Free speech or inciting hatred?

[redken1]

In the wake of the recent evil acts of cold blooded murder in Paris, UK politicians, the media and other commentators have come out publicly and defended the right of journalists to mock/ridicule all religions, thus igniting a national debate on where the lines should be drawn on free speech. To avoid any misinterpretation of the content of this post, before I pose the following question I wish to make it clear that I am not defending anyone or trying to justify anything. Why is it apparently acceptable in the name of free speech for a magazine/paper to publish antireligious material, yet it is a criminal offence under The 'Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006' for a football fan to chant antireligious songs?
RIP all the victims of the atrocity in Paris, my thoughts are with their loved ones.

[Kevinb]

These 'people' if you can use this word when describing them are not religious just fanatical murderers. anti religious is against a group whilst being racial tends to be against a person/nationality. Yes there needs to be boundaries drawn but if it becomes too politically correct no one would ever write a book, appear on television or speak in public.
Seeing today the police have them surrounded but there may be hostages which is worrying. Lets hope they can kill this filth without anyone else being hurt/murdered

[Stuntsunlimited]

Sadly the sensibilities of our Islamic brethren is child like to the point of retarded a bit like all religions. I will say it. Quite happy the art of satire is still alive and well, that particular paper Islam wasn't its only piss take victim. I'm going to go out on a limb here, but did the west arm and train these people? Haven't we bombed their countries for years? Caused and created tensions in the middle east. Theres a lot that goes on that you don't see, its all fuelled by greed of the west. I'm disgusted by whats happened, but to a greater degree more disgusted at what has led up to it!.

[Swanny]

Religion is bad news.

It's just a control method that has been used for thousands of years. Do as this book says or a mighty god will do nasty things to you.
I don't believe in gods

[Toph]

Isn't religion all about who has the best imaginary friend?

Religion sucks imho.. end of.

[Trev]

Isn't religion all about who has the best imaginary friend?

If that's the case then Homer Simpson got it right when he went down on one knee, clasped his hands together, looked up to the sky above and made this emotional plea.... 'I'm not normally a praying man, but if you're up there, please save me Superman!'

[redken1]

Some excellent and valid points and I respect all the views, but to be honest I wasn’t really trying to initiate a debate on the pros and cons of religion. My question was aimed at the conflicting interpretations of the 'Racial and Religious Hatred’ act and the lack of clarity regarding enforcement. Allow me to elaborate. If for example, an away football fan at a Spurs game chants anti-Semitic slogans aimed at the Home fans an offence will be deemed to have been committed and in all likelihood, that person will be charged in accordance with the said act. In contrast however, we have lawmakers and media commentators coming out today and publicly stating that in the name of free speech it is acceptable for publications to mock and ridicule any/all religions. Surely if a football fan is deemed to be inciting religious hatred in the eyes of the law by chanting anti religious slogans in a public stadium holding a few thousand, then why is it that images and text of a similar nature published with the potential to reach a global readership is not deemed in the same way?

[DC]

Nothing surprising whatsoever at all here in the stance of the media , the law makers or the political leaders . If little Johhny Jenkins sitting bored at his desk happens to post something derogatory on Twitter or Facebook about " lesbians " , " gays " ," blacks " , he would most likely be given his marching orders and in all probability , prosecuted for propagating discrimination and inciting hatred . and rightly so . Such behaviour is absolutely abhorrent and shouldn't be tolerated . There would certainly be no defence for him under the guise of freedom of speech . The media would be all over him and he'd receive a proper hammering , whilst the general populous would raise their pitchforks and demand the hanging he so rightly deserves . In actuality Johhny Jenkins is most likely some spotty , essentially harmless little oik , who's not that popular and wants his mates to think he's funny by making some joke that he hasn't given much thought to at all , and the consequences of which will barely muster a ripple in the grand scheme of things.
Isn't it peculiar however , that The " Civilized " West can rampage around the Middle East " illegally " , creating absolute and utter Hell on Earth and bombing civilian populations in the name of what....................??? and we barely raise an eyebrow . Our attention more keenly fixed on the goings on on in The Queen Vic or The Big Brother House .
Quite possibly , the reasons most of us seem to allow actions such as these to just slide on by is that the media and political leaders are constantly and incessantly telling us about the common enemy , the threat of terror and that they'll do " Whatever it Takes " to protect us . The theatre before us has been so carefully and strategically orchestrated , that they've managed to dress the Muslims to fit the bill .
Ten years ago there was the Danish cartoon incident and now this French nightmare and fundamentally the publications that have been gracing the streets of Europe over the last decade or so are not dissimilar to publications that were being distributed in WWII Germany before the Nazis rounded up the inhabitants of the Polish Ghettos to ship them off to the labour and death camps .
The political leaders are using the media as a tool in exactly the same way today , to incite hatred in the name of freedom of speech because it gives credence to THEIR " Agenda " .

[wiltshire builders]

Great post Ken and I was thinking along the same lines.

Obviously the outcome of this whole thing is horrendous but the people at Charlie Hebdo have to take some responsibility for the outcome.
You cannot constantly provoke someone and not expect a reaction.
I have a couple of Muslim friends and they are the first to admit that they are, socially, years behind western countries.
But the fact remains what Charlie Hebdo were doing was systematically bullying millions of people due to their personal beliefs.
Mock the extremist, mock the concept of religion but when you deliberately try to offend people for the sake of it then you're going too far.

These are potentially volatile times and the last thing we need are smug journalists fanning the flames and trying to create more hatred on both sides.

I don't think anybody could've predicted this outcome but to think that there wouldn't be some kind of reaction would be foolish.
This was racial abuse on a massive scale and it is unacceptable.
People are dying every day and like Stunts said we never hear about it.

Religion can be a wonderful thing. It's how people use it that screws everything up.

[WR6133]

If Charlie Hebdo should take responsibility for this massacre and if little spotty Johnny espousing crap on facebook should be prosecuted for foolish statements then why do we allow Islamic groups to protest on our streets? They hold signs far more offensive that demand or condone mass murder (of us) based on the religious views of others. I find that highly offensive, yet I tolerate it due to freedom of speech but were I to take a rifle to a group of those protestors and start brassing them up I doubt anyone would argue for my defence.

Simple solution if they dislike freedom of speech..... Sunni's move to Saudi Arabia where deviation from Islam equals beheading. Shia/Shiite move to Iran where deviation from Islam equals hanging.

I think we need to lose this sheltered, softly, softly attitude that makes us as a society find ways to excuse these people. Our apathetic attitude toward ourselves is leading to a slow suicide of our culture.

We should mourn the people that died at Charlie Hebdo while spitting at anyone that attempts to excuse their massacre. If you do not draw a line at some point and stand by it with savage conviction then eventually when they come for you there will be nobody left to stand with you.

[shiftyblake]

Even if it incites hate, it's not an excuse to murder people !

[redken1]

Even if it incites hate, it's not an excuse to murder people !

Of course not and I'd hope that no one on here would suggest otherwise.

[wiltshire builders]

Look at it this way:
If I drew a picture of your wife, commented on her lack of morals, poked fun at her appearance and generally mocked her and your relationship with her then printed it in a national magazine and put it on twitter for the world to see, would you still great me with a smile the next time you saw me?
I seriously doubt it.

Like I said, the reaction wasn't justified but a reaction was inevitable and now innocent people who had nothing to do with any of it are dead.

[WR6133]

Look at it this way:
If I drew a picture of your wife, commented on her lack of morals, poked fun at her appearance and generally mocked her and your relationship with her then printed it in a national magazine and put it on twitter for the world to see, would you still great me with a smile the next time you saw me?
I seriously doubt it.



No I probably wouldn't smile but I wouldn't shoot your family and associates. The magazine did nothing worse than Muslim protesters regularly write on placards and wave around at events where it will cause maximum offence (and they get police protection to do that).

Also you seem to be coming from an angle that thinks all this magazine did was rip in to Islam. That's not the case this magazine satirised pretty much anything related to current affairs, yet you don't see any other groups it satirised acting this way. So a better or more accurate way to phrase your question would be

"If I satirised your wife, after her having done things that made her a topic of national debate, in a publication that satirised most things of national interest all in an equally rude way, would you then shoot me and a number of my close associates?"

Although to be honest the question is still stupid as my wife is an actual physical being, not a silly creation dreamed up by a cult leader and then used to oppress the masses in to conforming throughout the ages.

[wiltshire builders]

Although to be honest the question is still stupid as my wife is an actual physical being, not a silly creation dreamed up by a cult leader and then used to oppress the masses in to conforming throughout the ages.

Here lies the problem. Your mind is so closed to the possibility of anything other than what you can see, touch or smell. To you everything is black and white.
The fact that you've called my question stupid highlights this.
That is absolutely fine and in most cases the most rational way to be but not always.
Basically you're right, they're wrong. Isn't that their stance too?

This in itself is a belief and you are now trying to force it on the people reading this thread where as posts by myself, Ken and the others are saying what if......how about.....and just think.
There is far more to this than what you are being told.
I'm not saying you're wrong I'm saying "look at it from this angle" and see the bigger picture.

[Swanny]

Isn't religion all about who has the best imaginary friend?




Brilliant :D

[WR6133]

Here lies the problem. Your mind is so closed to the possibility of anything other than what you can see, touch or smell. To you everything is black and white.
The fact that you've called my question stupid highlights this.
That is absolutely fine and in most cases the most rational way to be but not always.
Basically you're right, they're wrong. Isn't that their stance too?

This in itself is a belief and you are now trying to force it on the people reading this thread where as posts by myself, Ken and the others are saying what if......how about.....and just think.
There is far more to this than what you are being told.
I'm not saying you're wrong I'm saying "look at it from this angle" and see the bigger picture.

Bollocks, of everything I've typed in this thread those 2 lines you've selectively quoted are my personal opinion and me utilising free speech. At no point have I said others cannot express what they think and utilise their own right to free speech (infact quite the opposite), I'm merely trying to highlight that the murderers you seem so eager to defend and excuse are happy to use their right to free speech on one hand while killing those that use the same right in a way they disagree with.

What if a UK soldier sick of seeing placards wishing him dead went and shot a group of Muslim protestors? Would you apologise and excuse him too? After all he would have been provoked.

Anders Breivik (excuse spelling) in Norway? His beliefs were, in his opinion, under threat. So should we make excuses for him too? After all -


You cannot constantly provoke someone and not expect a reaction.

I think you are trying to find a bigger picture so hard that you are ignoring the reality, which (in my opinion) is there is a foreign/alien culture spreading which contains a significant element who are happy to manipulate our own freedoms to their advantage whilst at the same time plotting/attempting to destroy our own society and values to replace it with (a warped) version of their own. Unfortunately even the non-extremist part of this culture if not outright supportive of the extremist part are pretty unwilling to sort it out themselves (and even give it a lot of passive support).

Placating and excusing terrorism does not work. Look at this Christian terrorist him and his mate Gerry are living proof that if you don't draw a line and meet their savagery with equal savagery then you will be dancing their dance further down the line. Only the kind of people that perpetrated this massacre don't just want some political power and carte blanche for their old comrades in arms to take part in organised crime, these guys want to completely control the space between your ears or butcher you if you don't allow it.

http://i1249.photobucket.com/albums/hh504/wr6133/images_zps236b5665.jpg (http://s1249.photobucket.com/user/wr6133/media/images_zps236b5665.jpg.html)

Anyway I'll shut up now before I hammer my keyboard keys through the table ;)

[wiltshire builders]

WR you clearly don't have the intellect or patience to engage in political debate.
By your own admission and language you are already getting angry rather than weighing up the pros and cons of both arguments.
At no point have I defended the actions of those carried out in France or excused it. I just said it was inevitable.
You can't even quote my words directly to suit your argument because it's not what I actually said.
Their culture is foreign and alien to you not everyone. As for the significant number of people that wish us harm that is just an out and out lie. It is you and people like you that are being controlled. Fear and chaos is being spread through out the west and it's big business.
Vote for us and we'll keep you safe is the sales pitch.

I take it you're referring to the trouble in Northern Ireland at the end of your rant.
Violence was met with violence in equal measure and it achieved nothing.
What was it that resolved it In the end? Talking. I believe it was called The northern Irish PEACE Process.

[WR6133]

WR you clearly don't have the intellect or patience to engage in political debate.

Maybe not and despite saying I'd shut up your imbecilic rant back at me is like a red rag to a bull. I doubt you have anything approaching intellect or ability to debate properly either though


By your own admission and language you are already getting angry rather than weighing up the pros and cons of both arguments.

Sorry I fail to see a pro side in people being massacred for exercising their right to free speech. Your ignorance shows here because the magazine in question did not solely ridicule Muslims it ridiculed anything and everything yet all those other groups it insulted did not choose to unload assault rifles in to it's staff.



At no point have I defended the actions of those carried out in France or excused it. I just said it was inevitable.

Which in itself is excusing the act. It is not an inevitable act, it was a criminal act perpetrated by nutjobs.


You can't even quote my words directly to suit your argument because it's not what I actually said.

No I used a direct quote, learn to read or master the English language if you don't mean what you said and was then quoted.



Their culture is foreign and alien to you not everyone.

It is foreign and alien to Western society. Now I have no issue with multi-culturalism as long as it integrates to its host. This particular part of that culture has done the opposite and sworn to destroy western culture and replace with an extreme version of theirs.


As for the significant number of people that wish us harm that is just an out and out lie. It is you and people like you that are being controlled. Fear and chaos is being spread through out the west and it's big business.
Vote for us and we'll keep you safe is the sales pitch.

Far from it I know our own leaders are using these type of events to erode our own personal freedoms in the name of "safety". However that does not mean that the threat is not there and as we have now seen in Paris growing. I've served where these kind of nut jobs were allowed to slowly flourish to a point where while we were trying to squash them our political leaders had to make a backroom deal for us to bug out and hide in a large airbase till withdrawal.

You like to say what I state is wrong/stupid/whatever yet you can't address my points one at a time and tell me where I am wrong. You simply attack me personally telling me I have no intellect and rant about the bigger picture without really identifying this massive International, strategic big picture that I should abandon my non-intellectual, idiotic views to follow.

[redken1]

This is very disappointing. I was hoping we could have engaged in a sensible and grown up debate without any personal attacks and muck slinging. Perhaps it is too emotive a subject matter and the wounds of Paris are too fresh. Perhaps there is no right time or place to discuss the ever increasing divide which exists between the two cultures in a sensible and tolerant way? Please refrain from making personal attacks.

[Stuntsunlimited]

I find it very foreign, absurd and I find it offensive, not letting women drive (actually lol), women treated like 3rd class citizens, beheadings for: witchcraft, wizardry, apostasy, drug dealing, drug taking, murder, leaving the religion, insulting the prophet, they are just the highlights... 3 Women in shria courts count as the testimony as one man. The problem lies with the fact we separated laws, common sense laws (I would beg to differ on some of them) from religion. These guys think that the word from an insane old merchant/warlord is the last word of god, there will never be another prophet.

It makes me wonder why they think its so abhorrent to depict the prophet, Islam etc. Is it because Muslims themselves might take a CRITICAL look at Islam and think, hang on a minute - its all bit ****ing mental really. The Prophet chose Milk instead of Wine (why they don't drink alcohol) when Mohammad ascended to heaven on a flying white horse funnily enough from the Church of Holy Sepulchre where Christians believe Christ was crucified - but the Prophet is buried in Medina, Saudi Arabia - I've seen the grave site, lucky as a non believer. Can anyone see the problem there? Any sort of art takes creative thinking. See the problem.

The Christian Terrorist Gerry wasn't claiming that God wanted him to take back Northern Island from that 'thing' in the green, who wouldn't surprise me if she's had a hand in a lot of the worlds troubles..

Calling Islam out to justify its own insanity.

[WR6133]

Sorry redken, but it's not the 1st time we have disagreed on politics (myself and WB) though I believe last time I was simply dismissed as "stupid". I will hold my tongue so as not to mess your thread up further than I have already. If you would like I will edit the text out of my posts just say if you want that.

[Stuntsunlimited]

Sorry redken, but it's not the 1st time we have disagreed on politics (myself and WB) though I believe last time I was simply dismissed as "stupid". I will hold my tongue so as not to mess your thread up further than I have already. If you would like I will edit the text out of my posts just say if you want that.

That's you're freedom of speech fella edit nothing!

[redken1]

That's you're freedom of speech fella edit nothing!

No point in having any discussions about anything if we feel that we can't express our views freely and if we don't respect opposing views. I was only reminding all contributors that if we end up with a slanging match it would inevitably lead to closure of the debate.

[Stuntsunlimited]

No point in having any discussions about anything if we feel that we can't express our views freely and if we don't respect opposing views. I was only reminding all contributors that if we end up with a slanging match it would inevitably lead to closure of the debate.

To lighten the mood, here's a link to Bill Mahers Mockumentry Religulous. Its pretty funny. for those of you that haven't seen it - a serious look at religion, using some fun and some experts who are now thinking - 'Its ****ing Mental'

http://youtu.be/E2zhlDbMfDg?t=12s

[Swanny]

Watch out or the forum Nazi's will be along to lock this thread.
Freedom of speech is not allowed here ;)

I agree with Georges point of view


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6RT6rL2UroE

[Stuntsunlimited]

Watch out or the forum Nazi's will be along to lock this thread.
Freedom of speech is not allowed here ;)

I agree with Georges point of view


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6RT6rL2UroE

LOVE IT!

[Swanny]

To lighten the mood, here's a link to Bill Mahers Mockumentry Religulous. Its pretty funny. for those of you that haven't seen it - a serious look at religion, using some fun and some experts who are now thinking - 'Its ****ing Mental'

http://youtu.be/E2zhlDbMfDg?t=12s
Very good. Reminds me of Bill Hicks


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iFGl3NDQFak

[Swanny]

Twelve members of Islamic State have been left seriously amused after a ruthless gang of satirists forced their way into its headquarters and proceeded to ridicule up the place.

Sarcasm, parody and irony are all said to have been used in what many are seeing as a broader attack on everyone's freedom to stone homosexuals or cut babies in half.
IS employee, Mohammed Adir, was quietly working on ways to interpret ancient religious texts so as to justify beheading schoolgirls when the siege took place.

'One of them had a sketchpad, but that's about all I can remember. I think he was the leader.'
'The rest of them just sat there riffing gags back and forth and taking central tenets of our religious philosophy to their naturally absurd logical conclusions. They must have been planning it for months.' he continued.
Abu Mustafa, an IS freelancer who was busy cutting the still-screaming head off a humanitarian aid worker in Northern Africa when he heard of the attack, considers himself lucky.

'What's the world coming to when you can't go about trying to establish a worldwide caliphate of unchallenged barbaric totalitarianism in peace?'
'I'm just thankful that most of those in the building at the time didn't possess the requisite critical thinking skills to have been affected. Otherwise, who knows how many might have 'got it'.'

Sadly, not everyone was so fortunate; the worst affected being the twelve who were subjected to over forty minutes of humorous, rational observations encouraging healthy skepticism and freedom of thought. Unfortunately, for IS and all its supporters, their condition is now said to be 'critical'.

[Burbler]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZw4I5qSOkY

[redken1]

Sticking to the theme of this thread (free speech v inciting hatred), let’s take a step back and look at it from a different angle. IMO it is naïve to think that free speech means someone can say what they like when and wherever they like without expecting any consequences. I’m going to use the biking community in a hypothetical scenario with two different outcomes to try and illustrate the point I’m trying to make for two obvious reasons. One, it is a biking forum and secondly many of us are passionate about biking and see it as a way of life. That is the end of any similarity between biking and religion and I’m not trying to draw a comparison between the two. A man walks into a well known biking pub late on a Friday night. The pub is full to the rafters with bikers and he shouts at the top of his voice, “All bikers are w**kers and should be killed at birth!” Outcome 1; The pub landlord calls the police and a few of the bikers restrain the man with the minimum amount of force required until officers arrive to arrest him. The man is subsequently charged with breach of the peace. The pub landlord and the bikers are commended by the police and the wider community for dealing with what was a volatile situation in a fair and proportionate way. All concerned are unequivocal in their condemnation of the man’s behaviour. Outcome 2; a physical struggle ensues and a number of the bikers wrestle the man to the pub floor. He is punched and kicked repeatedly until he stops breathing. Police officers arrive and the bikers involved are subsequently charged with murder. The entire community condemn the bikers for dealing with the situation in a totally OTT and disproportionate way. IMO, the actions of the bikers in outcome 2 is indefensible and cannot be justified under any circumstances. But why did that man walk into that pub on a busy Friday night? Was he exercising his right to free speech or was his sole intention to incite hatred and provoke the bikers into a reaction? I believe passionately in free speech, but recognise that it comes with a degree of responsibility and I should be held to account for what I say. I don’t see any difference between an Islamic extremist marching down a high street shouting, “All British soldiers are murderers” and a member of a rightwing extremist group on the other side of the street bellowing, “All Muslims are terrorists!” Neither is acceptable in a tolerant democracy and cannot be defended on the grounds of free speech in my view. Apologies, this is a bit long winded.

[Swanny]

I don't have a problem with someone saying “All bikers are wankers and should be killed at birth!” That's their opinion which they're entitled to have.
I know it's not true and certainly wouldn't take it as a personal attack.



Why is your text so small??

[redken1]

I don't know why it is so small Swanny. Can you make it out? Perhaps an Admin can make it bigger.

That is you Swanny and you are entitled to hold that view. However, I would not be prepared to put it to the test to see if your view would be shared by the majority of bikers in the situation I described.

[Swanny]

He's entitled to his opinion, it's not a personal attack at me so why should I care? Other people may want to take it further, but that's up to them.

Unless it's a personal attack against me or my friends then I couldn't give a fcuk and people can say whatever they like.

Your text is fine now :)

[wiltshire builders]

You missed out a vital point in your scenarios Ken.
If Scenario 2 happened should we all be branded violent thugs due to the actions of a minority of the biking community?

[redken1]

You missed out a vital point in your scenarios Ken.
If Scenario 2 happened should we all be branded violent thugs due to the actions of a minority of the biking community?

Of course not, but I thought I covered that in my closing comments. I think I know where you are coming from though.

[Swanny]

Seems to me that people these days are looking for something to be offended about.

[redken1]

He's entitled to his opinion, it's not a personal attack at me so why should I care? Other people may want to take it further, but that's up to them.

Unless it's a personal attack against me or my friends then I couldn't give a fcuk and people can say whatever they like.

Your text is fine now :)

Exactly my point. You can speak for yourself on how you would react, but neither you, nor I, nor anyone else could predict how the other bikers would react to the man's taunting. One thing we can be sure about is if the man had kept his mouth shut neither outcome would have been possible.

[wiltshire builders]

Seems to me that people these days are looking for something to be offended about.

You said earlier that you would only be offended if it was directed at you or your friends/family.
The man dishing it out might have the view that you were being over sensitive because he wouldn't be offended in the same situation.
Everyone has a different limit and to say yours is right and his is wrong is unreasonable. (Just to clarify to the hang them all brigade I'm referring to the latest point not the shootings)

[Swanny]

The man dishing it out might have the view that you were being over sensitive because he wouldn't be offended in the same situation.

Well then he's not the sharpest chisel in the box if he doesn't realise that calling me names to my face isn't going to offend me :D


***Edit to say fair play to him for having the balls to say what he thinks about me to my face

[wiltshire builders]

Well then he's not the sharpest chisel in the box if he doesn't realise that calling me names to my face isn't going to offend me :D


***Edit to say fair play to him for having the balls to say what he thinks about me to my face
So you agree with the terrorists then. "Mock me and everything I hold dear and face the consiquences"

[Swanny]

Absolutely not.

Calling me names isn't going to result in him dying

[wiltshire builders]

But it's the same thought process. There would be violence. You would still commit a crime, albeit a lesser one, in the name of what you perceive to be justice.
To someone who has been radicalised there's no difference. Murder is justified. "These people know if they speak out against us they will pay the price."

Don't get me wrong. I would probably act like you too but I know it's the wrong thing to do.

[Swanny]

I wouldn't be committing a crime, if it turned physical I would be acting in self defense.

These people are using their religion as an excuse to murder

[DC]

You missed out a vital point in your scenarios Ken.
If Scenario 2 happened should we all be branded violent thugs due to the actions of a minority of the biking community?

Spot on WB . So if we go back now to the subject of the original post. If a minority group go around beheading and shooting innocent people , and incidentally this minority group truly DO NOT represent Islam or in any way follow the teachings of the Prophet Muhammad , and to quote “The most excellent Jihad is that for the conquest of self.” who could actually argue with that ? . I must point out that I am neither Christian nor Muslim and lean more towards Agnosticism and most likely Atheism , but I reserve judgement until the day I receive definite proof , as is my right . I don't support Christianity or Islam nor any other faith for that matter , and have only ever seen it as a tool which was created and nurtured for one purpose only . To divide and maintain conflict among " ordinary People " That being said , we must strive to accept , support and tolerate another beings right to his or her belief , thought and feeling whatever that may be , if it provides a source of comfort , love and peace in a world which seems more and more to propagate and encourage selfishness , greed , hatred and conflict .
We must also support and defend another beings right to free speech , but what actually is that , in this day and age . It seems to mean different things in different societies , different cultures and different systems , and definitely has different values and meanings when viewing events from different perspectives . The line has become pretty murky in this diverse and complex world .
On this small Island and , it appears in the rest of the West , whenever we open a " News " paper or switch on the TV , we're constantly being supplied with information which we're informed really does have our best interest and collective well being and safety as it's motivation . Information that is provided to educate , and serve and protect us ??? We seem to spend our daily lives swimming in such words as " terror " Islam " " national security " Muslim " " fundamentalists " " radicals " "TERROR TERROR TERROR " " War On Terror " We barely get a chance to draw a breath before the next barrage of information hits us in our best interest .
What happened in Paris is so F*****G abominable I can't begin to imagine and in particular The Charlie Hebdo shootings , as this brings us back to the media's perspective on these events . And after all it was only a cartoon . As Ricky Gervais once said " It's really not possible to cause offence , it's only possible to take offence " And whether the Hebdo publications had gone out or not this minority group of "Criminals" would still be out there doing what they do , not needing any real reason or justification for their actions . That being said WE should know better as THEY clearly don't . But isn't the real issue the fact that the mainstream international media , law makers and political leaders , and let's face it , aren't they really one and the same thing , get hold of this event and wave it around in the name of free speech , when in actual fact it only possibly leads to the alienation of and discrimination towards an entire people , ultimately resulting in further conflict and division . Why would the mainstream media and political leaders want this ??? Ah and the penny drops , or it should do ...............
If the " People " all marched on Westminster and the Financial square mile shouting slogans and waving banners , calling for our leaders and our bankers to step down as we did not believe them to be genuinely and sincerely upholding their responsibilities , would we wake up in the morning to headlines of "Justice " and " Unity In the name of Free Speech " ............. Not likely.
Freedom of Speech and Inciting Hatred means different things from opposing angles , and it's down to us as " Civilised Human Beings " to measure , evaluate and regulate what that is , because it's not being done for us.

[wiltshire builders]

I wouldn't be committing a crime, if it turned physical I would be acting in self defense.

These people are using their religion as an excuse to murder
I don't want to get into the intricacies of law but hitting someone who mocks you is definitely not self defence. You would be before a judge and you would be looking at jail time and quite rightly so.
Your argument has fallen flat.
They are using religion as an excuse to murder as you would be using hurt feelings/pride as an excuse to commit abh.
Like I said earlier this is exactly the same view the radicals have and it is wrong.

[wiltshire builders]

Reza Aslan sums up the media's portrayal of Islam perfectly.
1.5 Billion people are a lot to tar with the same brush.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=h5tc48iaki0

[DC]

Reza Aslan sums up the media's portrayal of Islam perfectly.
1.5 Billion people are a lot to tar with the same brush.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=h5tc48iaki0


Good find , I wish I could be as articulate , fluent and lucid on the spot.

Here's some news coverage which highlights the effects that Western political decisions and mainstream media coverage of Extremism has on ordinary people " JUST LIKE US "

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XvZBkIkVZiw

[Swanny]

I don't want to get into the intricacies of law but hitting someone who mocks you is definitely not self defence. You would be before a judge and you would be looking at jail time and quite rightly so.
Your argument has fallen flat.
They are using religion as an excuse to murder as you would be using hurt feelings/pride as an excuse to commit abh.
Like I said earlier this is exactly the same view the radicals have and it is wrong.

I wouldn't hit someone for mocking me and never said I would. I said I would defend myself if it turned physical. He is the aggressor not me.

[Swanny]

Reza Aslan sums up the media's portrayal of Islam perfectly.
1.5 Billion people are a lot to tar with the same brush.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=h5tc48iaki0

Good video, it shows that CNN is part of the BS propaganda system just as is the BBC. There is an agenda at work


More propaganda exposed


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJEvlKKm6og

[Swanny]

Reza Aslan sums up the media's portrayal of Islam perfectly.
1.5 Billion people are a lot to tar with the same brush.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=h5tc48iaki0

Notice how they talk about female genital mutilation and yet almost all males in America have their genitals mutilated

[Stuntsunlimited]

Good video, it shows that CNN is part of the BS propaganda system just as is the BBC. There is an agenda at work


More propaganda exposed


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJEvlKKm6og

Ive seen this, the bullet looked to me like it struck the pavement. No blood, if he's already expiring there won't be. When people get shot at close range, theres not a big theatrical blood and brains explosion like you see in the movies, plenty of videos on the net that prove this.. If you don't believe me google Executions - human rights people made it in the mid 90s, subsequently banned.. Check the last 5mins. A guy took an AK47 slug to the face, hardly if at all any blood.

[WR6133]

A guy took an AK47 slug to the face, hardly if at all any blood.

The mess takes a bit of time to fully ooze out the exit wound..... I have personal experience of this.

[Stuntsunlimited]

The mess takes a bit of time to fully ooze out the exit wound..... I have personal experience of this.

so whats your take on it then fella?

[WR6133]

so whats your take on it then fella?

The comparison in the video to a watermelon is BS, a human head is not a watermelon. A friend of mine was shot in the head it took hours to get him out of the vehicle for various reasons that don't matter here, but there was no massive explosion of his skull. A very neat hole just under his eye and a somewhat larger hole at the back of his skull. The kind of mess you see in gore films is over done, I did end up painted in blood that night but that was only after a lot of movement of the body over a few hours. Prior to movement all that really told you he had been shot in the head was the neat hole to the front which looked like a tear made of blood and the less neat hole behind.

The AK round on the policeman at that range would have simply passed straight through, no tumble, no slowing down at something over 700 meters a second... too all intents and purposes his head would have made no difference to the travel of the bullet..... it'll be embedded in the pavement somewhere. As to his head not "jerking" when hit, live leak is full of videos of executions and murders you can see for yourself people don't go flying about like ragdolls, high velocity rounds go clean through most of the time they don't get stuck inside trying to propel the target with them (there is scientific wording for this but I don't know it).

The flash on the pavement is probably a combination of ****e following the round down the barrel, muzzle flash being dispersed and those forces blowing up any crap on that bit of pavement. May even be caused by the round gone through his head ricocheting off the pavement though I don't think it is due to the angle.

For people to start getting hurled around with body parts exploding you need to be getting in the realms of 30mm HE weapons which are bloody big and vehicle mounted or shoulder mounted anti tank weapons (though odds are a direct RPG hit would go through a human target not explode).

I personally don't doubt that policeman was shot in the head. Definitive proof that the layman could find would be to go there and look around the street/pavement for where the exiting bullet has struck...... it will have left a mark there somewhere.

The masks I doubt were worn for anonymity probably more for intimidation, IS soldiers can be seen wearing them in Syria/Iraq where they don't need anonymity. The ID card is because they probably never intended to make a long term escape (I'd bet they were shocked at the getaway they did manage), these guys probably wanted martyrdom and all the bounties that apparently come with.

Anyway that's my take on the video quoted a few posts above.

[Stuntsunlimited]

The comparison in the video to a watermelon is BS, a human head is not a watermelon. A friend of mine was shot in the head it took hours to get him out of the vehicle for various reasons that don't matter here, but there was no massive explosion of his skull. A very neat hole just under his eye and a somewhat larger hole at the back of his skull. The kind of mess you see in gore films is over done, I did end up painted in blood that night but that was only after a lot of movement of the body over a few hours. Prior to movement all that really told you he had been shot in the head was the neat hole to the front which looked like a tear made of blood and the less neat hole behind.

The AK round on the policeman at that range would have simply passed straight through, no tumble, no slowing down at something over 700 meters a second... too all intents and purposes his head would have made no difference to the travel of the bullet..... it'll be embedded in the pavement somewhere. As to his head not "jerking" when hit, live leak is full of videos of executions and murders you can see for yourself people don't go flying about like ragdolls, high velocity rounds go clean through most of the time they don't get stuck inside trying to propel the target with them (there is scientific wording for this but I don't know it).

The flash on the pavement is probably a combination of ****e following the round down the barrel, muzzle flash being dispersed and those forces blowing up any crap on that bit of pavement. May even be caused by the round gone through his head ricocheting off the pavement though I don't think it is due to the angle.

For people to start getting hurled around with body parts exploding you need to be getting in the realms of 30mm HE weapons which are bloody big and vehicle mounted or shoulder mounted anti tank weapons (though odds are a direct RPG hit would go through a human target not explode).

I personally don't doubt that policeman was shot in the head. Definitive proof that the layman could find would be to go there and look around the street/pavement for where the exiting bullet has struck...... it will have left a mark there somewhere.

The masks I doubt were worn for anonymity probably more for intimidation, IS soldiers can be seen wearing them in Syria/Iraq where they don't need anonymity. The ID card is because they probably never intended to make a long term escape (I'd bet they were shocked at the getaway they did manage), these guys probably wanted martyrdom and all the bounties that apparently come with.

Anyway that's my take on the video quoted a few posts above.

Nice one WR, yeah it would explain a lot... :) So you doing think he missed then?

[WR6133]

Don't think he missed. This is a clumsy way to do it but I think this is paused almost on the moment of the shot, looks to me like that barrel is pointed to the lower rear of the guys head.

http://i1249.photobucket.com/albums/hh504/wr6133/aaaaa_zps18ddecd7.jpg (http://s1249.photobucket.com/user/wr6133/media/aaaaa_zps18ddecd7.jpg.html)

I suppose the only way the conspiracy theories would be silenced is by showing the guys post mortem live which won't happen. Though I'd say this.... if somebody went to all the trouble to fake this why would they not just kill the policeman anyway? He is nothing more than an irrelevant pawn, faking his death and letting him live could lead to way too many unforeseen complications down the line, killing him would be a win, win, hero and martyr for the people behind the conspiracy to sell to us and no loose ends to cause problems later.

Edit - If you look at the image, I would suspect any blood from the exit wound would be neatly covered by the body.

[Stuntsunlimited]

Don't think he missed. This is a clumsy way to do it but I think this is paused almost on the moment of the shot, looks to me like that barrel is pointed to the lower rear of the guys head.

http://i1249.photobucket.com/albums/hh504/wr6133/aaaaa_zps18ddecd7.jpg (http://s1249.photobucket.com/user/wr6133/media/aaaaa_zps18ddecd7.jpg.html)

I suppose the only way the conspiracy theories would be silenced is by showing the guys post mortem live which won't happen. Though I'd say this.... if somebody went to all the trouble to fake this why would they not just kill the policeman anyway? He is nothing more than an irrelevant pawn, faking his death and letting him live could lead to way too many unforeseen complications down the line, killing him would be a win, win, hero and martyr for the people behind the conspiracy to sell to us and no loose ends to cause problems later.

Edit - If you look at the image, I would suspect any blood from the exit wound would be neatly covered by the body.

Nice one, I'll buy that... Though for the conspiricy theorist, they know theres is something wrong with the world, I work in TV News occasionally, and stuff, relevant stuff does get 'edited' I can see why people are distrustful. Politicians constantly lie to us.

[Swanny]

Makes you wonder if these things have been planned to happen


Albert Pike received a vision, which he described in a letter that he wrote to Mazzini, dated August 15, 1871. This letter graphically outlined plans for three world wars that were seen as necessary to bring about the One World Order (http://www.threeworldwars.com/new-world-order.htm), and we can marvel at how accurately it has predicted events that have already taken place.

Pike's Letter to Mazzini

It is a commonly believed fallacy that for a short time, the Pike letter to Mazzini was on display in the British Museum Library in London, and it was copied by William Guy Carr, former Intelligence Officer in the Royal Canadian Navy. The British Library has confirmed in writing to me that such a document has never been in their possession. Furthermore, in Carr's book, Satan, Prince of this World, Carr includes the following footnote:
"The Keeper of Manuscripts recently informed the author that this letter is NOT catalogued in the British Museum Library. It seems strange that a man of Cardinal Rodriguez's knowledge should have said that it WAS in 1925".


It appears that Carr learned about this letter from Cardinal Caro y Rodriguez of Santiago, Chile, who wrote The Mystery of Freemasonry Unveiled.
To date, no conclusive proof exists to show that this letter was ever written. Nevertheless, the letter is widely quoted and the topic of much discussion.
Following are apparently extracts of the letter, showing how Three World Wars have been planned for many generations.


"The First World War must be brought about in order to permit the Illuminati to overthrow the power of the Czars in Russia and of making that country a fortress of atheistic Communism. The divergences caused by the "agentur" (agents) of the Illuminati between the British and Germanic Empires will be used to foment this war. At the end of the war, Communism will be built and used in order to destroy the other governments and in order to weaken the religions." 2



Students of history will recognize that the political alliances of England on one side and Germany on the other, forged between 1871 and 1898 by Otto von Bismarck, co-conspirator of Albert Pike, were instrumental in bringing about the First World War.


"The Second World War must be fomented by taking advantage of the differences between the Fascists and the political Zionists. This war must be brought about so that Nazism is destroyed and that the political Zionism be strong enough to institute a sovereign state of Israel in Palestine. During the Second World War, International Communism must become strong enough in order to balance Christendom, which would be then restrained and held in check until the time when we would need it for the final social cataclysm." 3



After this Second World War, Communism was made strong enough to begin taking over weaker governments. In 1945, at the Potsdam Conference between Truman, Churchill, and Stalin, a large portion of Europe was simply handed over to Russia, and on the other side of the world, the aftermath of the war with Japan helped to sweep the tide of Communism into China.
(Readers who argue that the terms Nazism and Zionism were not known in 1871 should remember that the Illuminati invented both these movements. In addition, Communism as an ideology, and as a coined phrase, originates in France during the Revolution. In 1785, Restif coined the phrase four years before revolution broke out. Restif and Babeuf, in turn, were influenced by Rousseau - as was the most famous conspirator of them all, Adam Weishaupt.)


"The Third World War must be fomented by taking advantage of the differences caused by the "agentur" of the "Illuminati" between the political Zionists and the leaders of Islamic World. The war must be conducted in such a way that Islam (the Moslem Arabic World) and political Zionism (the State of Israel) mutually destroy each other. Meanwhile the other nations, once more divided on this issue will be constrained to fight to the point of complete physical, moral, spiritual and economical exhaustion…We shall unleash the Nihilists and the atheists, and we shall provoke a formidable social cataclysm which in all its horror will show clearly to the nations the effect of absolute atheism, origin of savagery and of the most bloody turmoil. Then everywhere, the citizens, obliged to defend themselves against the world minority of revolutionaries, will exterminate those destroyers of civilization, and the multitude, disillusioned with Christianity, whose deistic spirits will from that moment be without compass or direction, anxious for an ideal, but without knowing where to render its adoration, will receive the true light through the universal manifestation of the pure doctrine of Lucifer, brought finally out in the public view. This manifestation will result from the general reactionary movement which will follow the destruction of Christianity and atheism, both conquered and exterminated at the same time." 4



Since the terrorist attacks of Sept 11, 2001, world events, and in particular in the Middle East, show a growing unrest and instability between Modern Zionism and the Arabic World. This is completely in line with the call for a Third World War to be fought between the two, and their allies on both sides. This Third World War is still to come, and recent events show us that it is not far off.

In case you don't know who Albert Pike (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Pike)is

[Stuntsunlimited]

I've seen this before. I get the whole 3rd World War thing. How many countries fighting does it constitute a 'world war'? Maybe the 3rd world war is going on right now... And we don't know it!

[redken1]

Nice one, I'll buy that... Though for the conspiricy theorist, they know theres is something wrong with the world, I work in TV News occasionally, and stuff, relevant stuff does get 'edited' I can see why people are distrustful. Politicians constantly lie to us.


I don’t subscribe to the conspiracy theory on this occasion. I do find it difficult however, to accept on face value any news or information released by establishment sources. People are not born cynical. Decades of cover-ups, lies and the manipulation of facts by those in positions of trust has pushed the ordinary person’s faith to the limits. Oh how I wish I could feel differently, but how can I after witnessing the lengths that the police, politicians, the media and other public figures went to in collusion, to coverup scandals like the failings in the Hillsborough disaster and Stephen Lawrence murder investigation, to name but two? And did they ever find WMDs in Iraq?

[Stuntsunlimited]

I don’t subscribe to the conspiracy theory on this occasion.However, I do find it difficult to accept any news or information released byestablishment sources on face value. People are not born cynical. Decades ofcover-ups, lies and the manipulation of facts by those in positions of trusthas pushed the ordinary person’s faith to the limits. Oh how I wish I couldfeel differently’ but how can I after witnessing the lengths that the police,politicians, the media and other public figures went to in collusion, to coverup scandals like the failings in the Hillsborough disaster and Stephen Lawrence murder investigation, to name buttwo.


You would be, very very surprised... It all goes right to the very top!

[redken1]

You would be, very very surprised... It all goes right to the very top!

I would be what? Not quite sure what you mean. If you mean surprised at what goes on, I bet I wouldn't be. Stunts I edited that last post after you copied it because for some reason there was no spaces between some of the words.

[WR6133]

You would be, very very surprised... It all goes right to the very top!

Read "Ministry of Defeat" it is a good book about our involvement in Iraq and how despite what we were being told we actually just stumbled from blunder to blunder before basically surrendering (despite being undefeated). It gives a good insight in to how things are not so much conspiracy but spin upon spin upon spin to the point the original facts are lost. Sheds a light well on how those that the top lie and deceive.

[Swanny]

Good bye privacy



https://ph.news.yahoo.com/david-cameron-wants-ban-encryption-175807286.html?.tsrc=warhol

http://www.windowscentral.com/uk-prime-minister-wants-ban-encrypted-messaging-apps

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/david-cameron-pledges-new-snoopers-charter-if-he-wins-election-9971379.html

[Stuntsunlimited]

Good bye privacy



https://ph.news.yahoo.com/david-cameron-wants-ban-encryption-175807286.html?.tsrc=warhol

http://www.windowscentral.com/uk-prime-minister-wants-ban-encrypted-messaging-apps

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/david-cameron-pledges-new-snoopers-charter-if-he-wins-election-9971379.html

The revolution will not be televised!

[WR6133]

Good bye privacy



I wonder if enough people encrypted everything no matter how trivial would it bring his "snoopers charter" grinding to halt due to lack of resources to decrypt everything?

[Swanny]

http://www.allnewspipeline.com/images/Screenshot_from_2015-01-17_113552.jpg

[Swanny]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J0dkqK1pGqE#t=178

[Swanny]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KkWz7Inn-4A


Just sharing

[Stuntsunlimited]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KkWz7Inn-4A


Just sharing

I don't buy this for one minute Swanny. Its great that people are looking more in-depth and not believing everything.. Very funny how the Prince Andrew things fallen off of the radar. And now the ex chief of Mi6 is saying we deserve everything we get if we insult Islam... How retarded is that? So insult my sky fairies messenger - I'll funking murder you!

[Swanny]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5wMF6huQ42w