Comments on: UK free speech, cont’d

By: Deoxy

Deoxy — Mon, 13 Nov 2006 11:18:18 +0000

“I’ll bet that if someone were game enough to sneak some voice recorders into British mosques a lot of Moslem preachers could be charged under these proposed laws.”

1. You wouldn’t have to sneak it in – they do quite enough in public.

2. The operative word there is “could”. They ALREADY “could” be charged. But they aren’t, and they won’t be. Thes laws are bing mad FOR them, not against them.

By: David Wilson

David Wilson — Mon, 13 Nov 2006 10:43:29 +0000

CSI, I’ll be you’re right, and I think the U.K. has made a squeak or two about this aspect of free expression — er, I mean, hate speech. But like civil rights laws in the U.S., the intended beneficiaries and targets are clear enough. It’s not the precious protected groups they want to prosecute, it’s those stubborn nativists backward enough to want to preserve their traditional society. It’s positively Orwellian that Griffin is being prosecuted for these particular remarks, which were actually made BEFORE 7/7. But as the British authorities correctly state, the truth is no defense to “hate speech” crimes.

By: LAN3

LAN3 — Sun, 12 Nov 2006 03:59:06 +0000

I don’t claim to understand the British political system, but Gordon Brown is the Chancellor of the Exchequer, a senior cabinet position, which makes him roughly equivalent to the Secretary of the Treasury. Now, I gather that he’s also the presumed next leader of the Labour Party and therefore the next PM should Labour retain power, but in the meantime, what the hell is he doing pledging the above while he’s still in the Cabinet?

Also, Rowan Atkinson! A million bravos to you and the House of Commons! Keep up the good work.

By: CSI

CSI — Sun, 12 Nov 2006 00:17:35 +0000

I’ll bet that if someone were game enough to sneak some voice recorders into British mosques a lot of Moslem preachers could be charged under these proposed laws.