The BNP - Good or Bad?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tash.

I said in my mind thats what the equivalent is, I didn't say it was the actual equivalent.

When I was writing the part about whether I think he believes what he was saying, what I was trying to put across is he is using his freedom of speech to make a controversial opinion and also with the intention of defending the actions of the Nazi's. What you're not getting is my point that he is exploiting the right to freedom of speech.. thats all i've said.

I'm not actually trying to fade the subject of beliefs into a hate issue, he doesn't just believe in something he feels the need to spread this hatred into the public domain, thats what I don't like. Nick Griffin takes advantage of those who have no real opinion for themselves and therefore take upon the most extreme in their time of need. That's how the Nazi's got into power and it seems as though the lesson hasn't yet been learnt because his mission is to do the same thing all over again and he's being allowed to.

---

If you continue to try and silence the British National Party in undemocratic ways then you will give them more support, and personally i'd wish them good luck because its not them who are trying to ban free speech, so who are the real Nazis it makes you wonder.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

If you continue to try and silence the British National Party in undemocratic ways then you will give them more support, and personally i'd wish them good luck because its not them who are trying to ban free speech, so who are the real Nazis it makes you wonder.

---

Wait, so now your saying the worst feature of the Nazi's was the fact that they banned freedom of speech?I don't think so. Plus, we're talking about one issue here. We aren't talking about the end of freedom of speech entirely.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tash.

Wait, so now your saying the worst feature of the Nazi's was the fact that they banned freedom of speech?I don't think so. Plus, we're talking about one issue here. We aren't talking about the end of freedom of speech entirely.

---

Where did I say that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

If you continue to try and silence the British National Party in undemocratic ways then you will give them more support, and personally i'd wish them good luck because its not them who are trying to ban free speech, so who are the real Nazis it makes you wonder.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

Where did I say that?

---

To me the bit in bold really suggests that you are comparing my stance to that imposed by the Nazi's in Germany in the 1930s. Infact my stance is nothing at all like that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sergio

Why, who laughed at whose funeral??? :S

---

If you read the previous posts you'd understanding we're comparing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

I didn't say it wasn't a fact, I said some people think its not a fact and in a democracy it is their right to state their opinion.

I wouldn't feel anything because I would know they are dead. :S

---

You've completely missed the point. I think Tash has explained.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tash.

To me the bit in bold really suggests that you are comparing my stance to that imposed by the Nazi's in Germany in the 1930s. Infact my stance is nothing at all like that.

---

Of course its similar to that of the Nazis on the point of free speech, if you wish to make free speech over historical events illegal then you have no respect for freedom of speech or democracy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ardemax

If you read the previous posts you'd understanding we're comparing.

You've completely missed the point. I think Tash has explained.

---

How about you explain it then, Tash is not making any sense what so ever - I ask whether denial of the holocaust should be banned or not and Tash says no, yet then continues arguing against me for being against denial of the holocaust being made illegal.

Instead of waiting for Tash, Alexxx and whoever else, you explain your own point for once.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ardemax

If you read the previous posts you'd understanding we're comparing.
...

---

Don't worry, I read every page. However that's a completely irrational comparison. Saying 'the Holocaust didn't happen' 60 years afterwards is not at all similar to going to somebody's funeral and laughing.

I've lost interest in this debate because it's became too repetitive.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

Of course its similar to that of the Nazis on the point of free speech, if you wish to make free speech over historical events illegal then you have no respect for freedom of speech or democracy.



How about you explain it then, Tash is not making any sense what so ever - I ask whether denial of the holocaust should be banned or not and Tash says no, yet then continues arguing against me for being against denial of the holocaust being made illegal.

Instead of waiting for Tash, Alexxx and whoever else, you explain your own point for once.

---

I think I've explained it.

Maybe you should check over the last 5 pages or so and read what I've said.
Then we can debate on that, instead of asking me to repeat myself several times.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ardemax

I think I've explained it.

Maybe you should check over the last 5 pages or so and read what I've said.
Then we can debate on that, instead of asking me to repeat myself several times.

---

Your comparison makes no sense though, so I cannot say anything more because the example you are giving/others are giving of a funeral does not make sense at all and is nothing like denial of the holocaust.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

Your comparison makes no sense though, so I cannot say anything more because the example you are giving/others are giving of a funeral does not make sense at all and is nothing like denial of the holocaust.

---

Yes it is and it has been explained several times in this thread (especially in the last two days), so please re-read it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

Your comparison makes no sense though, so I cannot say anything more because the example you are giving/others are giving of a funeral does not make sense at all and is nothing like denial of the holocaust.

---

And what is the Holocaust again?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SauravG

Yes it is and it has been explained several times in this thread (especially in the last two days), so please re-read it.

---

They are nothing alike;

• Murder of millions of people by gas/hard labor.

• A funeral with somebody laughing.

I can see no relation at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ardemax

And what is the Holocaust again?

---

A historical event in which Hitler attempted to 'cleanse' the Third Reich. It is not however a funeral with somebody laughing, so don't try and say that as you predictably are going to.

I think a better comparison would be if in 60 years time someone denied 9/11 happened

Holocaust= Murder of millions of people by gas/hard labor.
9/11 = thousand of people murdered in a terrorist attack

no quite the same but meh

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan2nd

I think a better comparison would be if in 60 years time someone denied 9/11 happened

Holocaust= Murder of millions of people by gas/hard labor.
9/11 = thousand of people murdered in a terrorist attack

no quite the same but meh

---

..within their rights to think that if they wish to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

..within their rights to think that if they wish to.

---

Yeah it certainly is as there are many people who already think it was all a setup thing by the white house (loose change or whatever the movie is called) but lets not open the whole 9/11 conspricy thing up it could like this debate go on for hours :P

I think we should be encouraged to speak our minds instead of making people constantly fear that they are going to say the wrong thing (and that applys to all races, sexualities or genders). If anything I think the whole politically correct angle our current Government seems to like if anything causes more of a divide between communities.

I don't think all that the BNP stands for is bad some of it I agree with.. In the next election I'll be voting UKIP :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

A historical event in which Hitler attempted to 'cleanse' the Third Reich. It is not however a funeral with somebody laughing, so don't try and say that as you predictably are going to.

---

Well it is? lol.

Somebody laughing at your families funeral - there for mocking the dead, is the same as going up to someone and saying that their family members did not do anything heroic, brave and fought for whats right. Instead it was all a myth, a complete fake and they should forget about it. That's mocking someone too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan2nd

Yeah it certainly is as there are many people who already think it was all a setup thing by the white house (loose change or whatever the movie is called) but lets not open the whole 9/11 conspricy thing up it could like this debate go on for hours :P

I think we should be encouraged to speak our minds instead of making people constantly fear that they are going to say the wrong thing (and that applys to all races, sexualities or genders). If anything I think the whole politically correct angle our current Government seems to like if anything causes more of a divide between communities.

I don't think all that the BNP stands for is bad some of it I agree with.. In the next election I'll be voting UKIP :)

---

..got it spot on, the sad thing is that with so much scare-monngering/nanny state this government has created a bunch of left wing nut cases who want to interfere in everybodys lives, in their jobs, in their houses, their wheelie bins, their freedom of speech - everything. This government is the worst government we have ever had in our history (worse than the Callagahan government in the 1970s) - it only serves itself.

Good on you. :)
+rep (if I can)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ardemax

Well it is? lol.

Somebody laughing at your families funeral - there for mocking the dead, is the same as going up to someone and saying that their family members did not do anything heroic, brave and fought for whats right. Instead it was all a myth, a complete fake and they should forget about it. That's mocking someone too.

---

Laughing at a funeral is different to somebody questioning the existance of the gas chambers/the numbers killed in a historical event.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

Of course its similar to that of the Nazis on the point of free speech, if you wish to make free speech over historical events illegal then you have no respect for freedom of speech or democracy.


How about you explain it then, Tash is not making any sense what so ever - I ask whether denial of the holocaust should be banned or not and Tash says no, yet then continues arguing against me for being against denial of the holocaust being made illegal.

Instead of waiting for Tash, Alexxx and whoever else, you explain your own point for once.

---

Right, lets just get a few things straight here because you clearly haven't read or understood what i've been saying. I've tried several times and you're still not getting it. I am not trying to get the law changed on discussing all historical events, nor am I trying to make free speech outlawed with reference to them. I am talking about 1 specific event in history, one in which millions died at the hands of a mad man. There is scientific and first hand evidence of this and of the amounts that have died, not to mention the mass graves that have been discovered. To me denying that does not only make you stupid and ignorant it also makes you highly insensitive. If it was only ignorance to the evidence that drove Nick Griffins denial then maybe I wouldn't have such an issue with it, but he is an intelligent man. I'd bet money on the fact that if you asked him he would not be able to tell you why he doesn't think the holocaust happened and to me thats inexcusable. His opinion is driven only by his love for the Nazi's.

I haven't argued against you at all, you're just not listening. I think, and this is the last time I am going to say this, that denying the holocaust should be morally wrong. I don't think he should be punished for denying it, I don't think he should not say it, I just think that people need to be made aware of how wrong he actually is. There are some very very impressionable people out there, especially in the current climate economically and politically, and they are susceptible to be sucked in by his lies. I seriously think he should be publically denounced for having the opinion, specifically in the media through proving him wrong with evidence. Maybe that way he'll give up on this pathetic crusade.

And please can you think before you try and say that I make no sense, because at the moment the only one who is having trouble understanding me is you. Ardemax managed to, SauravG managed to so why can't you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

..within their rights to think that if they wish to.

---

So you're ok with people being not only stupid but dilusional? I don't understand you at all. Yes they're within their rights to think it, but it would make them again disrespectful to those people who lost their lives. I'm not sure I would want to live in a world full of people who didn't believe what was infront of their eyes, on film, for all to see.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

Laughing at a funeral is different to somebody questioning the existance of the gas chambers/the numbers killed in a historical event.

---

Technically it is yes, but the effect that it has on the families of those people are the same. The amount of disrespect for the dead is again, the same. That's the point we and many others have been trying to get across.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ardemax

Well it is? lol.

Somebody laughing at your families funeral - there for mocking the dead, is the same as going up to someone and saying that their family members did not do anything heroic, brave and fought for whats right. Instead it was all a myth, a complete fake and they should forget about it. That's mocking someone too.

---

Who went up to someone's family members and said they did not do anything heroic, brave and fought for what's right? :S

Hang on a second... I thought you were talking about the holocaust??? Now it seems (even more) that you're just twisting even your own words to try and scrape together a valid argument.

The fact is, freedom of speech gives someone the right to choose not to believe that something we believe as a historical event, did not happen. It has nothing to do with approaching and abusing anybody or anything. Honestly mate, just give up.

Quote:

---

Right, lets just get a few things straight here because you clearly haven't read or understood what i've been saying. I've tried several times and you're still not getting it. I am not trying to get the law changed on discussing all historical events, nor am I trying to make free speech outlawed with reference to them. I am talking about 1 specific event in history, one in which millions died at the hands of a mad man. There is scientific and first hand evidence of this and of the amounts that have died, not to mention the mass graves that have been discovered. To me denying that does not only make you stupid and ignorant it also makes you highly insensitive. If it was only ignorance to the evidence that drove Nick Griffins denial then maybe I wouldn't have such an issue with it, but he is an intelligent man. I'd bet money on the fact that if you asked him he would not be able to tell you why he doesn't think the holocaust happened and to me thats inexcusable. His opinion is driven only by his love for the Nazi's.

I haven't argued against you at all, you're just not listening. I think, and this is the last time I am going to say this, that denying the holocaust should be morally wrong. I don't think he should be punished for denying it, I don't think he should not say it, I just think that people need to be made aware of how wrong he actually is. There are some very very impressionable people out there, especially in the current climate economically and politically, and they are susceptible to be sucked in by his lies. I seriously think he should be publically denounced for having the opinion, specifically in the media through proving him wrong with evidence. Maybe that way he'll give up on this pathetic crusade.

---

It may be morally wrong in your opinion but its somebody elses opinion and they should be allowed to air it. If people believe in the holocaust then they do, if people don't believe in the holocaust then they dont - simple as that. On the media, the media is not paid by the ruling elite to target one man (well then again there is the BBC/Guardian). I'm afraid people know the truth and we don't need the nanny state to tell us otherwise.

Quote:

---

And please can you think before you try and say that I make no sense, because at the moment the only one who is having trouble understanding me is you. Ardemax managed to, SauravG managed to so why can't you?

---

Actually I entered this discussion saying that to make it illegal to deny the holocaust would be against freedom of speech, since then i've had you, SauravG and Ardemax (no suprise there) try to prove something against me, when infact it appears that all along we've agreed on the same thing.

Quote:

---

So you're ok with people being not only stupid but dilusional? I don't understand you at all. Yes they're within their rights to think it, but it would make them again disrespectful to those people who lost their lives. I'm not sure I would want to live in a world full of people who didn't believe what was infront of their eyes, on film, for all to see.

---

That, again, is your opinion. I think Labour is stupid, dilusional and I think the European Union is an insult to all those who died in world war II, however instead of saying point blankly 'they/he is wrong' - I debate it and prove my point. Instead of insisting on a witch hunt against Nick Griffin, why don't you and everyone else actually prove him wrong for once.

..but the sad truth is that Nick Griffin has more of a moral backbone than the ruling Lib/Lab/Con elite, thats why they are all so terribly afraid to debate with him.

Quote:

---

Technically it is yes, but the effect that it has on the families of those people are the same. The amount of disrespect for the dead is again, the same. That's the point we and many others have been trying to get across.

---

No it isn't the same, stop pretending its anywhere near the same.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sergio

Who went up to someone's family members and said they did not do anything heroic, brave and fought for what's right? :S

Hang on a second... I thought you were talking about the holocaust??? Now it seems (even more) that you're just twisting even your own words to try and scrape together a valid argument.

The fact is, freedom of speech gives someone the right to choose not to believe that something we believe as a historical event, did not happen. It has nothing to do with approaching and abusing anybody or anything. Honestly mate, just give up.

---

Anyone who denies the holocaust is doing it. Its like me going "hey 9/11 never happened". "hey London tube didn't really get bombed. it never happened".
Now suppose you lost someone in the London bombings, you wont mind if someone kept denying the terrorist attacks which killed your family?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SauravG

Anyone who denies the holocaust is doing it. Its like me going "hey 9/11 never happened". "hey London tube didn't really get bombed. it never happened".
Now suppose you lost someone in the London bombings, you wont mind if someone kept denying the terrorist attacks which killed your family?

---

No we wouldn't really care, because in life we don't agree with a lot of things but we get by with it. Its called reality.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

No we wouldn't really care, because in life we don't agree with a lot of things but we get by with it. Its called reality.

---

You say its called reality but what you say is NOT how you will react in that situation.
If you lose someone you loved alot to a terrorist attack e.g. London bombings, or the holocaust and someone constantly denied it on nation TV, you WOULD care. EVERYONE would. You wont just go "I don't really care if people deny what happened to him/her".
Now that's called reality.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SauravG

You say its called reality but what you say is NOT how you will react in that situation.
If you lose someone you loved alot to a terrorist attack e.g. London bombings, or the holocaust and someone constantly denied it on nation TV, you WOULD care. EVERYONE would. You wont just go "I don't really care if people deny what happened to him/her".
Now that's called reality.

---

That is reality, because while i'd strongly disagree with them/think they were a muppet for their views - I realise I live in a democracy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

That is reality, because while i'd strongly disagree with them/think they were a muppet for their views - I realise I live in a democracy.

---

But you said you wouldn't care.
There is a difference between not caring what someone says and disagreeing with them.

You may say you won't care, but believe me, if it did, you won't be happy at all. Say someone bombs Liverpool tomorrow, kills millions of people and I say "meh it never happened." etc, you are saying you wont care? Sure. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SauravG

Anyone who denies the holocaust is doing it. Its like me going "hey 9/11 never happened". "hey London tube didn't really get bombed. it never happened".
Now suppose you lost someone in the London bombings, you wont mind if someone kept denying the terrorist attacks which killed your family?

---

That's not what he was saying though. He was saying it was the same as going to a funeral and laughing. Even though your examples are slightly more relevant, it could still be argued that the holocaust wasn't broadcast all over the world on TV as it happened.

Anyway to answer your question, obviously I would mind if someone treated my family like that if I were in that situation. HOWEVER I would accept their point of view because I would realise I only gain the right to freedom of speech if I allow others to express it themselves. Even though I'd feel anger and pity towards them, the point is (as I've been saying for about 15 pages) is that they have the right to believe that if they want.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

Laughing at a funeral is different to somebody questioning the existance of the gas chambers/the numbers killed in a historical event.

---

It's the same disrespect tbh. If someone denies the holocaust then they're going against whoever died in it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sergio

Who went up to someone's family members and said they did not do anything heroic, brave and fought for what's right? :S

Hang on a second... I thought you were talking about the holocaust??? Now it seems (even more) that you're just twisting even your own words to try and scrape together a valid argument.

The fact is, freedom of speech gives someone the right to choose not to believe that something we believe as a historical event, did not happen. It has nothing to do with approaching and abusing anybody or anything. Honestly mate, just give up.

---

It's funny how in one post you target me, don't let me reply, then tell me to give up.
Some "democracy" this is.
Jews and anyone against the state in World War 2, were mass murdered. They had to die because someone wanted world domination. They died for us. They didn't die because they wanted to, I think that's obvious.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

It may be morally wrong in your opinion but its somebody elses opinion and they should be allowed to air it. If people believe in the holocaust then they do, if people don't believe in the holocaust then they dont - simple as that. On the media, the media is not paid by the ruling elite to target one man (well then again there is the BBC/Guardian). I'm afraid people know the truth and we don't need the nanny state to tell us otherwise.

Actually I entered this discussion saying that to make it illegal to deny the holocaust would be against freedom of speech, since then i've had you, SauravG and Ardemax (no suprise there) try to prove something against me, when infact it appears that all along we've agreed on the same thing.

That, again, is your opinion. I think Labour is stupid, dilusional and I think the European Union is an insult to all those who died in world war II, however instead of saying point blankly 'they/he is wrong' - I debate it and prove my point. Instead of insisting on a witch hunt against Nick Griffin, why don't you and everyone else actually prove him wrong for once.

..but the sad truth is that Nick Griffin has more of a moral backbone than the ruling Lib/Lab/Con elite, thats why they are all so terribly afraid to debate with him.

No it isn't the same, stop pretending its anywhere near the same.

---

So the European Union is an insult, but deniers of the holocaust are perfectly fine?

Answer me honestly, if your close relatives were killed in gas chambers, you wouldn't be upset? (You said you wouldn't care?) So if someone went up to you and said they didn't die there, it's all a joke, they lied to us all and it's a complete fake, then decided to mock you because you still believed it happened. Are you honestly not going to care?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ardemax

... It's funny how in one post you target me, don't let me reply, then tell me to give up.
Some "democracy" this is.
Jews and anyone against the state in World War 2, were mass murdered. They had to die because someone wanted world domination. They died for us. They didn't die because they wanted to, I think that's obvious. ...

---

What? :S
1. How did I target you?
2. I can't stop you replying.
3. I said give up because you keep repeating the same rubbish and won't accept an explanation for the argument against it.
4. Once again I will state that I do not dispute the occurrence of the holocaust.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sergio

What? :S
1. How did I target you?
2. I can't stop you replying.
3. I said give up because you keep repeating the same rubbish and won't accept an explanation for the argument against it.
4. Once again I will state that I do not dispute the occurrence of the holocaust.

---

Well it sounded by you saying "Give up." and that I should drop my arguement I thought that was targetted at me, my bad.

I'm sorry, but repeating the same rubbish?

Isn't anyone guilty of that aswell? oh yeah..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SauravG

But you said you wouldn't care.
There is a difference between not caring what someone says and disagreeing with them.

You may say you won't care, but believe me, if it did, you won't be happy at all. Say someone bombs Liverpool tomorrow, kills millions of people and I say "meh it never happened." etc, you are saying you wont care? Sure. :)

---

How can I make this anymore clearer?

I would not like it but I would accept that I live in a democracy and people have a right to freedom of speech.

Quote:

---

It's the same disrespect tbh. If someone denies the holocaust then they're going against whoever died in it.

---

Wrong, laughing at a funeral is not the same as believing the holocaust was exaggerated.

Quote:

---

It's funny how in one post you target me, don't let me reply, then tell me to give up.

Some "democracy" this is.
Jews and anyone against the state in World War 2, were mass murdered. They had to die because someone wanted world domination. They died for us. They didn't die because they wanted to, I think that's obvious

---

Do not imply that others on this forum are undemocratic, you support the European Union and want holocaust denial to be made illegal, so you are not in a very strong position when it comes to democracy.

Quote:

---

So the European Union is an insult, but deniers of the holocaust are perfectly fine?

---

The European Union is an insult to democracy, yes. What is your point?

Quote:

---

Answer me honestly, if your close relatives were killed in gas chambers, you wouldn't be upset? (You said you wouldn't care?) So if someone went up to you and said they didn't die there, it's all a joke, they lied to us all and it's a complete fake, then decided to mock you because you still believed it happened. Are you honestly not going to care?

---

I shall say it again;I would care, but as I live in a democracy I would also accept that people have different views to mine.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

How can I make this anymore clearer?

I would not like it but I would accept that I live in a democracy and people have a right to freedom of speech.

Wrong, laughing at a funeral is not the same as believing the holocaust was exaggerated.

Do not imply that others on this forum are undemocratic, you support the European Union and want holocaust denial to be made illegal, so you are not in a very strong position when it comes to democracy.

The European Union is an insult to democracy, yes. What is your point?
I shall say it again;I would care, but as I live in a democracy I would also accept that people have different views to mine.

---

No you wouldn't accept people have different views about your family members' death. As far as anyone would care, someone saying it was all bogus and a fake, would you honestly go: "Thanks for your valid opinion, I'll value it and I'll say thankyou to democracy for letting this ******** give me nothing but nonsense." ... ok maybe not that harsh.

What is my point? Read the next bit of my question.

I was being ironic with the democratic thing, as you and mr. sergio have been saying how undemocratic I was, and then for him to tell me to give up this debate...
In this next bit, I'm hoping you can prove me wrong.

Your idea of freedom of speech is: everyone is allowed their opinion on something... sounds good.

Ok, so can I go up to you, insult you, insult your friends, tell them what I think of them in a nasty way and then when they complain I'll say it was freedom of speech and the case is dropped.

Mhmm?

So the person Nick Griffin took to court for apprarently racially abusing him should be found not guilty as its FREEDOM OF SPEECH. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SauravG

So the person Nick Griffin took to court for apprarently racially abusing him should be found not guilty as its FREEDOM OF SPEECH. :)

---

Yes, exactly.

Freedom of speech can be used in any arguement!

Quote:

---

No you wouldn't accept people have different views about your family members' death. As far as anyone would care, someone saying it was all bogus and a fake, would you honestly go: "Thanks for your valid opinion, I'll value it and I'll say thankyou to democracy for letting this ******** give me nothing but nonsense." ... ok maybe not that harsh.

---

I don't like everything people say, but I accept their right to say it. Do not tell me what I would and would not accept, maybe you would prefer everyone to be wrapped in EU/Govt cotton wool but I don't and neither do the rest of this country.

Quote:

---

What is my point? Read the next bit of my question.

I was being ironic with the democratic thing, as you and mr. sergio have been saying how undemocratic I was, and then for him to tell me to give up this debate...
In this next bit, I'm hoping you can prove me wrong.

---

You are undemocratic.

Quote:

---

Your idea of freedom of speech is: everyone is allowed their opinion on something... sounds good.

Ok, so can I go up to you, insult you, insult your friends, tell them what I think of them in a nasty way and then when they complain I'll say it was freedom of speech and the case is dropped.

Mhmm?

---

I never said everyone would be allowed to say what they felt, I have said clearly before that there is a line between racism/homophobia and so on which should not be crossed. As I state again further down in this post; homophobia and racism are not the same as denial of a historical event.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SauravG

So the person Nick Griffin took to court for apprarently racially abusing him should be found not guilty as its FREEDOM OF SPEECH. :)

---

We are going around in circles yet again because I think you can see our point but are determined to keep repeating the same old lines which we have already debuckled. I have said before and i'll bold it for you this time, homophobia and racism are not the same as denial of a historical event.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

I don't like everything people say, but I accept their right to say it. Do not tell me what I would and would not accept, maybe you would prefer everyone to be wrapped in EU/Govt cotton wool but I don't and neither do the rest of this country.

You are undemocratic.

I never said everyone would be allowed to say what they felt, I have said clearly before that there is a line between racism/homophobia and so on which should not be crossed. As I state again further down in this post; homophobia and racism are not the same as denial of a historical event.



We are going around in circles yet again because I think you can see our point but are determined to keep repeating the same old lines which we have already debuckled. I have said before and i'll bold it for you this time, homophobia and racism are not the same as denial of a historical event.

---

Actually denial of MLK and what he did could be seen as racist.

I'm so undemocratic it hurts.

So the only time when freedom of speech is stopped as soon as racism comes into play?

But I've only insulted someone? They're not gay, nor a different skin colour to me. That's still freedom of speech?

Good for some of it end of

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ardemax

Actually denial of MLK and what he did could be seen as racist.

I'm so undemocratic it hurts.

So the only time when freedom of speech is stopped as soon as racism comes into play?

But I've only insulted someone? They're not gay, nor a different skin colour to me. That's still freedom of speech?

---

How is denial of Martin Luther King racist? - I view Nelson Mandela as a terrorist as the ANC was a terrorist organisation using the most horrific methods of torture/killing in the Union of South Africa - am I racist?

..and yes, denial of the holocaust is not targeting somebody in a hateful manner, it is merely questioning whether or not it was a conspiracy by the Allied Powers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SauravG

So the person Nick Griffin took to court for apprarently racially abusing him should be found not guilty as its FREEDOM OF SPEECH. :)

---

FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, NOOOOOO!!!! :eusa_wall:eusa_wall:eusa_wall

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

... We are going around in circles yet again because I think you can see our point but are determined to keep repeating the same old lines which we have already debuckled. I have said before and i'll bold it for you this time, homophobia and racism are not the same as denial of a historical event.

---

Exactly what Dan said. You just keep repeating the same nonsense page after page and won't accept the definitive answer. There's no point trying to reason with you, enjoy your pointless post counts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

How is denial of Martin Luther King racist? - I view Nelson Mandela as a terrorist as the ANC was a terrorist organisation using the most horrific methods of torture/killing in the Union of South Africa - am I racist?

..and yes, denial of the holocaust is not targeting somebody in a hateful manner, it is merely questioning whether or not it was a conspiracy by the Allied Powers.

---

I still can't believe someone would deny all that evidence and proof. meh.
ok lemme quote from my other post

"So the only time when freedom of speech is stopped as soon as racism comes into play?

But I've only insulted someone? They're not gay, nor a different skin colour to me. That's still freedom of speech?"

....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ardemax

I still can't believe someone would deny all that evidence and proof. meh.
ok lemme quote from my other post

"So the only time when freedom of speech is stopped as soon as racism comes into play?

But I've only insulted someone? They're not gay, nor a different skin colour to me. That's still freedom of speech?"

....

---

Exactly. Denying the holocaust causes hatred and causes sadness etc for the victims families. Thats our point. If the other two don't get it then "/ and they say we are enjoying pointless post counts "/.
To me, undertaker says something, we prove him wrong, and then he says thats not what he meant. He is just full of excuses and hence I am losing interest in this debate as he is one of those people who never accept they are wrong.

FREEDOM OF SPEECH SHOULD NOT BE LIMITED
gets proved wrong
WAIT THATS NOT WHAT I MEANT, I MEANT IT SHOULD BE LIMITED FOR PURPOSES OF HATRED ETC
gets proved wrong about BNP again
WAIT IT SHOULD ONLY BE FOR RACIAL ABUSE
gets proved wrong

whats next undertaker?