This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Look what you've done!
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
nickgusset  Shizzlehurst 22 Jul 15 10.51am |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote jamiemartin721 at 22 Jul 2015 10.48am
Quote leggedstruggle at 22 Jul 2015 7.49am
Quote nickgusset at 22 Jul 2015 12.30am
thought crime illegal soon...
Usual double standards. Outrage from Nick when the government tries to stop terrorist apologists and worse spouting their vile, while he is silent when an 85-year-old woman is arrested, handcuffed and fined for telling some people to 'go home'. What happened to her freedom of speech? Similarly he supports the prosecution of a bakery in Northern Ireland for not supporting 'gay marriage' - even though such ceremonies are illegal there. Edited by leggedstruggle (22 Jul 2015 7.52am) Illegal is over stating the case somewhat, they're regarded in law as being civil partnerships. Also the law wouldn't be particually useful against Apologists, unless they specifically are vocal in their support of groups such as IS or encourage others to join or otherwise commit a criminal offence. I very much doubt you'd be able to get a conviction that would stand up to the Human Right of Free Speech, unless it intimated or encouraged criminal actions or terrorism. Saying you support IS wouldn't be a crime, but encouraging others to support IS would be. Are you talking about the human rights act that the tories want to pull out from?
|
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
 |
| leggedstruggle Croydon 22 Jul 15 11.23am |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote nickgusset at 22 Jul 2015 10.51am
Quote jamiemartin721 at 22 Jul 2015 10.48am
Quote leggedstruggle at 22 Jul 2015 7.49am
Quote nickgusset at 22 Jul 2015 12.30am
thought crime illegal soon...
Usual double standards. Outrage from Nick when the government tries to stop terrorist apologists and worse spouting their vile, while he is silent when an 85-year-old woman is arrested, handcuffed and fined for telling some people to 'go home'. What happened to her freedom of speech? Similarly he supports the prosecution of a bakery in Northern Ireland for not supporting 'gay marriage' - even though such ceremonies are illegal there. Edited by leggedstruggle (22 Jul 2015 7.52am) Illegal is over stating the case somewhat, they're regarded in law as being civil partnerships. Also the law wouldn't be particually useful against Apologists, unless they specifically are vocal in their support of groups such as IS or encourage others to join or otherwise commit a criminal offence. I very much doubt you'd be able to get a conviction that would stand up to the Human Right of Free Speech, unless it intimated or encouraged criminal actions or terrorism. Saying you support IS wouldn't be a crime, but encouraging others to support IS would be. Are you talking about the human rights act that the tories want to pull out from? Yes, the one that terrorist spokesmen use to prolong their stay in this country while continuing to peach their hatred - it's their 'right' you know as human beings.
mother-in-law is an anagram of woman hitler |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| leggedstruggle Croydon 22 Jul 15 11.26am |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote jamiemartin721 at 22 Jul 2015 10.48am
Quote leggedstruggle at 22 Jul 2015 7.49am
Quote nickgusset at 22 Jul 2015 12.30am
thought crime illegal soon...
Usual double standards. Outrage from Nick when the government tries to stop terrorist apologists and worse spouting their vile, while he is silent when an 85-year-old woman is arrested, handcuffed and fined for telling some people to 'go home'. What happened to her freedom of speech? Similarly he supports the prosecution of a bakery in Northern Ireland for not supporting 'gay marriage' - even though such ceremonies are illegal there. Edited by leggedstruggle (22 Jul 2015 7.52am) Illegal is over stating the case somewhat, they're regarded in law as being civil partnerships. Also the law wouldn't be particually useful against Apologists, unless they specifically are vocal in their support of groups such as IS or encourage others to join or otherwise commit a criminal offence. I very much doubt you'd be able to get a conviction that would stand up to the Human Right of Free Speech, unless it intimated or encouraged criminal actions or terrorism. Saying you support IS wouldn't be a crime, but encouraging others to support IS would be. So it is ok to voice support for an organisation that beheads people, burns people alive, rapes children and throws gay men off roofs. But it is punishable to use the word 'black' in certain contexts and to tell people to 'go home' and to refuse to support same sex marriage even when it is illegal where you live.
mother-in-law is an anagram of woman hitler |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| nickgusset Shizzlehurst 22 Jul 15 11.32am |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote leggedstruggle at 22 Jul 2015 11.26am
Quote jamiemartin721 at 22 Jul 2015 10.48am
Quote leggedstruggle at 22 Jul 2015 7.49am
Quote nickgusset at 22 Jul 2015 12.30am
thought crime illegal soon...
Usual double standards. Outrage from Nick when the government tries to stop terrorist apologists and worse spouting their vile, while he is silent when an 85-year-old woman is arrested, handcuffed and fined for telling some people to 'go home'. What happened to her freedom of speech? Similarly he supports the prosecution of a bakery in Northern Ireland for not supporting 'gay marriage' - even though such ceremonies are illegal there. Edited by leggedstruggle (22 Jul 2015 7.52am) Illegal is over stating the case somewhat, they're regarded in law as being civil partnerships. Also the law wouldn't be particually useful against Apologists, unless they specifically are vocal in their support of groups such as IS or encourage others to join or otherwise commit a criminal offence. I very much doubt you'd be able to get a conviction that would stand up to the Human Right of Free Speech, unless it intimated or encouraged criminal actions or terrorism. Saying you support IS wouldn't be a crime, but encouraging others to support IS would be. So it is ok to voice support for an organisation that beheads people, burns people alive, rapes children and throws gay men off roofs. But it is punishable to use the word 'black' in certain contexts and to tell people to 'go home' and to refuse to support same sex marriage even when it is illegal where you live.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| jamiemartin721 Reading 22 Jul 15 11.38am |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote nickgusset at 22 Jul 2015 10.51am
Quote jamiemartin721 at 22 Jul 2015 10.48am
Quote leggedstruggle at 22 Jul 2015 7.49am
Quote nickgusset at 22 Jul 2015 12.30am
thought crime illegal soon...
Usual double standards. Outrage from Nick when the government tries to stop terrorist apologists and worse spouting their vile, while he is silent when an 85-year-old woman is arrested, handcuffed and fined for telling some people to 'go home'. What happened to her freedom of speech? Similarly he supports the prosecution of a bakery in Northern Ireland for not supporting 'gay marriage' - even though such ceremonies are illegal there. Edited by leggedstruggle (22 Jul 2015 7.52am) Illegal is over stating the case somewhat, they're regarded in law as being civil partnerships. Also the law wouldn't be particually useful against Apologists, unless they specifically are vocal in their support of groups such as IS or encourage others to join or otherwise commit a criminal offence. I very much doubt you'd be able to get a conviction that would stand up to the Human Right of Free Speech, unless it intimated or encouraged criminal actions or terrorism. Saying you support IS wouldn't be a crime, but encouraging others to support IS would be. Are you talking about the human rights act that the tories want to pull out from? Not this election they won't. They might want to, but legally its almost impossible for them to do so, as far too much UK law ties into the act now. Far too much English legal precedent has been set by the European Court and the ECHR that its largely pointless leaving it anyhow (bearing in mind its been ratifying UK law in its various forms, and serving as the court of appeal, since the 1950s).
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| jamiemartin721 Reading 22 Jul 15 11.41am |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote nickgusset at 22 Jul 2015 11.32am
Quote leggedstruggle at 22 Jul 2015 11.26am
Quote jamiemartin721 at 22 Jul 2015 10.48am
Quote leggedstruggle at 22 Jul 2015 7.49am
Quote nickgusset at 22 Jul 2015 12.30am
thought crime illegal soon...
Usual double standards. Outrage from Nick when the government tries to stop terrorist apologists and worse spouting their vile, while he is silent when an 85-year-old woman is arrested, handcuffed and fined for telling some people to 'go home'. What happened to her freedom of speech? Similarly he supports the prosecution of a bakery in Northern Ireland for not supporting 'gay marriage' - even though such ceremonies are illegal there. Edited by leggedstruggle (22 Jul 2015 7.52am) Illegal is over stating the case somewhat, they're regarded in law as being civil partnerships. Also the law wouldn't be particually useful against Apologists, unless they specifically are vocal in their support of groups such as IS or encourage others to join or otherwise commit a criminal offence. I very much doubt you'd be able to get a conviction that would stand up to the Human Right of Free Speech, unless it intimated or encouraged criminal actions or terrorism. Saying you support IS wouldn't be a crime, but encouraging others to support IS would be. So it is ok to voice support for an organisation that beheads people, burns people alive, rapes children and throws gay men off roofs. But it is punishable to use the word 'black' in certain contexts and to tell people to 'go home' and to refuse to support same sex marriage even when it is illegal where you live.
Which wouldn't be viable, there is no way the UK judiciary would accept prosecution on the basis of oppositional stance. It would necessitate a connection to a criminal offence, although it might be flexible enough to affect those who hide behind the technicalities. Personal I don't agree with the law, but its a stretch to think it will be anything beyond being a 'popularity policy' that barely ever is used.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| jamiemartin721 Reading 22 Jul 15 11.46am |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote leggedstruggle at 22 Jul 2015 11.26am
Quote jamiemartin721 at 22 Jul 2015 10.48am
Quote leggedstruggle at 22 Jul 2015 7.49am
Quote nickgusset at 22 Jul 2015 12.30am
thought crime illegal soon...
Usual double standards. Outrage from Nick when the government tries to stop terrorist apologists and worse spouting their vile, while he is silent when an 85-year-old woman is arrested, handcuffed and fined for telling some people to 'go home'. What happened to her freedom of speech? Similarly he supports the prosecution of a bakery in Northern Ireland for not supporting 'gay marriage' - even though such ceremonies are illegal there. Edited by leggedstruggle (22 Jul 2015 7.52am) Illegal is over stating the case somewhat, they're regarded in law as being civil partnerships. Also the law wouldn't be particually useful against Apologists, unless they specifically are vocal in their support of groups such as IS or encourage others to join or otherwise commit a criminal offence. I very much doubt you'd be able to get a conviction that would stand up to the Human Right of Free Speech, unless it intimated or encouraged criminal actions or terrorism. Saying you support IS wouldn't be a crime, but encouraging others to support IS would be. So it is ok to voice support for an organisation that beheads people, burns people alive, rapes children and throws gay men off roofs. But it is punishable to use the word 'black' in certain contexts and to tell people to 'go home' and to refuse to support same sex marriage even when it is illegal where you live. Yes, that's how free speech works. Provided those are personal opinion, and not directed at specific people. There is a world of difference between saying something, and acting upon it. However, if your speaking for a business or directly expressing that opinion at someone else, such as telling them to go home, you're no longer just speaking, you're enacting.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| leggedstruggle Croydon 22 Jul 15 12.50pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote jamiemartin721 at 22 Jul 2015 11.46am
Quote leggedstruggle at 22 Jul 2015 11.26am
Quote jamiemartin721 at 22 Jul 2015 10.48am
Quote leggedstruggle at 22 Jul 2015 7.49am
Quote nickgusset at 22 Jul 2015 12.30am
thought crime illegal soon...
Usual double standards. Outrage from Nick when the government tries to stop terrorist apologists and worse spouting their vile, while he is silent when an 85-year-old woman is arrested, handcuffed and fined for telling some people to 'go home'. What happened to her freedom of speech? Similarly he supports the prosecution of a bakery in Northern Ireland for not supporting 'gay marriage' - even though such ceremonies are illegal there. Edited by leggedstruggle (22 Jul 2015 7.52am) Illegal is over stating the case somewhat, they're regarded in law as being civil partnerships. Also the law wouldn't be particually useful against Apologists, unless they specifically are vocal in their support of groups such as IS or encourage others to join or otherwise commit a criminal offence. I very much doubt you'd be able to get a conviction that would stand up to the Human Right of Free Speech, unless it intimated or encouraged criminal actions or terrorism. Saying you support IS wouldn't be a crime, but encouraging others to support IS would be. So it is ok to voice support for an organisation that beheads people, burns people alive, rapes children and throws gay men off roofs. But it is punishable to use the word 'black' in certain contexts and to tell people to 'go home' and to refuse to support same sex marriage even when it is illegal where you live. Yes, that's how free speech works. Provided those are personal opinion, and not directed at specific people. There is a world of difference between saying something, and acting upon it. However, if your speaking for a business or directly expressing that opinion at someone else, such as telling them to go home, you're no longer just speaking, you're enacting. What a peculiar idea you have of what is free speech. Athough I accept that these days it means the right to express views that the left approves of, or is afraid to criticise in case of offending some minority or other. Whereas anything that the left disapproves of can suffer the full force of the law. The new left damages the very 'freedoms' that is supposedly supports. Very similar to the fact that implementation of their economic 'policies' would actually impoverish the very people they supposedly support - the working class.
mother-in-law is an anagram of woman hitler |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| nickgusset Shizzlehurst 22 Jul 15 12.53pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote leggedstruggle at 22 Jul 2015 12.50pm
Quote jamiemartin721 at 22 Jul 2015 11.46am
Quote leggedstruggle at 22 Jul 2015 11.26am
Quote jamiemartin721 at 22 Jul 2015 10.48am
Quote leggedstruggle at 22 Jul 2015 7.49am
Quote nickgusset at 22 Jul 2015 12.30am
thought crime illegal soon...
Usual double standards. Outrage from Nick when the government tries to stop terrorist apologists and worse spouting their vile, while he is silent when an 85-year-old woman is arrested, handcuffed and fined for telling some people to 'go home'. What happened to her freedom of speech? Similarly he supports the prosecution of a bakery in Northern Ireland for not supporting 'gay marriage' - even though such ceremonies are illegal there. Edited by leggedstruggle (22 Jul 2015 7.52am) Illegal is over stating the case somewhat, they're regarded in law as being civil partnerships. Also the law wouldn't be particually useful against Apologists, unless they specifically are vocal in their support of groups such as IS or encourage others to join or otherwise commit a criminal offence. I very much doubt you'd be able to get a conviction that would stand up to the Human Right of Free Speech, unless it intimated or encouraged criminal actions or terrorism. Saying you support IS wouldn't be a crime, but encouraging others to support IS would be. So it is ok to voice support for an organisation that beheads people, burns people alive, rapes children and throws gay men off roofs. But it is punishable to use the word 'black' in certain contexts and to tell people to 'go home' and to refuse to support same sex marriage even when it is illegal where you live. Yes, that's how free speech works. Provided those are personal opinion, and not directed at specific people. There is a world of difference between saying something, and acting upon it. However, if your speaking for a business or directly expressing that opinion at someone else, such as telling them to go home, you're no longer just speaking, you're enacting. What a peculiar idea you have of what is free speech. Athough I accept that these days it means the right to express views that the left approves of, or is afraid to criticise in case of offending some minority or other. Whereas anything that the left disapproves of can suffer the full force of the law. The new left damages the very 'freedoms' that is supposedly supports. Very similar to the fact that implementation of their economic 'policies' would actually impoverish the very people they supposedly support - the working class.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| leggedstruggle Croydon 22 Jul 15 1.17pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote nickgusset at 22 Jul 2015 12.53pm
Quote leggedstruggle at 22 Jul 2015 12.50pm
Quote jamiemartin721 at 22 Jul 2015 11.46am
Quote leggedstruggle at 22 Jul 2015 11.26am
Quote jamiemartin721 at 22 Jul 2015 10.48am
Quote leggedstruggle at 22 Jul 2015 7.49am
Quote nickgusset at 22 Jul 2015 12.30am
thought crime illegal soon...
Usual double standards. Outrage from Nick when the government tries to stop terrorist apologists and worse spouting their vile, while he is silent when an 85-year-old woman is arrested, handcuffed and fined for telling some people to 'go home'. What happened to her freedom of speech? Similarly he supports the prosecution of a bakery in Northern Ireland for not supporting 'gay marriage' - even though such ceremonies are illegal there. Edited by leggedstruggle (22 Jul 2015 7.52am) Illegal is over stating the case somewhat, they're regarded in law as being civil partnerships. Also the law wouldn't be particually useful against Apologists, unless they specifically are vocal in their support of groups such as IS or encourage others to join or otherwise commit a criminal offence. I very much doubt you'd be able to get a conviction that would stand up to the Human Right of Free Speech, unless it intimated or encouraged criminal actions or terrorism. Saying you support IS wouldn't be a crime, but encouraging others to support IS would be. So it is ok to voice support for an organisation that beheads people, burns people alive, rapes children and throws gay men off roofs. But it is punishable to use the word 'black' in certain contexts and to tell people to 'go home' and to refuse to support same sex marriage even when it is illegal where you live. Yes, that's how free speech works. Provided those are personal opinion, and not directed at specific people. There is a world of difference between saying something, and acting upon it. However, if your speaking for a business or directly expressing that opinion at someone else, such as telling them to go home, you're no longer just speaking, you're enacting. What a peculiar idea you have of what is free speech. Athough I accept that these days it means the right to express views that the left approves of, or is afraid to criticise in case of offending some minority or other. Whereas anything that the left disapproves of can suffer the full force of the law. The new left damages the very 'freedoms' that is supposedly supports. Very similar to the fact that implementation of their economic 'policies' would actually impoverish the very people they supposedly support - the working class.
The suppression of politically correct free speech results in the likes of the arrest, handcuffing and prosecution of an 85-year-old working class woman. Also the victimisation of the likes of John Terry and Carol Thatcher. The implementation of New Left Socialist economics would have the same result as all the other failed Socialist economies where working people have standards of living immeasurably worse than elsewhere. These working people would also of course be subjected to repressive measures when they attempt to find ways round the failing system or try to flee to countries that are not Socialist.
mother-in-law is an anagram of woman hitler |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
 dannyh wherever I lay my hat....... 22 Jul 15 1.19pm |
  |
|---|---|
|
Quote nickgusset at 22 Jul 2015 9.52am
Quote leggedstruggle at 22 Jul 2015 7.49am
Quote nickgusset at 22 Jul 2015 12.30am
thought crime illegal soon...
Usual double standards. Outrage from Nick when the government tries to stop terrorist apologists and worse spouting their vile, while he is silent when an 85-year-old woman is arrested, handcuffed and fined for telling some people to 'go home'. What happened to her freedom of speech? Similarly he supports the prosecution of a bakery in Northern Ireland for not supporting 'gay marriage' - even though such ceremonies are illegal there. Edited by leggedstruggle (22 Jul 2015 7.52am) Oh dear. Not dealing with the point again. Another ad hominem argument. Well done you.
Edited by nickgusset (22 Jul 2015 9.58am)
Goes back to my previous comment.
"It's not the bullet that's got my name on it that concerns me; it's all them other ones flyin' around marked 'To Whom It May Concern.'" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
 |
| nickgusset Shizzlehurst 22 Jul 15 1.31pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote dannyh at 22 Jul 2015 1.19pm
Quote nickgusset at 22 Jul 2015 9.52am
Quote leggedstruggle at 22 Jul 2015 7.49am
Quote nickgusset at 22 Jul 2015 12.30am
thought crime illegal soon...
Usual double standards. Outrage from Nick when the government tries to stop terrorist apologists and worse spouting their vile, while he is silent when an 85-year-old woman is arrested, handcuffed and fined for telling some people to 'go home'. What happened to her freedom of speech? Similarly he supports the prosecution of a bakery in Northern Ireland for not supporting 'gay marriage' - even though such ceremonies are illegal there. Edited by leggedstruggle (22 Jul 2015 7.52am) Oh dear. Not dealing with the point again. Another ad hominem argument. Well done you.
Edited by nickgusset (22 Jul 2015 9.58am)
Goes back to my previous comment.
Whether it's the mirror or not, IDS has changed the name of the bill which is a fact not opinion. The pro Tory press made little fuss of it.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / RegisterNew users
Registration is now on our new message board
Existing users
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
Sponsors
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.