A Liberty GB spokesman said: "Mr Weston was standing on the steps of Winchester Guildhall, addressing the passers-by in the street with a megaphone. He quoted an excerpt about Islam from the book The River War by Winston Churchill.
"Reportedly, a woman came out of the Guildhall and asked Mr Weston if he had the authorisation to make this speech. When he answered that he didn't, she told him 'It's disgusting!' and then called the police.
But those in the Muslim community said the police were correct to act if Mr Weston’s actions were deliberately intended to incite hatred.
Mohamed Shafiq, leader of the Ramadan Foundation, said: “Of course there should be freedom of speech, but with freedom of speech comes responsibility. If someone was to deliver this message in the centre of Bradford for example where there is a large Muslim population then it could be seen as a deliberate act of incitement.
“We are banning extremists from the Muslim community, the likes of Anjem Choudary, so it is right that the policy is applied equally. "
Shafiq. Listen.
Go. Fuck. Yourself.
How about that?
What you're advocating is not justice but censorship.
"A spokesman for the Muslim Council of Britain said: “We are sure that even Mr Churchill, if confronted with what he wrote as a young man would now blush at his own writings, just as he would when presented with his description of Gandhi as a 'half- naked fakir.' "
Says the spokesman for a religion with no intellectual or cultural heritage where individual rights and free speech are concerned.
Yeah well, nevertheless, I highly doubt Churchill would do so. This is just another way for this organization to form and redefine the concept of liberty. I'd be, at this point, extra-crispy vigilant from this point forward. It's taken Western civilization centuries to claw, fight and intellectualize our way to this.
How the heck did Islam become protected status anyway? Shit, the Jews have faced far worse than the Muslims will likely ever witness and never benefited from it. No, you don't deserve not to be spoken too nicely. If your religion does bad things including something retarded like murder innocent people, then yeah, you're kinda gonna have to go with the flow on that. You're not shielded from criticism in any way.
I'll be damned if we're going to piss it all away based on faulty premises and a boatload of bull shit.
And Canada, to be fair, is not doing its bit on this front either.
The West has to once and for all decide which way they want to go on liberty, freedom of speech and expression. They can go the UK way; which is the shitty way. Or they can follow what the Americans are fighting mostly in the libertarian ranks; which is the correct way.
Pick a side folks.
There is no grey area.
"Reportedly, a woman came out of the Guildhall and asked Mr Weston if he had the authorisation to make this speech. When he answered that he didn't, she told him 'It's disgusting!' and then called the police.
But those in the Muslim community said the police were correct to act if Mr Weston’s actions were deliberately intended to incite hatred.
Mohamed Shafiq, leader of the Ramadan Foundation, said: “Of course there should be freedom of speech, but with freedom of speech comes responsibility. If someone was to deliver this message in the centre of Bradford for example where there is a large Muslim population then it could be seen as a deliberate act of incitement.
“We are banning extremists from the Muslim community, the likes of Anjem Choudary, so it is right that the policy is applied equally. "
Shafiq. Listen.
Go. Fuck. Yourself.
How about that?
What you're advocating is not justice but censorship.
"A spokesman for the Muslim Council of Britain said: “We are sure that even Mr Churchill, if confronted with what he wrote as a young man would now blush at his own writings, just as he would when presented with his description of Gandhi as a 'half- naked fakir.' "
Says the spokesman for a religion with no intellectual or cultural heritage where individual rights and free speech are concerned.
Yeah well, nevertheless, I highly doubt Churchill would do so. This is just another way for this organization to form and redefine the concept of liberty. I'd be, at this point, extra-crispy vigilant from this point forward. It's taken Western civilization centuries to claw, fight and intellectualize our way to this.
How the heck did Islam become protected status anyway? Shit, the Jews have faced far worse than the Muslims will likely ever witness and never benefited from it. No, you don't deserve not to be spoken too nicely. If your religion does bad things including something retarded like murder innocent people, then yeah, you're kinda gonna have to go with the flow on that. You're not shielded from criticism in any way.
I'll be damned if we're going to piss it all away based on faulty premises and a boatload of bull shit.
And Canada, to be fair, is not doing its bit on this front either.
The West has to once and for all decide which way they want to go on liberty, freedom of speech and expression. They can go the UK way; which is the shitty way. Or they can follow what the Americans are fighting mostly in the libertarian ranks; which is the correct way.
Pick a side folks.
There is no grey area.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Mysterious and anonymous comments as well as those laced with cyanide and ad hominen attacks will be deleted. Thank you for your attention, chumps.