a disgrace

[sovietsong]

Whilst I think what happened was terrible I don't think we should give 30 arseholes this amount of coverage.

i agree there was 50k students who didn't do anything!

Also think that coverage was ott!

[kinboshi]

I think there are some great points on here.

Dan you are hanging on to a kind of shibboleth here with no real solid foundation. As many have said, there is no such thing as complete freedom of speech, lines are drawn all the time, you know this because you and the team here draw them all the time.

There are situations where someone elses freedom limits mine, so we stop them and we all have different lines - there is no blanket "I defend yr right...etc" that makes any sense at all

The people who have fought and died to protect this country were protecting our freedom - which encompasses many things, such as the basic human rights including the freedom of speech/expression.  Not for one second am I condoning these idiotic actions, but if you look beyond their motives and reasoning, the fact they could do such a thing in this country is actually an indication that we do (to a degree, and that's a whole debate in itself) have a country that allows a great degree of freedom and civil liberties.

Imagine if someone burned a koran in a muslim state, such as Iran or Saudi Arabia?  Do you think they would have been allowed the freedom to make such a protest (for whatever their reasons)? Would there be a debate about their right to demonstrate using non-violent means?  Doesn't that say something about what many have died to protect? 

So they can have signs saying "British Soldiers Burn In Hell" and burn poppys, yet if someone had a sign saying "Islam Burn In Hell" and burning the Quran they would be arrested/murdered??!?!?!?!

What?  You can do both in this country.  Not saying either is right or clever, but you can do those things here.

The difference is you would be arrested and not be pampered like they seem to be a lot of the time, plus you would probably dead within a week for saying anything against the Quran.

Really!?

Depends where you say it I guess. But you do have a right to say what you have against a book/ religion. With the exception of judaism ( because judasim can be considered a race aswell as a religion).

Who going to murder you ?

You can say what you want about judaism as well.  You can't however, discriminate against the Jews as a race of people. 

You can criticise someone for what they do, but not what they are.

[Delboy]

I think there are some great points on here.

Dan you are hanging on to a kind of shibboleth here with no real solid foundation. As many have said, there is no such thing as complete freedom of speech, lines are drawn all the time, you know this because you and the team here draw them all the time.

There are situations where someone elses freedom limits mine, so we stop them and we all have different lines - there is no blanket "I defend yr right...etc" that makes any sense at all

The people who have fought and died to protect this country were protecting our freedom - which encompasses many things, such as the basic human rights including the freedom of speech/expression.  Not for one second am I condoning these idiotic actions, but if you look beyond their motives and reasoning, the fact they could do such a thing in this country is actually an indication that we do (to a degree, and that's a whole debate in itself) have a country that allows a great degree of freedom and civil liberties.

Imagine if someone burned a koran in a muslim state, such as Iran or Saudi Arabia?  Do you think they would have been allowed the freedom to make such a protest (for whatever their reasons)? Would there be a debate about their right to demonstrate using non-violent means?  Doesn't that say something about what many have died to protect? 

So they can have signs saying "British Soldiers Burn In Hell" and burn poppys, yet if someone had a sign saying "Islam Burn In Hell" and burning the Quran they would be arrested/murdered??!?!?!?!

What?  You can do both in this country.  Not saying either is right or clever, but you can do those things here.

The difference is you would be arrested and not be pampered like they seem to be a lot of the time, plus you would probably dead within a week for saying anything against the Quran.

Really!?

Depends where you say it I guess. But you do have a right to say what you have against a book/ religion. With the exception of judaism ( because judasim can be considered a race aswell as a religion).

Who going to murder you ?

You can say what you want about judaism as well.  You can't however, discriminate against the Jews as a race of people. 

You can criticise someone for what they do, but not what they are.

Fair enough. My choice of word was incorrect.

[Acidmouse]

i bet they all play wow and are attention whores on their too. Look at me! Look at me! i am clever!

I personally don't care what a small minority of loonies do but why o why does the telegraph give them a platform for it?

[kinboshi]

I think there are some great points on here.

Dan you are hanging on to a kind of shibboleth here with no real solid foundation. As many have said, there is no such thing as complete freedom of speech, lines are drawn all the time, you know this because you and the team here draw them all the time.

There are situations where someone elses freedom limits mine, so we stop them and we all have different lines - there is no blanket "I defend yr right...etc" that makes any sense at all

The people who have fought and died to protect this country were protecting our freedom - which encompasses many things, such as the basic human rights including the freedom of speech/expression.  Not for one second am I condoning these idiotic actions, but if you look beyond their motives and reasoning, the fact they could do such a thing in this country is actually an indication that we do (to a degree, and that's a whole debate in itself) have a country that allows a great degree of freedom and civil liberties.

Imagine if someone burned a koran in a muslim state, such as Iran or Saudi Arabia?  Do you think they would have been allowed the freedom to make such a protest (for whatever their reasons)? Would there be a debate about their right to demonstrate using non-violent means?  Doesn't that say something about what many have died to protect? 

So they can have signs saying "British Soldiers Burn In Hell" and burn poppys, yet if someone had a sign saying "Islam Burn In Hell" and burning the Quran they would be arrested/murdered??!?!?!?!

What?  You can do both in this country.  Not saying either is right or clever, but you can do those things here.

The difference is you would be arrested and not be pampered like they seem to be a lot of the time, plus you would probably dead within a week for saying anything against the Quran.

Really!?

Depends where you say it I guess. But you do have a right to say what you have against a book/ religion. With the exception of judaism ( because judasim can be considered a race aswell as a religion).

Who going to murder you ?

You can say what you want about judaism as well.  You can't however, discriminate against the Jews as a race of people. 

You can criticise someone for what they do, but not what they are.

Fair enough. My choice of word was incorrect.

You're right though.  We can say what we like against any religion we like.  That's a good thing, surely - for those who are religious or not.

[MANTIS01]

I think there are some great points on here.

Dan you are hanging on to a kind of shibboleth here with no real solid foundation. As many have said, there is no such thing as complete freedom of speech, lines are drawn all the time, you know this because you and the team here draw them all the time.

There are situations where someone elses freedom limits mine, so we stop them and we all have different lines - there is no blanket "I defend yr right...etc" that makes any sense at all

The people who have fought and died to protect this country were protecting our freedom - which encompasses many things, such as the basic human rights including the freedom of speech/expression.  Not for one second am I condoning these idiotic actions, but if you look beyond their motives and reasoning, the fact they could do such a thing in this country is actually an indication that we do (to a degree, and that's a whole debate in itself) have a country that allows a great degree of freedom and civil liberties.

Imagine if someone burned a koran in a muslim state, such as Iran or Saudi Arabia?  Do you think they would have been allowed the freedom to make such a protest (for whatever their reasons)? Would there be a debate about their right to demonstrate using non-violent means?  Doesn't that say something about what many have died to protect? 

You're right. And the poppy-burners are using that freedom to make mugs of the people who provide it for them. What part of their message had any value that would legitimise it as a reasonable protest? Sure we should support freedom of expression and the right to protest but they choose the time they did to incite hatred and promote racial violence. Being passionate about your tolerant values shouldn't blind you to common sense. You are a tolerant and reasonable guy. If you get home to find your best friend in bed with your wife then kicking your friend very hard in the bollox doesn't mean you're not a reasonable and tolerant guy.

[Swordpoker]

I hate agreeing with Kin on this subject but I do.

Yes, it is a matter of respect but since when was respect compulsory? The 2 minute silence is a show of respect and it is wonderful how many people join in the silence. If it was enforced that would ridiculously hippocratic.

3 were arrested on public disorder charges. That seems about right to me. It's a minor offence. Despite being massively hurtful and distasteful they have the right to say what they want.

Personally, I think we are gradually losing our freedom of speech in the UK. I, for one, would like to keep it.

[Rod Paradise]

I think there are some great points on here.

Dan you are hanging on to a kind of shibboleth here with no real solid foundation. As many have said, there is no such thing as complete freedom of speech, lines are drawn all the time, you know this because you and the team here draw them all the time.

There are situations where someone elses freedom limits mine, so we stop them and we all have different lines - there is no blanket "I defend yr right...etc" that makes any sense at all

The people who have fought and died to protect this country were protecting our freedom - which encompasses many things, such as the basic human rights including the freedom of speech/expression.  Not for one second am I condoning these idiotic actions, but if you look beyond their motives and reasoning, the fact they could do such a thing in this country is actually an indication that we do (to a degree, and that's a whole debate in itself) have a country that allows a great degree of freedom and civil liberties.

Imagine if someone burned a koran in a muslim state, such as Iran or Saudi Arabia?  Do you think they would have been allowed the freedom to make such a protest (for whatever their reasons)? Would there be a debate about their right to demonstrate using non-violent means?  Doesn't that say something about what many have died to protect? 

You're right. And the poppy-burners are using that freedom to make mugs of the people who provide it for them. What part of their message had any value that would legitimise it as a reasonable protest? Sure we should support freedom of expression and the right to protest but they choose the time they did to incite hatred and promote racial violence. Being passionate about your tolerant values shouldn't blind you to common sense. You are a tolerant and reasonable guy. If you get home to find your best friend in bed with your wife then kicking your friend very hard in the bollox doesn't mean you're not a reasonable and tolerant guy.

Fighting a war over oil and killing civilians (how many? Don't know, we haven't the decency to keep count), might just piss off people originating from those countries or areas. Just a thought.

[Acidmouse]

I think there are some great points on here.

Dan you are hanging on to a kind of shibboleth here with no real solid foundation. As many have said, there is no such thing as complete freedom of speech, lines are drawn all the time, you know this because you and the team here draw them all the time.

There are situations where someone elses freedom limits mine, so we stop them and we all have different lines - there is no blanket "I defend yr right...etc" that makes any sense at all

The people who have fought and died to protect this country were protecting our freedom - which encompasses many things, such as the basic human rights including the freedom of speech/expression.  Not for one second am I condoning these idiotic actions, but if you look beyond their motives and reasoning, the fact they could do such a thing in this country is actually an indication that we do (to a degree, and that's a whole debate in itself) have a country that allows a great degree of freedom and civil liberties.

Imagine if someone burned a koran in a muslim state, such as Iran or Saudi Arabia?  Do you think they would have been allowed the freedom to make such a protest (for whatever their reasons)? Would there be a debate about their right to demonstrate using non-violent means?  Doesn't that say something about what many have died to protect?  

You're right. And the poppy-burners are using that freedom to make mugs of the people who provide it for them. What part of their message had any value that would legitimise it as a reasonable protest? Sure we should support freedom of expression and the right to protest but they choose the time they did to incite hatred and promote racial violence. Being passionate about your tolerant values shouldn't blind you to common sense. You are a tolerant and reasonable guy. If you get home to find your best friend in bed with your wife then kicking your friend very hard in the bollox doesn't mean you're not a reasonable and tolerant guy.

Fighting a war over oil and killing civilians (how many? Don't know, we haven't the decency to keep count), might just piss off people originating from those countries or areas. Just a thought.

i think this clouds the real issues though and its a line often brought out to excuse this type of behavior. Showing ones respect for the troops, the men who lost their lives is a lot different to showing respect for the people who sent them there or justifying the conflicts they are in.  

[Geo the Sarge]

I think there are some great points on here.

Dan you are hanging on to a kind of shibboleth here with no real solid foundation. As many have said, there is no such thing as complete freedom of speech, lines are drawn all the time, you know this because you and the team here draw them all the time.

There are situations where someone elses freedom limits mine, so we stop them and we all have different lines - there is no blanket "I defend yr right...etc" that makes any sense at all

The people who have fought and died to protect this country were protecting our freedom - which encompasses many things, such as the basic human rights including the freedom of speech/expression.  Not for one second am I condoning these idiotic actions, but if you look beyond their motives and reasoning, the fact they could do such a thing in this country is actually an indication that we do (to a degree, and that's a whole debate in itself) have a country that allows a great degree of freedom and civil liberties.

Imagine if someone burned a koran in a muslim state, such as Iran or Saudi Arabia?  Do you think they would have been allowed the freedom to make such a protest (for whatever their reasons)? Would there be a debate about their right to demonstrate using non-violent means?  Doesn't that say something about what many have died to protect? 

You're right. And the poppy-burners are using that freedom to make mugs of the people who provide it for them. What part of their message had any value that would legitimise it as a reasonable protest? Sure we should support freedom of expression and the right to protest but they choose the time they did to incite hatred and promote racial violence. Being passionate about your tolerant values shouldn't blind you to common sense. You are a tolerant and reasonable guy. If you get home to find your best friend in bed with your wife then kicking your friend very hard in the bollox doesn't mean you're not a reasonable and tolerant guy.

Fighting a war over oil and killing civilians (how many? Don't know, we haven't the decency to keep count), might just piss off people originating from those countries or areas. Just a thought.

lol at just a thought, do you forget other threads regards the recent wars, where almost to a man we all agree. Just don't see the point of your post there.

Or is it just through your own personal hatred of British troops?

Geo

[Rod Paradise]

I think there are some great points on here.

Dan you are hanging on to a kind of shibboleth here with no real solid foundation. As many have said, there is no such thing as complete freedom of speech, lines are drawn all the time, you know this because you and the team here draw them all the time.

There are situations where someone elses freedom limits mine, so we stop them and we all have different lines - there is no blanket "I defend yr right...etc" that makes any sense at all

The people who have fought and died to protect this country were protecting our freedom - which encompasses many things, such as the basic human rights including the freedom of speech/expression.  Not for one second am I condoning these idiotic actions, but if you look beyond their motives and reasoning, the fact they could do such a thing in this country is actually an indication that we do (to a degree, and that's a whole debate in itself) have a country that allows a great degree of freedom and civil liberties.

Imagine if someone burned a koran in a muslim state, such as Iran or Saudi Arabia?  Do you think they would have been allowed the freedom to make such a protest (for whatever their reasons)? Would there be a debate about their right to demonstrate using non-violent means?  Doesn't that say something about what many have died to protect? 

You're right. And the poppy-burners are using that freedom to make mugs of the people who provide it for them. What part of their message had any value that would legitimise it as a reasonable protest? Sure we should support freedom of expression and the right to protest but they choose the time they did to incite hatred and promote racial violence. Being passionate about your tolerant values shouldn't blind you to common sense. You are a tolerant and reasonable guy. If you get home to find your best friend in bed with your wife then kicking your friend very hard in the bollox doesn't mean you're not a reasonable and tolerant guy.

Fighting a war over oil and killing civilians (how many? Don't know, we haven't the decency to keep count), might just piss off people originating from those countries or areas. Just a thought.

lol at just a thought, do you forget other threads regards the recent wars, where almost to a man we all agree. Just don't see the point of your post there.

Or is it just through your own personal hatred of British troops?

Geo

I'll treat that comment with the contempt it deserves Geo. Show me where I've slagged the troops - I've slagged the criminal ones, but the ordinary troops I've no hatred for I just feel sorry for them.

[The Baron]

Bit harsh on Rod IMO. You can support your troops and see another population's point of view at the same time?

FWIW the protest sickened me. But I'm proud to be in a place where these people wont have their hands cut off for it.

[GreekStein]

not gonna read the thread because I skimmed a few posts and saw Boshi was debating and we all know what happens when he does that...

[Woodsey]

not gonna read the thread because I skimmed a few posts and saw Boshi was debating and we all know what happens when he does that...

?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KlamcAzI9UA

[MANTIS01]

I think there are some great points on here.

Dan you are hanging on to a kind of shibboleth here with no real solid foundation. As many have said, there is no such thing as complete freedom of speech, lines are drawn all the time, you know this because you and the team here draw them all the time.

There are situations where someone elses freedom limits mine, so we stop them and we all have different lines - there is no blanket "I defend yr right...etc" that makes any se

The people who have fought and died to protect this country were protecting our freedom - which encompasses many things, such as the basic human rights including the freedom of speech/expression.  Not for one second am I condoning these idiotic actions, but if you look beyond their motives and reasoning, the fact they could do such a thing in this country is actually an indication that we do (to a degree, and that's a whole debate in itself) have a country that allows a great degree of freedom and civil liberties.

Imagine if someone burned a koran in a muslim state, such as Iran or Saudi Arabia?  Do you think they would have been allowed the freedom to make such a protest (for whatever their reasons)? Would there be a debate about their right to demonstrate using non-violent means?  Doesn't that say something about what many have died to protect? 

You're right. And the poppy-burners are using that freedom to make mugs of the people who provide it for them. What part of their message had any value that would legitimise it as a reasonable protest? Sure we should support freedom of expression and the right to protest but they choose the time they did to incite hatred and promote racial violence. Being passionate about your tolerant values shouldn't blind you to common sense. You are a tolerant and reasonable guy. If you get home to find your best friend in bed with your wife then kicking your friend very hard in the bollox doesn't mean you're not a reasonable and tolerant guy.

Fighting a war over oil and killing civilians (how many? Don't know, we haven't the decency to keep count), might just piss off people originating from those countries or areas. Just a thought.

If their motive was to protest about the occupation of Afghanistan I would support their right to free speech. In fact I would encourage their protest because such a serious issue should be kept in the spotlight. I'd say the majority of the country want our troops out of Afghanistan and I suspect the troops don't want to be there either so their message would receive some good support. There are lots of credible ways to protest as well. So how good a strategy is burning poppies in front of grieving widows? It's only a good strategy if your motive is to spread hate. Rod, if you were at the funeral of somebody you loved and strangers started shouting abuse you would drop this right to free speech shit in about one second. You'd feel a bit of respect was your basic right and you would react furiously. It's inconsistent to want that respect for yourself but not want to offer it to other people in return. I think promoting basic respect for each other is probably more important than free speech if you want a peaceful world. Allowing people to hate on each other in public doesn't make for a more ideal society.