French group wants courts to block U.S. Racist Website

[Phil21]

Yes.. let's abolish free speech classy. The same free speech that allowed African Americans to eventually gain equal rights. The same free speech that lets you say whatever the heck you want about the president. The same free speech that allows you to have an opinion differing from the public majority.

Gimme a break. This is just a "I don't agree with it, so it should be silenced because I know what's best" attitude. If we violate the first ammendment, then this entire country will QUICKLY spiral downward. Probably right into a neo-nazizm type of culture you proclaim to hate so much. Do some research as to how censorship made the Nazi's rise to power possible in the first place.

I don't understand how poeple can preach about how they have the right to silence someone else because they don't agree with it.

Why do people insist on tearing this country down bit by bit? I'm afraid our great grandchildren are going to have an absolute nightmare of a country if this pattern continues. Free speech and individual rights are being abolished slowly but surely. Yet people see it as a good thing.

All you are, is a short sited idiot who can only see one side of an argument. You have fallen for the PC'ism that is this country with the "oog. racism bad. silence by any means.", and I'm honestly quite sad.

-Phil

 

[Amused]

<< I am proud of the french. I don't blame them. Its about time someone say enough is enough. No one needs to read or hear Racist material. And I hope they win. Go French, GO! >>



Although I completelty disagree with hate speech, I equally disagree with limiting it.

Classy, you should really rethink your position. Free speech is measured not by allowing speech you agree with, but by allowing speech you find abhorant.

If you limit this site today, what unpopular speech is next?

 

[Amused]

<<

<< god i hate France and the french, complete idoits... they think its their place to tell other countries businesses what to do. they are a bunch of back stabbing cowards. If their citizens are too stupid to ignore certain websites its not our fault.



I also think Classy is a Neo-Nazi, he's try to supress our rights and he supports the smelly frenchies! Lets all berate and bilittle him together!


booo classy! >>



I can take the bashing. Also I am no trying take away your rights. I have a right not to have to listen to you or have you post stuff my children will read. Freedom without responsibility is dangerous. >>



Exactly, Classy. And your right to &quot;not have to listen to it&quot; requires YOU to tune it out. It does not require government to make the other person shut up.

If we look hard enough, I'm sure there's something you believe and say that someone else feels the same way about. How would you feel if your speech was limited?

I hate to say this, Classy... but you're a fascist. A fascist with good intentions, but a fascist nonetheless.

 

[kamiam]

<< AmusedOne >>


unfortunately your wise words fall on classy's deaf ears...as I said before classy wants neither freedom nor the responsibility that goes with it...sad indeed

 

[Moonbeam]

How about free speach where Hitler can come into your house and spend the first fifteen years of your kids life teaching them the real facts of life? Money is free speach according to the Supreme Coup. How about buying up all the air time to sell through violence? Oh scratch that one; it's already happened.

Is there any point where hate can become such a din that it begins to become the dominant propagandizing voice, and should action be taken before that point? If you think that education rather than supression is the answer, ask yourself what effect the knowledge of the origin of violence in society that I have proposed over and over has had on you. You who speak of education ought at least to notice that you cannot learn. By what means do you separate a man from his hate, once he has learned it?

All hate is self hate. There's an education for you. Stop hating yourself.

 

[kamiam]

<< dominant propagandizing voice, and should action be taken before that point? >>


if your smart enough to realise it for what it is then your smart enough to &quot;tune it out&quot;


<< free speach where Hitler can come into your house and spend the first fifteen years of your kids life teaching them the real facts of life >>


obviously hitler was a govt leader spreading his propaganda thru the govt that he controlled...even you moonbeam can see the corolation between this and govt sponsored censorship

 

[Clinotus]

um......no one has bothered to point out that our government monitors ALL hate groups, especially under the light of the recent internet expansions. You can rest assured that all activty to the site is being monitored (good/bad???). This is really not an issue. Information sharing between governments ensures that anyone utiliing a French portal to access the site has been added to some list some where.

 

[Amused]

<< How about free speach where Hitler can come into your house and spend the first fifteen years of your kids life teaching them the real facts of life? >>



Um, you don't have to let anyone into yoyr house, Moonie. You can turn off the TV, not go to the Hate site, Etc...



<< Money is free speach according to the Supreme Coup. How about buying up all the air time to sell through violence? Oh scratch that one; it's already happened. >>



Again, you aren't forced to watch TV.



<< Is there any point where hate can become such a din that it begins to become the dominant propagandizing voice, and should action be taken before that point? If you think that education rather than supression is the answer, ask yourself what effect the knowledge of the origin of violence in society that I have proposed over and over has had on you. You who speak of education ought at least to notice that you cannot learn. By what means do you separate a man from his hate, once he has learned it?

All hate is self hate. There's an education for you. Stop hating yourself. >>



Action should be taken when speech becomes action... and not one second before that.

You know, it's funny... The hard core liberals here are not liberals at all, but nanny-state fascists. Man, it's scary.

 

[kamiam]

AmusedOne


<< You know, it's funny... The hard core liberals here are not liberals at all, but nanny-state fascists. Man, it's scary. >>


once again you have &quot;hit the nail on the head&quot; and put some perspective here...my hats off to you

 

[67gt500]

I am proud of the french. I don't blame them. Its about time someone say enough is enough. No one needs to read or hear Racist material. And I hope they win. Go French, GO!

This is for both Etech and Classy although not entirely at one or the other..

There is, or was, a group called NAMBLA. short for the men boy love association they were a group of gay men across american that shared a love for a common thing.. young boys. they had a website called www.nambla.org. After MUCH controversy it was taken down.

Now there is profound evidence which shows that members of this group formed organizations overseas and were involved at boys shelters in third world countries. They are currently being sued by someone's parents who claim their son was victimized by a man who this group trained. Sadly the aclu has chosen to defend them.

Now in light of what I have just said, do you find this sort of thing to be acceptable online? Apparently from sources given to O'reilly this group taught members how to seduce young boys, how to get away with these sort of things, etc. Should we allow this sort of BS online?

I can't say yes or no. Once you limit someone's freedoms you open the door to limit everyone's freedoms. Perhaps this is why the ACLU chooses to defend NAMBLA.

 

[67gt500]

You know, it's funny... The hard core liberals here are not liberals at all, but nanny-state fascists. Man, it's scary.

Yeah it doesn't make a lot of sense. If classy were to be consistent he would be opposed to this. One can only assume that they read the title, assume it means something bad about the US, and go with it.

 

[Moonbeam]

kamian, &quot;if your smart enough to realise it for what it is then your smart enough to &quot;tune it out&quot; What an amazing statement. I would have thought that if we were wmart enough to know the differece, we would have every right in the world to censor. It is because we don't know the difference, ie that we censor that which we don't like, that we must have laws that protect free speach.

&quot;obviously hitler was a govt leader spreading his propaganda thru the govt that he controlled...even you moonbeam can see the corolation between this and govt sponsored censorship&quot; I don't understand what you are trying to say. Could you say that in a different way.

Amused, you seem to be from Mars. I cannot insulate myself from the influence of my culture nor prevent it from brainwashing me as a child, because what I absorbed then happened before I began to notice that I was being manipulated. Having looked at myself, I cannot conclude whith the same fantasy that I am an individual island and ruler of my destiny that you seem to. I'm not forced to let hitler in my house or watch tv. Get real. You seem not to be aware that the stuff you mouth is an idiology, a propogandized mumbo jumbo that you've bought hook line and sinker.

&quot;Action should be taken when speech becomes action... and not one second before that.&quot; The problem with that is that you think you understand what you are talking about. Hate speach, in and of itself, can be an action the moment it is spoken. It is a toxin that infects. It infects those who are not otherwise prepared to resist it's infection. We require school children to get inocculated against disease for the common good. Where was there a similar protection for WW11 era Germans. With the deaths of 50 million people a little nearer in mind, Europeans haven't such a NICE idea of free speach as we do.

You seem to assume that I'm for censor ship because I posed some challenging questions, which, by the way, didn't get answered. I am really only interested in the logistical conflict that an absolutist point of view like yours imply. Yours is, after all, every bit as fascistic in its absolutism, as my unanswered questions point out.

The point is, as kamian suspected. We can have the internal judgement to know the difference between hate speach and other forms of speech, and ought, therefore, to be able to intelligently censor, recognizing the danger that that speech poses to minds not as elitist, or as yet mature as our own. The question is, 'do those with the faculty for discrimination have a duty or an obligation to act to protect others from a, to them, unsean danger. I have tried to point out to you, Amused, that your hans off notion is naive, that those who know act regardless of the ideal absolutes you spout, because not to do so would be to fail to love.

Bottom line, then, is that this debate over censorship can only be resolved on another dimension than logical debate. Both the problem and the need for a solution disolve in the presence of love.

 

[67gt500]

I don't like some liberals messages, should they be banned?

..while I'm convinced some liberalism has done the US some good over the years, times have changed, there is no purpose for a civil rights movement. Liberalism has lost its place in america.

Many liberals on this board would like to ban conservatives that speak out.

If you've paid any attention over the last few days to some of my threads I've started.. I've been called probably 50 different names.. or insulted in 200 different ways, or called a troll 500 different times.. just for stating my opinions on things.

The left is just hypocritical. I'd be embarassed to be part of it. I'm not fond of the GOP, but I'd certainly align myself with their party far before that of the Democratic party. At least they don't consider the U.S. to be its own worst enemy.

 

[Moonbeam]

I agree, now that we have achieved perfection (read 'I'm comfortable') we don't need any more progress or liberalism.

&quot;We have met the enemy and they are us&quot;

 

[kamiam]

moonbeam
to take you at your word then we should &quot;protect&quot; those who are unable to understand... and to a point I agree...those who &quot;don't understand&quot; and need &quot;protecting&quot; should be strictly limited to YOUR OWN CHILDREN it is YOUR responsibility and SOLEY your responsibility... only YOU should censure what your child see's or hears,no one else...and then when they have matured it is up to them and NO ONE ELSE as to what they hear or watch or think

 

[67gt500]

What I don't get about this entire fiasco is that you don't have to go to these websites.

It isn't like channel surfing when you can accidentally run across some barely fuzzed out porno.. You have to make a fervent effort to reach one of these sites.. and it isn't like typing 'barney' at google.com brings up listings for hate sites... search engines are fairly regulated and functional these days..

So what is the point? What purpose does this serve? I suppose they think that banning it will make it go away? Make the racist feelings that a small percentage of the french have go away? No. Be realistic please. Banning it will only add more fuel to the fire.

Regardless, not much positive can come from this. It is important as a society to understand the hate mentality so that we can eventually overcome it.. not ignore it and ban it and hope that it goes away. Because it won't. Not that easily.

 

[pen^2]

coudlnt agree more with moonbeam. as much as i would like to post my take on the matter, moonbeam has aleady expounded all the things i wanted to point out. you bastard

however, i must admit 67gt500 has a very valid point indeed.

is complete freedom of speech on the internet a necessary evil?

 

[Moonbeam]

Well with a name like BrotherMan, I should hope so.

Which reminds me kamian, we are all God's children. I won't spell that out for you. It takes a village.

What was Jesus' problem with the moneychangers anyway. Live and let live I always say.

 

[kamiam]

moonbeam

<< The question is, 'do those with the faculty for discrimination have a duty or an obligation to act to protect others from a, to them, unsean danger. I >>


unfortunately human nature being what it is, this kind of power gets abused by people that (right or wrong) just disagree with what they are seeing/ listening to
necessitating the need for this type of freedom free from censureship

 

[Moonbeam]

kamian, and thereby denying those with real vision and good intention the power to act. The French, it seems, have simply come down on a different, the other, side of the equation.

It's a grey issue, not black and white, as Amused, and yourself seem to me to imply.

 

[Amused]

<< Amused, you seem to be from Mars. I cannot insulate myself from the influence of my culture nor prevent it from brainwashing me as a child, because what I absorbed then happened before I began to notice that I was being manipulated. Having looked at myself, I cannot conclude whith the same fantasy that I am an individual island and ruler of my destiny that you seem to. I'm not forced to let hitler in my house or watch tv. Get real. You seem not to be aware that the stuff you mouth is an idiology, a propogandized mumbo jumbo that you've bought hook line and sinker. >>



Oh, Moonie...

I'm not the one espousing conytrol over everyone by elitists like yourself. Moonie, you're the follower, not me. My opinions are formed after seeing every side of the issue, including your elitist one.

And your opinion is no less an ideology than my own. Pot, meet Kettle. Kettle, Pot.

You're a micro-manageing elitist with no trust in your fellow man, save for a few elitists such as yourself. You spew the same failed Marxist theories and ideals that dozens of failed communist leaders have.



<< &quot;Action should be taken when speech becomes action... and not one second before that.&quot; The problem with that is that you think you understand what you are talking about. Hate speach, in and of itself, can be an action the moment it is spoken. It is a toxin that infects. It infects those who are not otherwise prepared to resist it's infection. We require school children to get inocculated against disease for the common good. Where was there a similar protection for WW11 era Germans. With the deaths of 50 million people a little nearer in mind, Europeans haven't such a NICE idea of free speach as we do.

You seem to assume that I'm for censor ship because I posed some challenging questions, which, by the way, didn't get answered. I am really only interested in the logistical conflict that an absolutist point of view like yours imply. Yours is, after all, every bit as fascistic in its absolutism, as my unanswered questions point out.

The point is, as kamian suspected. We can have the internal judgement to know the difference between hate speach and other forms of speech, and ought, therefore, to be able to intelligently censor, recognizing the danger that that speech poses to minds not as elitist, or as yet mature as our own. The question is, 'do those with the faculty for discrimination have a duty or an obligation to act to protect others from a, to them, unsean danger. I have tried to point out to you, Amused, that your hans off notion is naive, that those who know act regardless of the ideal absolutes you spout, because not to do so would be to fail to love.

Bottom line, then, is that this debate over censorship can only be resolved on another dimension than logical debate. Both the problem and the need for a solution disolve in the presence of love. >>



Oh BS, Moonie. WHO decides what speech should be censored?? Elitist fascists like yourself? No thanks. WHO decides who should be controlled?? Elitists like yourself?? No thanks.

You seek to limit people, before they've even had a chance to enjoy their freedom and prove their ability to handle it. I seek to limit people only when they've proven they cannot.

Tell me, Moonie, who's the elitist fascist follower here?

And to answer your question about my absolutism when it comes to rights and freedom. It MUST be this way, because the alternative is corrupt governments and fascist elitists like yourself determining who gets to be free, and who doesn't. Your fantasy society cannot exist, because man is far from incorruptibility, and therefore should never have that much power over his fellow man.

BTW, I've never seen someone spin something using so many words, to say so little.

 

[Amused]

<< kamian, and thereby denying those with real vision and good intention the power to act. The French, it seems, have simply come down on a different, the other, side of the equation.

It's a grey issue, not black and white, as Amused, and yourself seem to me to imply. >>



When it comes to people's rights and freedoms, the issue must be black and white, or elitists like yourself will start censoring anything you deem &quot;harmful.&quot;

 

[kamiam]

<< thereby denying those with real vision and good intention the power to act >>

there were those that said this same thing about hitler...its much better to let the individual make their own decision as to what they watch and hear... not someone who &quot;thinks&quot; that they know whats good for them...your thinking is flawed moonbeam

 

[kamiam]

moonbeam

<< those with real vision and good intention >>


if they have this real vision and good intention then they can influence other people with their words not their acts of censureship
whats wrong moonie the kitchen got too hot so you had to leave??? noticed you logged out

 

[Amused]

<< thereby denying those with real vision and good intention the power to act >>



And I gotta ask... who decides who has the power to limit people's freedoms, though they've committed no crime, and harmed no one else, but only because you fear they will???

Who decides who are the ones with &quot;real vision and good intentions?&quot; Oh, wait, those are the elitists such as yourself.

If you've ever uttered an elitist line, this has to take the cake.