Sunday, November 12, 2006

Race Hate Laws

From Conservative Home:
I have found no Tory reaction to the BNP's latest publicity coup.
Nor I. The LibDems have condemned Labour politicians' calls for further restrictions on free speech. The Tories, to their shame, have been silent.

Update. Talking of LibDems...


Anonymous Anonymous said...

David Cameron has a strong authoritarian streak himself. Like Herr Blair, he knows better than the rest of the world what's good for it. This was manifested in the creation of the 'A' list and the removal of authority from the local associations to choose their own selection of candidates. And in his idiotic intervention in W H Smith's business practices when he reprimanded them for selling chocolate oranges at the till instead of real oranges. And he alone understands hoodies. All they need is a kiss and a cuddle.

I would not expect the Tories under this leadership to try to put the brakes on any further grotesque moves to curb ancient freedoms.

1:10 pm  
Blogger Man in a Shed said...

The Lib Dems are still capable of seeking the support of the BNP when it suits them - hat tip to Fib Dems.

2:13 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Lord Ahmed thinks it's time that the Govt. started treating muslims equally.

Note halfway down the article...states that "The area has had substantial Govt. funding in the past including £15 million etc..."

Living in the same town I can say that not one penny has been spent on my area...equality...bring it on.

4:08 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chocolate Orange Inspector - like you, I stopped believing that "Tories are the party of individual liberty" line years ago.

5:56 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Whatever possessed the Attorney-General, Lord Goldsmith, to agree to putting two activists of the British National Party on trial?

The BNP’s chairman, Nick Griffin, and another activist, Mark Collett, were accused of stirring up racial hatred. Griffin was accused of describing Islam as a ‘wicked, vicious faith’ and saying Muslims were turning Britain into a ‘ multiracial hell-hole’.

Earlier this year, a jury cleared the pair of similar charges but failed to reach verdicts on others. Last Friday, the debacle was all-too predictably repeated when Griffin and Collett were acquitted for the second time. Griffin had run rings round the prosecution by turning the proceedings into a purported trial of Islam, selecting passages from the Koran which he claimed justified terrorist attacks.

There was never any chance of a conviction, for the simple reason that such statements were an attack on a religion rather than a race. It is perfectly legitimate, after all, to say that the enforcement of extreme Islamic precepts poses a threat to the lives of millions of Asians — including, in fact, many Muslims.

It didn’t take a genius to work out that this trial was a win-win situation for the BNP. If Griffin and Collett had been convicted, they would have posed as martyrs to free speech. Their acquittal, on the other hand, has provided a tremendous boost for their repellent platform.

The Assholes in this case were the prosecution, and the political left clowns who pushed for more.

That kleptomaniac Brown, and idiotic pimp Falconer, should then jump on stage, grab the microphone and cry vengence, and threaten laws on how to control free speech, speaks volumes for their grasp of the legal situation relating to this case.

7:54 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

dont forget that it was the Tories that tried to ban rave music with their "repetitive beats" clause in the Criminal Justice Bill.

they have an authoritarian streak that just as bad as Blair's.

(where oh where are the libertarians nowadays?)

10:32 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

There is a telling contrast between the BBC's treatment of Griffin and the Taleban.

A BBC reporter goes undercover and films Griffin and his buddies at a BNP rally before informing the police.

A BBC reporter interviews members of the Taleban and allows them to present their case.

Peter Barron, editor of Newsnight believes that they have a duty as journalists to allow the enemy to put forward its case:

"Some believe it is disloyal to our armed forces to film the enemy. But if we agreed not to show them, isn't that just a small step away from censorship and pro-government propaganda?"

Yes, Peter.

In other words, the BBC feels it has a moral duty to 'shop' the BBC but not the Taleban.

11:01 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

errr. sorry Mr Baron , but British taxpayers fund your salary. You have, therefore , a duty to give support to our armed forces.

Of course this debate would not be happening if the BBC was privatised - if it were a private company , they would be free to do whatever they wanted. and i would have no objections to that - i have an objection to their taliban proganda because my tax money is funding it - on pain of ending up in court and going to prison.

they really are a bunch of tossers arent they?

2:16 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"But if we agreed not to show them, isn't that just a small step away from censorship and pro-government propaganda?"

but you decide what NOT to show every day. there is acres of evidence of that on here.

the quote above is deserving of a permanent place just above the Andrew Marr quote on this blog.

2:21 am  
Blogger AntiCitizenOne said...

Remember the BBC aren't Anti-War, they're on the other side.

The BBC is funded by a Dane-Geld. If you want your country back then STOP PAYING!

10:44 am  
Anonymous wowitems said...

I have found no Tory reaction to the BNP's latest publicity coup.Nor I. The LibDems have condemned Labour politicians' calls foGold für WOW
Gold für World of Warcraft

10:35 am  

Post a comment

<< Home