too far.

-Arrian

[Ming]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Ming: Why is this thread still open given that you shut down his first one on the very same topic which was started for the exact same reasons as this one?

If you had taken the time to look at the thread BEFORE you asked your question, you wouldn't have needed to ask My answer to your question is on the first page...

[Bereta_Eder]

I'm (not so much) dissapointed by our British posters.

Their "law" violates basic values of democracy making Britain a virtual pariah in a democratic Europe.

Opinions are free to be persecuted in Britain by a "law" that would clearly fit in any fascist state, where it would be perfectly "acceptable".

And yet, instead of attacking that "law" that makes Britain probably the only country to allow persecutions of opinion and curtail free speech, they attack me.


A very sad state of affairs for Britain and a cause for alarm for the European Union which will do well to look on the issue, since "kangooroo" courts are not to be allowed inside its dominion.

The kid will be acquited in that farse of a "trial" of the criminilization of opinion since it has the best lawyers Greek money can buy.

This does not absolute the fascistic character of that "law" for Britain.

I'd also like to add that according to criminologists this insult of a "law" is, apart from fundamentaly undemocratic and uncommon in Europe (maybe even in the US) - it isalso basicly racist since it allows the police and the british gov. not only to freely prosecute whose opinions they don't like based on laughable "evidence" but it also discriminates against foreigners.


A very sad state of affairs that came to my attention.

The british political culture is in serious want of a democratic injection. I wonder how long this has been going on.

[Arrian]

Wow, resurrecting your own troll thread, Pattycakes?

It died four days ago. That should tell you something.

-Arrian