“I am anti-Semitic and I am no longer afraid to say so… I want every Jew to live in fear, except if they are pro-Palestinian. Let them die,”

Doesn’t sound much like satire to me. I’d be surprised if you could get away with saying similar about anyone TBH.

lemonysam – Member

There are a great many things which I have the right to do but doing so at work could get me into trouble – as it happens I’m doing one right this very second by posting this. This has nothing to do with freedom of speech.

And the reason you left off getting arrested for breach of the peace is?

Oh… and JY, would you go along with christians not being subjected to things like this…..

Is this overstepping the mark of what is acceptable? Because its exactly the same thing that this nutters are killing people for. Gives it a bit of perspective doesn’t it. Its patently ridiculous to say that this is somehow verboten The Islamic faith needs to sort itself out and learn some perspective. Because the present viewpoint is not conducive to a living in a free society.

My worry is that people with views like your own will suggest further restrictions on what can and cannot be said, unless anyone gets offended. Then they’ve effectively won. And why stop there? Whats next?

Time for this again I reckon:

One of these is Free Speech, the other had to be retracted:

Wrecker he made those remarks in 1985 and apologised for them as the article clearly states.

4 hostages dead.

What a mess.

oh no…at least four hostages killed. 🙁

Whats next?

PC gone mental?

I like pies me.. And suppin ale..

I don’t mind anyone calling me a ****, so I’ll call anyone a ****, even if they’ve asked me not to, and further more, I’ll then demand that they not see that as confrontational..
And then I’ll call them a **** over and over again..

Try that logic in the boozer 😆

Wrecker he made those remarks in 1985 and apologised for them as the article clearly states.

His position is fairly clear is it not? I expect he was on a warning, even if not he was bloody lucky to have a career.
Apology or not, he’s a xenophobe. no better than Nick Griffin, worse in fact.

I@ binners ts really not that long that we could do this and the islamic faith is not the only one that needs some perspective
I dont think they will suddenly change their mind if we bombard them with images and none of them offend me and Obviously I dont agree with their view but they get a bit Jihadi if they do it.

For example I have a mate who looks like shrek If anyone says this to him in a piss taking way he responds with great anger and mighty fury. He is a big fella as well and he has hit folk for it including very good mates. I have other friends who you can be far ruder to and they take it well and laugh it off. What I do is treat then differently as they respond differently.
Or we can take your approach and tell him he has no right to not be offended and insist he has to learn and change to be more like you. Lets be honest the world would be a better place if they were just like you wouldn’t it.
EDIT: I dont mean that to sound as harsh as it does.
Its up to you treat them the same treat them differently has he won or are we just not upsetting him? Bit of both but it clearly annoys him more than I need to do it.
EDIT:

My worry is that people with views like your own will suggest further restrictions on what can and cannot be said, unless anyone gets offended. Then they’ve effectively won. And why stop there? Whats next?

Lovely slippery slope argument and yes this might be the gateway drug to a totalitarian regime that no one is suggesting

Just on the news that all 3 Muslim bastards have finally been killed.

….don’t often agree with Clegg, he tends to come across as a wet fish most of the time but his comments today are spot on with the right to free speech and the right to offend.

Reuters reportign this as Next weeks’ Charlie Hebdo cover;

[edit] now beign reported as fake so removed pendign confirmation.

So is that why his colleagues at the magazine stood up for him for his right to express himself ? He didn’t directly insult Judaism exactly did he.

Just on the news that all 3 Muslim bastards have finally been killed.

Not really a helpful comment. Perhaps the 3 Murdering bastards would be a bit better? After all, that was what they did wrong and why they were shotted.

He didn’t directly insult Judaism exactly did he.

No, but he did wish death to jews, which is clearly a lot worse. In this instance, I think he was sacked for offending a very high profile french chappie. Muslims, jews; OK. Son of Sarkozy; not OK.

Not really a helpful comment.

I think it was designed specifically not to be helpful. It screams classiness.

Edit- wrong forum!

For example I have a mate who looks like shrek If anyone says this to him in a piss taking way he responds with great anger and mighty fury.

Of course he has a right to be offended, but would your friend murder 12 people in cold blood because someone called him Shrek?

If you come to play here, you accept the restrictions that are placed on what you can and can’t say. It’s clear, as an example….look at the rules of this forum.

And as you know, there is an element of subjectivity (inevitably) on how this (and any other rules of this type) are managed here and elsewhere.

Under Nick Clegg’s analysis John Terry’s behaviour may have been tolerated. Happy with that?

Never thought I’d agree with Cleggy, but he’s bang on the money there!

He might be right in that should be the situtation, but he is wrong from a legal perspective, he should have asked his wife. Insulting behavior can be an offence under the Public Order Act 1986.

French media saying 1 male gunman has escaped the supermarket and that the female terrorist is still on the loose. I don’t think it’s over.

Just seen one trooper being hit in the raid, doesn’t look like he was moving at all after. 🙁

You kind of don’t though. It’s a criminal offence to abuse someone based on race, gender or sexuality. Occassionally religion gets bundled in to that as well (although it shouldn’t).

Satire isn’t abuse though is it, let’s get this clear, this was like Private Eye being shot up.

Does freedom of speech extend to freedom to be racist? The caricature of Mohammaded wasn’t too far off the caricatures of the big-nosed grasping jews or the bog-trotting Fenians that used to be common here.

Everyone here fine with them too presumably?

(NB for the hard of thinking I’ve already said no cartoon EVER justifies violence)

Maybe something is lost in translation/cultural differences but I’m struggling to see anything funny or witty in there either. You can get away with a lot of offensiveness by at least actually being amusing/clever.

Also what is the correct “ISM” for discriminating against a person of a certain Religion.
It would not bother me if we had a black, brown or south East Asian prime minister if they were Christian or atheist but I would be decidedly nervous about a Muslim prime minister irrelevant of their/or lack of colour.

A few years ago i would not have been so, so what ism am I suffering as I am definitely not racist as I would never discriminate against a person based on the colour of their skin or think that I was better than anyone else simply because I was white and they was not. but I would based on their beliefs or more to the point how their beliefs cause them to discriminate against others.

A good person with faith will do good in the name of their faith.
An evil person with faith will do evil in the name of their faith.
What bothers me is, could an evil person with faith use their faith to cause a good person with faith to do evil.

To me religion is poppycock and I have the right to say so and It is impossible for me to blaspheme if i have not religion.
People have the right to believe but don’t get so bent out of shape at others who don’t and consider it no more believable than fairies at the end of the garden.

And in such circumstances should think that is your opinion and you are entitled to it not,

This extends to all religions, when jade goodie called shilpa sheti (probably spelt that wrong)
A Chapati or some thing like that in the big brother house they were burning effigies of jade on the streets of India.

I can not take that behaviour seriously, I am no fan of Christianity but at least now it is being forced to join the modern world.

no i’m not and if it comes across as this then i’m sorry. everyone has a freedom of speech but when you know that criticism of something in that manner may be seen as an insult that could potentially have repercussions of that nature then i would think carefully about airing those opinions in the first place.

I guess we shouldn’t offend nonces, corrupt politicians, murderers, dictators etc etc – their mates might get upset and come and shoot us.

I find your views massively offensive.

(NB for the hard of thinking I’ve already said no cartoon EVER justifies violence)

You must have posted in the wrong thread. Maybe you’re thick?

Does freedom of speech extend to freedom to be racist? The caricature of Mohammaded wasn’t too far off the caricatures of the big-nosed grasping jews or the bog-trotting Fenians that used to be common here.

Mohammed is an individual, making stereotyped images of Jews/an entire race is a different ball game.

Aspects of satire might be used by racists and were used by the Nazis, on the other hand satire has been instrumental in opposing regimes such as Nazi Germany, Mussolini’s Italy and Frankos Spain.

Not sure about an ism chip but bigotry or simply prejudice are words that would work pretty well for you.

Tony Blair and George W – both Christians who said their faith inspired them to invade Iraq.

We’re not talking about nonces etc though..
We’re talking about insulting a generally peaceful demographic that is billions strong.. It’s not their fault that the demographic in question contains a handful of psychotic gun toting maniacs

We’re not talking about nonces etc though..
We’re talking about insulting a demographic that is billions strong.. It’s not their fault that the demographic in question contains a handful of psychotic gun toting maniacs

The Nazis, the fascists of Italy and Spain, Russias communists – all practically entire demographics that were on the receiving end of satire.

Apparently the morality of insulting people is based on how many people you are insulting though.

Not sure about an ism chip but bigotry or simply prejudice are words that would work pretty well for you.

Thanks for clearing that up grum.

Acting all offended has been raised to an art form by some on STW.

What you can and can’t say is governed by laws pretty much everywhere. Anything sexist, racist or homophobic will get you into trouble in France but insults that are objectively accurate descriptions allowed. Telling the truth and calling a crook a crook won’t get you into trouble if there is evidence you are right. As an example, Armstrong managed to sue lots of people who accused him of doping in the Anglo-Saxon world but failed in France. In France he would have had to prove he hadn’t doped to get a decision in his favour, and the courts would have legally obtained the results of every dope test available in order to make an objective decision – and they wouldn’t have been restricted by UCI tolerated limits for doping products, it would have simply been the presence of doping products. That’s why he didn’t take on l’Equipe.

Comparing Muslims to nonces, murderers, dictators etc

I can see why you struggle with condemning racism.

Tom – you are an islamophobic, practically racist tit.. I have nothing further to discuss with you xx

So we can satirize nonces in the vatican but we can’t satirize Islam…..cuz Islam isn’t as bad as the vatican?

You guys are just suffering from a severe case of logic failure. Yes, maybe comparing Islam to fascism was going a bit far – but, as Doug Stanhope has pointed out – the Vatican and by extension Islam has a far more prosperous and prestigious record of mayhem than the Nazi’s.

Before spluttering too much with references to totalitarian regemes you might want to check out other news today from Saudi.

5thelefeant, you just backed my opinion even further…..oh noes….he insulted religion….he’s obviously a racist that needs to be lashed.

You talk about logical fallacies but then come out with a pathetic straw man that barely makes sense. I genuinely expected better from you Tom.

I didn’t from you though 5th Elefant. Well done on an excellent point. I don’t think anyone had noticed that Saudi Arabia is a shit country before.

yunki – Member

Tom – you are an islamophobic, practically racist tit.. I have nothing further to discuss with you xx

😯 C’mon! C’mon! Can’t you accept alternative views?

I can assure you Muslamic have extreme phobia over other beliefs too …

Tom_W1987 – Member

So we can satirize nonces in the vatican but we can’t satirize Islam…..cuz Islam isn’t as bad as the vatican?

You guys are just suffering from a severe case of logic failure.

😆 Ya, told you. Too many PhDs with logical minds yet can’t stick to logic and I see them coming … 😯

edit: oh ya … the AK47 shooters. Dead. Very Dead but unfortunately they have taken many with them. Now, the AK47 shooters will be the virgins to be savaged upon by those waiting for them on the other side.

Would you agree that it’s okay to offend Catholics in the name of satirizing the Vatican’s scandals? If you don’t, we are never going to agree on this at all.

If you do, then you are guilty of double standards.