We dont have freedom of speech. There is no constitution on the UK protecting freedom of speech. Our laws are based on being able to do anything as long as the government doesn't say it is not allowed.Fulax said:Yeah, fuck freedom of speech. Let's just ban everyone we don't agree with.
Not Jack Thompson.TheRealCJ said:Also known as 'Anyone else'.Pi_Fighter said:In this case, they appear to be justified.
There is a very large likelihood of a crime being committed as a driect result of the words of these people.
For obvious enough reasons, I would ban Michael Atkinson from my country and replace him with someone at least partially competent.
And who determines this? Where is the proof? Speaking your mind can be judged acceptable based on the likelihood of a crime being committed as a result?Pi_Fighter said:In this case, they appear to be justified.
There is a very large likelihood of a crime being committed as a driect result of the words of these people.
What consititues decent oversight? I believe the Soviets had "decent" oversight with the NKVD at one time.spuddyt said:So long as the process of bannin has decent oversight, its ok by me
Better than letting them run riot on killing sprees, I guess.Fulax said:Yeah, fuck freedom of speech. Let's just ban everyone we don't agree with.
i like your way of thinkinggeorge144 said:Its not enough people we should kick out lots of the nutty racist/extremists who are already in our country. But yes I think they should be allowed to ban these people from entering our fair isle. I would ban David Cameron because he's a slimy git, also all chavs.
Although I don't live in the U.K., I agree with that list.bjj hero said:Give this a read:
Uks least wanted list [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8033060.stm]
For those who can't be arsed the British government has released a list of people it will not allow into the country for spreading hate. I have the list here [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8033319.stm]. It includes a right wing US radio show host, skin head gangs, muslim preachers and members of the christian right.
My first question is:
Ignoring the comment that entering the UK is a privilage, should a governement be allowed to ban people who haven't committed a crime, just because they have unpopular views?
The second question is who would you ban from your country and why?
Brilliant, it'll halve the total benefits claims at a stroke (that's Cameron's claims of course).BlindTom said:That's like... A lot of people.george144 said:Its not enough people we should kick out lots of the nutty racist/extremists who are already in our country. But yes I think they should be allowed to ban these people from entering our fair isle. I would ban David Cameron because he's a slimy git, also all chavs.
banning of michael savage he doesnt promote hate or any of that crap. he speaks of what is wrong with the country. saying we need to fix the borders, stop mass spending, return to morals and values. where is the violence i ask? he got a report by the US governemt department of homeland security and he asked why are veterans suspected terror suspects. i will try to find this for you. the report was extremely stupid and made no sense.Pi_Fighter said:In this case, they appear to be justified.
There is a very large likelihood of a crime being committed as a driect result of the words of these people.
For obvious enough reasons, I would ban Michael Atkinson from my country and replace him with someone at least partially competent.
This is satire right?StayCold said:why isn't ABSOLUTELY ALL ASYLUM SEEKERS on that list?
Agreed. And I believe his entire church is barred.Nmil-ek said:Pastor Fred Phelps, Fukin A that asshat would be one of the top of my list thank you for once government now block the rest of the evangelical fundimentalist nuts.