Australian Politics Forum

Australian Politics Forum
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl General Discussion >> General Board >> FREEDOM OF SPEECH.. http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1421614428 Message started by cods on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 6:53am

Title: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 6:53am

as per instructions from FD himself..

how far will you go... to keep your FREEDOM OF SPEECH..you think you have?..

would you KILL for it.. LIKE FD WOULD...

would you look down the barrel of a AK.47 like FD would???

would you keep drawing ugly cartoons at someone elses expense like FD would?..

for his version of FREEDOM OF SPEECH I will draw until DEATH.... ::)

can you walk up and down with sign claiming you will kill the PM in this country???..

can you dump a truck load of manure on the Parliamentary steps...

all expression of FREE SPEECH.. ::) ::)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Dame Pansi on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 7:05am

It seems that freediver and his cohorts are not prepared to go to the mosque and express their anger, so they're not taking freedom of speech too seriously.

They're appeasers.

How far will they go to appease the Muslim extremists?

How far are they backing away from free speech in order to save their own sorry asses?

Go to the mosque boys!!! Today.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by gizmo_2655 on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 7:11am

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 7:05am:

How many times have you visited a Synagogue or Catholic Church to express your distaste pansi??

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 7:27am

gizmo_2655 wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 7:11am:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 7:05am:

How many times have you visited a Synagogue or Catholic Church to express your distaste pansi??

what distaste is that gizmo...

I for one am very much against all this cartoon crap that is neither funny nor helpful...doesnt do any good just makes someone I presume rich at someone elses expense..I find that pretty sad... just quietly

and if its called FREEDOM OF SPEECH even sadder.

I dont care what religion it is... its in appalling taste.

of all the cartoons shown on this forum.. can you honestly say you have had a belly laugh out of one of them?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Greens_Win on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 7:28am

Do we have a right for freedom of speech?
We don't have a bill of rights.

I'm all for a bill of rights so to guarantee.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 7:30am

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 7:05am:

you are missing the point pansi...

FREEDOM OF SPEECH isnt about DOING its about having....

if it was in danger [ meaning FofS] the boys should go to France or Belgium...where a lot of people are now living in fear because of their version of F of S..

and help put their minds at ease....fight the good fight on the beaches as they say.. ::) ::) ::) ::) not from the lounge room couch.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 7:31am

____ wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 7:28am:

Do we have a right for freedom of speech?
We don't have a bill of rights.

I'm all for a bill of rights so to guarantee.

\

this is about FREEDOM OF SPEECH.. as per FDs instructions you want to talk about something else make your own thread please..

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by gizmo_2655 on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 7:33am

cods wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 7:27am:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 7:11am:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 7:05am:

How many times have you visited a Synagogue or Catholic Church to express your distaste pansi??

Pansi's distaste for Israel(Jews) over defending themselves against the extremists in Gaza and the Catholic Church over the child molesting thing.

Although, I think fronting a place of worship to hassle the congregation might cross the line between Freedom of Expression (which is the Common Law right that Australia uses) into the realms of hate speech.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Greens_Win on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 7:33am

cods wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 7:31am:

____ wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 7:28am:

Do we have a right for freedom of speech?
We don't have a bill of rights.

I'm all for a bill of rights so to guarantee.

\

this is about FREEDOM OF SPEECH.. as per FDs instructions you want to talk about something else make your own thread please..

So your trying to impede my FOS !

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Dame Pansi on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 7:46am

gizmo_2655 wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 7:11am:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 7:05am:

How many times have you visited a Synagogue or Catholic Church to express your distaste pansi??

We don't have a synagogue here, but I told the Baptist pastor it was a load of croc and I wasn't happy that he didn't lead his parishioners in the path of Jesus. I told him he was hypocritical and sinful in telling his parishioners to re mortgage their homes so he could build a bigger church for God, of course for God.

I wrote to the Catholic Church and told them to be honest about the pedo ring they were protecting.

When the Mormons or JW's come to my door I ask them if they think perhaps they have been brainwashed. I am always polite in my criticism, it's the only way.

Besides, I have no real fight with religion I just like to have petty stabs from time to time, but I would never agree to publishing really insulting cartoons of any god, that goes below the belt in my opinion.

It's one thing to make fun of religions, quite another to be totally offensive.

It's your fight with Islam, not mine.

Carry on.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 7:48am

gizmo_2655 wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 7:33am:

cods wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 7:27am:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 7:11am:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 7:05am:

How many times have you visited a Synagogue or Catholic Church to express your distaste pansi??

come on gizmo....dont deflect... we are talking about a group who threatened to kill....,.. the Church has been more than taken to task over its cover ups.. it is being dealt with..

as for Gaza to me its six of one half a dozen of the other....if she was going to confront the Jews.. she needs to confront the Arabs as well...

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 7:49am

____ wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 7:33am:

cods wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 7:31am:

____ wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 7:28am:

Do we have a right for freedom of speech?
We don't have a bill of rights.

I'm all for a bill of rights so to guarantee.

\

this is about FREEDOM OF SPEECH.. as per FDs instructions you want to talk about something else make your own thread please..

So your trying to impede my FOS !

absolutely not... make your own thread on Bill of Rights...how is that impeding your rights??

I am doing what FD said to do.. go read him green....

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Resolute on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 7:57am

And yet again the appeasers are happy to invoke their right to freedom of speech, and of course their support for murders, whilst remaining comfortable and safe in their own opinionated little world.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 8:01am

Resolute wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 7:57am:

And yet again the appeasers are happy to invoke their right to freedom of speech, and of course their support for murders, whilst remaining comfortable and safe in their own opinionated little world.

and we dont want socks on this thread if you dont mind...its called I draw a line FREEDOM OF SPEECH..

what support are your referring to in particular???>..

not the bit where we prefer 17 people hadnt been sacrificed for a cartoon.....?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by gizmo_2655 on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 8:04am

cods wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 8:01am:

Resolute wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 7:57am:

And yet again the appeasers are happy to invoke their right to freedom of speech, and of course their support for murders, whilst remaining comfortable and safe in their own opinionated little world.

No cods, not 'sacrificed for a cartoon'...MURDERED because of a cartoon.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Resolute on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 8:06am

Well old girl, I don't give a stuff what "we" want.

When were "we" appointed 'Commander In Chief"?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 8:26am

gizmo_2655 wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 8:04am:

cods wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 8:01am:

Resolute wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 7:57am:

And yet again the appeasers are happy to invoke their right to freedom of speech, and of course their support for murders, whilst remaining comfortable and safe in their own opinionated little world.

No cods, not 'sacrificed for a cartoon'...MURDERED because of a cartoon.

does it make any difference.. they are dead....because of a cartoon...

the owner did have a choice..when someone kills another person it is usually murder....

if someone is given a choice..regarding living or dying..

then its sacrifice...the owner sacrificed his staff....to the would be murderers...

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 8:26am

Resolute wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 8:06am:

Well old girl, I don't give a stuff what "we" want.

When were "we" appointed 'Commander In Chief"?

ask fd he makes the rules..

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by nasus on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 9:07am

Not sure what this FREEDOM of speech is that this topic cover. Or freedom of expression.
The right to free speech was lost years ago and I cannot see any return to what we lost anytime soon.
However n our society there are some who are allowed more freedom of speech and expression that others.

If a person is to the far right and wants to protest about immigration being to lax etc, they want a peaceful protest to have their voices heard, Stiff, it won't happen in our free country.
If on the other hand you belong to the far left, are muslim, or some other green cause or just weird, you are allowed a great deal more tolerance and get less hassle than others.
Unions can pretty well close down the city, they are united, crap.

What is disappointing is even telling a joke that offends someone is no longer allowed, no more Irish jokes, sad.
No more great cartoons no more anything, and it's going to get worse before it might get better. >:(

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by longweekend58 on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 9:24am

What some of you dimwits don't seem to understand is that events have made the reprints of these cartoons absolutely inevitable. There is no choice in the matter. The terrorist attack has made the issue of freedom of speech the singular and paramount one. And there was only one option and ever only one.

PUSH BACK. PRINT THE CARTOONS. yes, they are offensive and probably unnecessary. But freedom of speech doesn't only protect nice speech. These truly dimwitted terrorists attacked something we simply cannot ignore and cannot acquiesce to - our right to speak.

If we went back in our holes and decided not to offend them then we automatically lose the entire war, not just a battle. Islamic Terrorism isn't about cartoons. It is about our entire way of life and the intrinsic freedoms we have and the right to express them. We either defend our way of life or not. Occasionally a lightening rod for issues like this appear and this terrorist attack is such a one.

If I could, I would buy a copy of this magazine, not because I particularly want to but to make a statement to terrorists that the more they seek to attack our way of life the more we will defend it.

It is one of those rare moments in time where we have the power to tell the Islamic world that we will not be told what we can and cannot do.

You cods, do not see it as you cower at home.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by longweekend58 on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 9:26am

cods wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 8:26am:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 8:04am:

cods wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 8:01am:

Resolute wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 7:57am:

And yet again the appeasers are happy to invoke their right to freedom of speech, and of course their support for murders, whilst remaining comfortable and safe in their own opinionated little world.

No cods, not 'sacrificed for a cartoon'...MURDERED because of a cartoon.

now you have gone from being silly to quite stupid.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by nasus on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 9:43am

As someone else wrote above, fight back. That is easier said than done, if we fight back and print or draw racist or anti religious depictions, you go directly to jail, do not pass go. The MEDIA will also not report that a person is advocating for freedom of speech and if (we) cant tell our side of the story or argument then no one will hear::::
We will rot in jail, incommunicado, no PRESS, in a dark place.
So, it is a lost cause because without media coverage any event (did not happen).
NOTE the media is all powerful, groups who the media agree with, or sympathise with get heaps of free publicity.
IF a cause, say more freedom to own firearms by the public, this would be a lost cause, BECAUSE the media will give a slanted version, or no coverage.
THIS fight for freedom of speech should have been fought when the changes to our laws was being debated. The Liberal government recently was again defeated in making amendments to the laws of speech, LOST, why? Greens and Labour opposed the sections in question.
Jumping up and down and getting angry changes nothing, being in jail for some cartoon drawn or slur to some religious of ethnic group, will not change the law, a person needs to be free to make changes, and needs the total support of the government of the day and the MEDIA. :-?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Quantum on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 9:44am

Cods is a spineless coward. The reason she is a coward is because she has made it very clear that making fun of Christians/buhudist/Hindus/etc is fair game because they won't shoot you. Muslims will shoot you, so it is best not to "kick the beehive".

If she was making an argument that these kind of cartoons are hate speach and should not be permitted to be made about anyone, that in itself would raise an interesting debate about freedom of speech, but at least it would not be from being a complete wimp.

So this issue isn't really about freedom of speech. It is about how far we as a society are willing to go to appease one particular fanatical religion. In cods view, you can kick the shlt out of everyone else because they won't kill you for it, but because Muslims are dangerous don't "kick the beehive". Gutless!

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 10:38am

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 9:24am:

I am abit sick of you.. calling me names when you are a well known Paedo supporter... >:( >:(

look down on me for thinking it is totally stupid to print a cartoon that will end up KILLING people....

do you think the violence IS OVER b ecause you stand on your toilet and tell them you will stand up for FREEDOM OF CARTOON DRAWING.???

so the good people of France and Belgium now cowering in their homes wondering whos next whilst the armed forces fill the streets is nothing to worry about....we bwave people in Australia are pointing ugly fingers at each other.....we are so bwave...anyone who has a difference of opinion.. we can abuse as much as we like...

a RARE moment in time...what a joke you are....

lets see you call these extremists DIMWITTED to their faces we have a ffew in this country you wont have far to look for them.. lets see bwave longy who wouldnt dream of sitting on his couch....and telling a widow what he thinks of her.. but not telling murdering fanatics to their faces what he thinks of them

come on paedo supporter... lets see you get off your couch and do what you claim you would do.......tell em to suck it up......come on I cant wait to see this..get that camera out..lets film it... if you live you could actually make some money out of it.. ;D ;D

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 10:43am

Quantum wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 9:44am:

oops how about joining longy and you bwave boys can tell them to their face what you think of them and what you will do for FREEDOM OF SPEECH... ;D..

I dont mind you being bwave I dont really but when

all of the huffing and puffing is done behind a computer.

I kind i think what bloody wankers... ::) ::)

yep abuse cods.... easy peasy.......

go and kick the bee hive.. stupid..

come on longy has his mobile ready...I want to see this.. and I sure hope pansi does as well..

I will come back and see how its going and when you plan to put it on ozpol...

I cant wait.. I really cant..I am so excited...

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Gnads on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 10:44am

Practise what you preach Cods.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 10:49am

nasus wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 9:07am:

Not sure what this FREEDOM of speech is that this topic cover. Or freedom of expression.
The right to free speech was lost years ago

SHHHHH DONT TELL FD OR GIZMO OR QUANTUM OR LONGWEEKEND... THEY ARE FIGHTING FOR IT AND WILL RISK THEIR LIVES FOR IT..SHHHH

and I cannot see any return to what we lost anytime soon.
However n our society there are some who are allowed more freedom of speech and expression that others.

If a person is to the far right and wants to protest about immigration being to lax etc, they want a peaceful protest to have their voices heard, Stiff, it won't happen in our free country.
If on the other hand you belong to the far left, are muslim, or some other green cause or just weird, you are allowed a great deal more tolerance and get less hassle than others.
Unions can pretty well close down the city, they are united, crap.

What is disappointing is even telling a joke that offends someone is no longer allowed, no more Irish jokes, sad.
No more great cartoons no more anything, and it's going to get worse before it might get better. >:(

MATE THE IRISH DONT THREATEN TO KILL OVER THE JOKES.

SO I AM SURE YOU WILL FIND AMUSEMENT AT SOMEONE ELSES EXPENSE IS STILL AVAILABLE....

I SUGGEST YOU GO AND DIGEST WHAT THE TOPIC IS ABOUT....

IT IS ABOUT INSULTING SOMEONES BELIEFS.....ITS ABOUT BEING THREATENED WITH DEATH..

NOT HARD TO FOLLOW..THERE IS SO FAR ONLY ONE GROUP OF PEOPLE THAT THREATEN DEATH OVER THIS FORM OF DISRESPECT.....

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 10:51am

Gnads wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 10:44am:

Practise what you preach Cods.

ok... what is that.. have I threatened you with death or called you names??>.......what are you saying you really need to spell it out...

btw I am not preaching anything....at least I didnt think I was.. so please explain...oh bwave one.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Gnads on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 10:55am

No need to get rattled & start shouting ::)

Quote:
MATE THE IRISH DONT THREATEN TO KILL OVER THE JOKES.

That's the whole point Cods .... no one else does except the mad mussos.....

Quote:
go and kick the bee hive.. stupid..

The hives of angry killer bees should be eradicated for the sake of the whole honey bee industry. ;)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Quantum on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 11:09am

cods wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 10:43am:

Quantum wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 9:44am:

Still not getting it are you.

If (I know, I know, you don't do hypotheticals. But just try and stick with this for a second), if, you had argued that this kind of cartoon was not freedom of speech because it is an attack on others, you could have an argument and not be a coward. But the moment you said that these cartoons/attacks on Christians/Buddhist/Hindus/ or any other group or party was ok because they won't shoot you, but it was wrong to do it to Muslims because they will, you showed that you are a gutless wonder.

You have not argued that these kind of cartoons should not be made at all (I find them disgusting and wouldn't ever consider buying one, so it is not as if I'm protecting the papar), but you have made it clear that you are ok with these magazines being made as long as it doesn't upset Muslims because they are violent. That is cowardly! That is saying that it is ok to attack those who won't defend themselves, but be nice to those who will. Complete yellow gutlessbuggeringwonder type cowardly.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by nasus on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 11:22am

cods wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 10:49am:

nasus wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 9:07am:

Not sure what this FREEDOM of speech is that this topic cover. Or freedom of expression.
The right to free speech was lost years ago

SHHHHH DONT TELL FD OR GIZMO OR QUANTUM OR LONGWEEKEND... THEY ARE FIGHTING FOR IT AND WILL RISK THEIR LIVES FOR IT..SHHHH
and I cannot see any return to what we lost anytime soon.
However n our society there are some who are allowed more freedom of speech and expression that others.
If a person is to the far right and wants to protest about immigration being to lax etc, they want a peaceful protest to have their voices heard, Stiff, it won't happen in our free country.
If on the other hand you belong to the far left, are muslim, or some other green cause or just weird, you are allowed a great deal more tolerance and get less hassle than others.
Unions can pretty well close down the city, they are united, crap.
What is disappointing is even telling a joke that offends someone is no longer allowed, no more Irish jokes, sad.
No more great cartoons no more anything, and it's going to get worse before it might get better. >:(

MATE THE IRISH DONT THREATEN TO KILL OVER THE JOKES.
SO I AM SURE YOU WILL FIND AMUSEMENT AT SOMEONE ELSES EXPENSE IS STILL AVAILABLE....
I SUGGEST YOU GO AND DIGEST WHAT THE TOPIC IS ABOUT....
IT IS ABOUT INSULTING SOMEONES BELIEFS.....ITS ABOUT BEING THREATENED WITH DEATH..
NOT HARD TO FOLLOW..THERE IS SO FAR ONLY ONE GROUP OF PEOPLE THAT THREATEN DEATH OVER THIS FORM OF DISRESPECT.....

The Irish don't threaten to kill, you are so right, HOWEVER the laws here prohibit this, YOU WILL BE SENT TO JAIL< dark dungeons. It was never amusements at another's expense, it was FREEDOM of speech.
Not sure your line about going to digest the topic is fair, guess you can't understand sarcasm?
If you are so bold and wish to insult someone's belief, you will be in front of the courts real quick.
MANY yell abuse at TV screens and walls but are to afraid to let the world know how they feel, again the law is against you, jail time.
All I was saying FREEDOM of speech is lost in Australia, forget the death threats, (LOST) as for those who threaten death over what you may say against them, or disrespect them is a separate issue, Australian law will not allow it.
I actually don't see anyone fighting for freedom of anything, they are just putting words on this forum without making the slightest difference, their lives are safe. Be safe. :)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Svengali on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 11:45am

gizmo_2655 wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 8:04am:

cods wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 8:01am:

Resolute wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 7:57am:

And yet again the appeasers are happy to invoke their right to freedom of speech, and of course their support for murders, whilst remaining comfortable and safe in their own opinionated little world.

No cods, not 'sacrificed for a cartoon'...MURDERED because of a cartoon.

Perhaps they had a death wish?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Swagman on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 11:57am

____ wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 7:28am:

Do we have a right for freedom of speech?
We don't have a bill of rights.

I'm all for a bill of rights so to guarantee.

Gee I thought as a raving lefty fruitloop you'd be more likely to be for a Bill of Lefts? :D :D :D

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by The Grappler Hebdo (je suis) on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 12:03pm

Gnads wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 10:55am:

No need to get rattled & start shouting ::)

Quote:
MATE THE IRISH DONT THREATEN TO KILL OVER THE JOKES.

That's the whole point Cods .... no one else does except the mad mussos.....

[quote]go and kick the bee hive.. stupid..

The hives of angry killer bees should be eradicated for the sake of the whole honey bee industry. ;)

[/quote]

[smiley=tekst-toppie.gif]

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by The Grappler Hebdo (je suis) on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 12:05pm

Quantum wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 11:09am:

cods wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 10:43am:

Quantum wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 9:44am:

Enough abuse... cods is cods and is entitled to a view.. we can argue that view with reason

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by longweekend58 on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 12:06pm

cods wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 10:38am:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 9:24am:

and this is why when I was one of the few people that stood up for you, I now no longer do. You are a weirdo,

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Dame Pansi on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 12:12pm

nasus wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 9:07am:

However n our society there are some who are allowed more freedom of speech and expression that others.

If a person is to the far right and wants to protest about immigration being to lax etc, they want a peaceful protest to have their voices heard, Stiff, it won't happen in our free country.
If on the other hand you belong to the far left, are muslim, or some other green cause or just weird, you are allowed a great deal more tolerance and get less hassle than others.
Unions can pretty well close down the city, they are united, crap.

What is disappointing is even telling a joke that offends someone is no longer allowed, no more Irish jokes, sad.
No more great cartoons no more anything, and it's going to get worse before it might get better. >:(

The far right can protest as much as any other group. You guys just need Alan Jones to get you all fired up, even then it turns into a fizzer....too lazy or not passionate enough?

Who said telling jokes or printing cartoons is no longer allowed is no longer allowed?

You can print a cartoon ridiculing or offending the prophet Mohammed any time you like. Who's stopping you?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Quantum on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 12:20pm

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 12:05pm:

Quantum wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 11:09am:

cods wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 10:43am:

Quantum wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 9:44am:

Enough abuse... cods is cods and is entitled to a view.. we can argue that view with reason

Nup. I tried politeness. I tried to explain it very carefully. Got told I'm one of the "pedo protectors" and mocked as pretending to be a hero. Stuff her. She has, as she would call it, kicked the "beehive".

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Dame Pansi on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 12:36pm

Quantum wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 12:20pm:

Be nice to cods longy, that's the right thing to do.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Dame Pansi on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 12:40pm

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 12:06pm:

cods wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 10:38am:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 9:24am:

You cods, do not see it as you cower at home.

I am abit sick of you.. calling me names when you are a well known Paedo supporter... >:( >:(

come on paedo supporter... lets see you get off your couch and do what you claim you would do.......tell em to suck it up......come on I cant wait to see this..get that camera out..lets film it... if you live you could actually make some money out of it.. ;D ;D

and this is why when I was one of the few people that stood up for you, I now no longer do. You are a weirdo,

So it seems you got your socks mixed up there longy.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Quantum on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 12:43pm

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 12:36pm:

Quantum wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 12:20pm:

Be nice to cods longy, that's the right thing to do.

Stop accusing people of being someone's sock and treating them like they are that person. That is the normal sensible thing to do (hence why you will never be able to stop because you are an arrogant retard)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by gizmo_2655 on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 12:47pm

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 7:46am:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 7:11am:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 7:05am:

How many times have you visited a Synagogue or Catholic Church to express your distaste pansi??

And drawing cartoons of long dead religious figures is making fun of a religion, NOT 'being totally offensive'...

Ok the written comments about Mo marrying a 6 yr old might be offensive...but the cartoons generally weren't above the making fun level.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by gizmo_2655 on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 12:51pm

cods wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 7:48am:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 7:33am:

cods wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 7:27am:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 7:11am:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 7:05am:

How many times have you visited a Synagogue or Catholic Church to express your distaste pansi??

I'm NOT deflecting cods...it's the central point of the discussion, i.e how many people have ( in recent years) been murdered for having a go at either the Catholic/Christian churches, or at Judaism, compared to how many have been killed for doing the same to Islam????

Death 'threats' aren't really relevant, since most death threats are never carried out, and are basically 'talking tough'.

edit..and Scientology, Hindus, Buddhists, Wiccans etc as well.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by longweekend58 on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 1:04pm

Quantum wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 12:20pm:

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 12:05pm:

Quantum wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 11:09am:

cods wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 10:43am:

Quantum wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 9:44am:

Enough abuse... cods is cods and is entitled to a view.. we can argue that view with reason

same here. Cods is at her best quaint and rather silly but I defended here on numerous occasions. But after her endless pedo claims - all because I think about issues and she simply reacts (like now) - she is on her own.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by nasus on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 1:20pm

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 12:12pm:

nasus wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 9:07am:

The below quote, which we/YOU all know about, stop stirring, then speak you peace, Lol. So much for drawing cartoons that NO-ONE will publish, or words that will never see the light of day. Hence, go to the dungeon.

Government Senator Cory Bernardi yesterday called for a review of Race Discrimination Act provisions which make it illegal to "insult or offend" people on the basis of race.

Human Rights Commissioner, Tim Wilson, says publications by Charlie Hebdo "would come into contradiction with section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act and would be censored in Australia."

He says Australia's current law imposes a "fundamental violation on freedom of speech".

"The fundamental underlying problem with this law [is] that it makes it unlawful to offend or insult somebody and that needs to be removed," he says.

"We really have to decide as a society are we going to go down the path of making unlawful to offend or insult people on the basis of their race, their religion or any other attribute?" he says.

"Or are we going to do the sensible and pragmatic thing and restrict public harassment on the basis of any number of things which is a very different proposition from being merely offended or insulted?"

He has joined calls for a renewed debate on freedom of speech laws, which he says would have prevented Charlie Hebdo publishing here.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Postmodern Trendoid II on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 6:56pm

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 7:05am:

Good propaganda, Comrade. Just don't let anyone know that the conservatives have been battling Islam for over a decade. Do we "progressives" have the skills to cover this truth up? Lucky we have you as one of our main agitprop writers. This is progress.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by nasus on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 8:06pm

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 7:05am:

It seems that freediver and his cohorts are not prepared to go to the mosque and express their anger, so they're not taking freedom of speech too seriously.
They're appeasers.
How far will they go to appease the Muslim extremists?
How far are they backing away from free speech in order to save their own sorry asses?
Go to the mosque boys!!! Today.

I like the crusade you are venturing into. On what basis do you make your statement, is your crystal ball working, mine is slowing down so I can actually read what others write then respond, you appear to have that all back to front. Why would any intelligent person want to visit a mosque, what is in there except smelly feet, they don't even wear shoes.
Why do you state that others are appeasing anyone, you must know more that others, "you are all mighty".

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by stryder on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 8:41pm

Quote:

As for the west, well! they've had their hour in the sun, it's time for change, as we are now seeing. I don't really care if the west falls, it's their own fault for continuing with their colonialism and greed , they've had it coming.

Dame pansi,from the THREAD, AMERICA

That is Dame pansi mind. said it right there

Used freedon of speech to let us see what he thinks, ;D ;D ;D

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 9:13pm

Quote:

if it was in danger [ meaning FofS] the boys should go to France or Belgium...where a lot of people are now living in fear because of their version of F of S..

What other versions are there cods?

Quote:

Besides, I have no real fight with religion I just like to have petty stabs from time to time, but I would never agree to publishing really insulting cartoons of any god, that goes below the belt in my opinion
It's one thing to make fun of religions, quite another to be totally offensive.

So Pansi, writing to a Catholic church and accusing them of protecting pedophiles is OK, but a Muhammed cartoon is too offensive for you? What is the difference, other than Muslims threatening to kill you? Seems to me you are quite happy to throw out insults, but only after other people have secured your right to do so on your behalf. You have no principles at all. You do not refrain from insult on principle, but only out of fear or convenience.

Quote:

and we dont want socks on this thread if you dont mind...its called I draw a line FREEDOM OF SPEECH..

Where do you draw the line cods?

Nasus:

Quote:

The right to free speech was lost years ago

How?

Quote:

However n our society there are some who are allowed more freedom of speech and expression that others.

Who?

Quote:

If a person is to the far right and wants to protest about immigration being to lax etc, they want a peaceful protest to have their voices heard, Stiff, it won't happen in our free country.
If on the other hand you belong to the far left, are muslim, or some other green cause or just weird, you are allowed a great deal more tolerance and get less hassle than others.
What is disappointing is even telling a joke that offends someone is no longer allowed, no more Irish jokes, sad.

Sounds like your little fantasy to me.

Quote:

As someone else wrote above, fight back. That is easier said than done, if we fight back and print or draw racist or anti religious depictions, you go directly to jail, do not pass go.

What planet are you on?

Quote:

look down on me for thinking it is totally stupid to print a cartoon that will end up KILLING people....

Cods, if you incessantly post stupid crap, it is inevitable that this will happen.

Quote:

do you think the violence IS OVER b ecause you stand on your toilet and tell them you will stand up for FREEDOM OF CARTOON DRAWING.???

Cods do you think the violence is over because you spinelessly appease?

Quote:

so the good people of France and Belgium now cowering in their homes wondering whos next

No cods, they are out in the street exercising their freedom of speech. You are the only one cowering.

Quote:

a RARE moment in time...what a joke you are....

Cods longy is right on this one. There is a rarely such a clear-cut case of oppression vs freedom, and it is truly saddening how many people are so eager to choose oppression.

Quote:

lets see you call these extremists DIMWITTED to their faces we have a ffew in this country you wont have far to look for them.. lets see bwave longy who wouldnt dream of sitting on his couch....and telling a widow what he thinks of her.. but not telling murdering fanatics to their faces what he thinks of them

Sounds like Pansi giving the Church a piece of her mind but cowering from the Muslims.

Quote:

I dont mind you being bwave I dont really but when
all of the huffing and puffing is done behind a computer.

You are right that it doesn't take much guts to do this anonymously, so why are you and pansi cowering from behind a computer? There is no chance this will affect you, but you are already running scared.

Quote:

IT IS ABOUT INSULTING SOMEONES BELIEFS.....ITS ABOUT BEING THREATENED WITH DEATH..

It is about cods cheering on the terrorists who are doing the threatening. It is about pansi and cods trying to pass off their spineless appeasement as a principled stance against insulting people.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by stryder on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 9:37pm

I think Cods is getting impressed with the radical strain of Islam, and is getting shaken up by those radical elements through the media reports to respond here as an unashamed coward, with a shade of the stockholm syndrome, given how she will bend and accomodate ISLAMO BULLIES

one of the saddest things ive seen here on ozpolitics, :(

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by gizmo_2655 on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 9:42pm

Svengali wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 11:45am:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 8:04am:

cods wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 8:01am:

Resolute wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 7:57am:

And yet again the appeasers are happy to invoke their right to freedom of speech, and of course their support for murders, whilst remaining comfortable and safe in their own opinionated little world.

No cods, not 'sacrificed for a cartoon'...MURDERED because of a cartoon.

Perhaps they had a death wish?

Or perhaps they wanted to express themselves..under French Law??

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 9:53pm

cods wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 6:38am:

Islam do not like their messiah being ridiculed....
why that has anything to do with freedom of speech also escapes me.

Could someone with a lot of patience please volunteer to explain this to cods, seeing as she went to the trouble of starting the thread on freedom of speech (then posted this in another thread).

While we are at it, here is another mind-numbingly stupid comment from cods about freedom of speech:

cods wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 10:26am:

Julius Abbott wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 10:00am:

Quote:

Fox News and Andrew Bolt owned by the same man - Murdoch.

Fox News apologises for terror pundit’s ‘Birmingham totally Muslim’ comments

is that going against his FREEDOM OF SPEECH rights do you think?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Amadd on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 11:55pm

I cans see Cod's point that it's not very nice to offend somebody's religion, however, to say things like "they had it coming" is rather ridiculous and a real kick in the nuts to all those who have fought and died for the freedoms that we are trying to hold onto today.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 7:51am

Cods thinks freedom of speech is something that is handed to you on a platter. No-one ever died for it. It is free, so you can discard it whenever you want. Then one day when you finally realise you want to say something that might offend someone, you ask nicely and they give it back.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by nasus on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 8:35am

freediver wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 9:13pm:

Quote:

if it was in danger [ meaning FofS]
Nasus:

[quote]The right to free speech was lost years ago

How?

[quote]However n our society there are some who are allowed more freedom of speech and expression that others.

Who?

Quote:

Sounds like your little fantasy to me.

Quote:

As someone else wrote above, fight back. That is easier said than done, if we fight back and print or draw racist or anti religious depictions, you go directly to jail, do not pass go.

What planet are you on?

ANSWER:
Which domestic laws relate to freedom of opinion and expression?

There is no Commonwealth legislation enshrining a general right to freedom of expression.

The High Court has inferred a freedom of political communication primarily from sections 7 and 24 of the Constitution. These provisions require that members of the Parliament be 'directly chosen by the people'. The High Court found that for this to be an informed choice, there must be free access to relevant political information. However, the Court has recognised that the implied freedom can be limited, or burdened, but only by laws that are reasonably appropriate and adapted to serving a legitimate end in a manner which is compatible with Australia's system of representative and responsible government. The freedom has been inferred by the court in declaring invalid Commonwealth laws that prohibited the broadcasting of political material in the lead-up to elections and obliged broadcasters to provide free advertising time to political parties during an election period. The right has also been held to allow the distribution in a public place of pamphlets alleging corruption by named police officers.

Restrictions

Some restrictions on freedom of expression exist. For example, the Criminal Code Act 1995 contains offences relating to urging by force or violence the overthrow of the Constitution or the lawful authority of the Government. The Criminal Code also contains offences relating to the use of a telecommunications carriage service in a way which is intentionally menacing, harassing or offensive, and using a carriage service to communicate content which is menacing, harassing or offensive.

Existing laws on the prohibition of advocacy of hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination

The Racial Discrimination Act 1975 makes it unlawful to do an act reasonably likely to offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate another person or group if the act is done because of the race, colour or national or ethnic origin of the person or group."

If you actually read the Act, you will get the message. We have no freedom of speech other than in general. No more jokes or cartoons that may offend based on race or religion.
In answer to your question "what planet am I on" the third one from the sun. I ask you, what rock are you hiding under, we lost our so called right to freedom of speech, such as it was years ago. Try making a religious or racial slur, go straight to jail.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 8:41am

cods wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 8:13am:

I HAVE TRIED TO CONVINCE YOU YOU STIFLE MY FREEDOM ON SPEECH ON HERE......

Cods posting idiotic comments like this would not be so bad if you did not repeat them ad nauseum while ignoring the responses you get. Freedom of speech does not entitle you to compel someone else to publish your idiocy on their website. You have failed to convince me for the same reason you fail at everything else - you are wrong and incapable of understanding why.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 9:05am

freediver wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 7:51am:

and????????????..

you are extreme you know that dont you.....you are as unstable as the terrorists...I have begged for my speech freedom on ozpol.....and you twist it into personal abuse....all I want to do is call you the M word...do I have to threaten your life along with all those that live in your home???... is that really what you are driving me to do.... all because of YOUR VERSION OF FREEDOM OF SPEECH........

btw I think your version and the fanatics version of FREEDOM OF SPEECH are on a different scale..

go kick the beehive fd see if I care.....when someone else takes over this sorry forum they can then change the the rules cant they.. :P :P

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 9:08am

freediver wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 8:41am:

cods wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 8:13am:

I HAVE TRIED TO CONVINCE YOU YOU STIFLE MY FREEDOM ON SPEECH ON HERE......

well idiotic like appeasement you mean. ;D ;D ;D

how come you think FREEDOM of SPEECH can compel a terrorist to like what he says he will kill over..... then..

how come it doesnt work for you but you expect it to work for them?...

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 9:25am

Quote:

how come you think FREEDOM of SPEECH can compel a terrorist to like

Wow, this thread really was necessary. No cods, it cannot compel this.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 1:16pm

Pansi's concept of freedom lost:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 1:03pm:

I have lost nothing because I never wanted to publish crude cartoons about Muhammed or Jesus or any other prophet.

So tell us Pansi, at what point would you consider yourself to have lost something, and at what point would you actually stand up for your rights? Never? Better to let other people do it for you?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Dr. Caligari on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 2:17pm

There never has been freedom of speech and there never will be.

Currently freedom of speech is being used as a bludgeon against Muslims with the expected consequences.

Peaceful Muslims will be attacked by insane goons in the streets because Muslims have been targeted in slanderous campaigns of public denigration.

The effect will be the creation of more hostilities.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Dame Pansi on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 2:39pm

So Pansi, writing to a Catholic church and accusing them of protecting pedophiles is OK,

Too bloody right it's ok, they have been found guilty of protecting pedophiles at the Royal Commission into child abuse. They have themselves admitted it. The Pope has admitted it.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by nasus on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 2:48pm

Dr. Caligari wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 2:17pm:

Your statement is not really correct. Some years ago I will not date it freedom of speech as exercised by everyone and sundry. I could call you any number of names, relating to your country of birth, religion, in fact nothing was off the table. The term Jap, Wog, Jew, queer and thousands more were in everyday use. In every newspaper, cartoon, and publication that targeted the "fringe element" homosexuals in the main and hence few ever came out of the closet for FEAR of being stigmatised.

Re my post number 54, currently our version of what can be said is as legislated. It has nothing to do with individual groups, least of all muslims.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Dame Pansi on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 2:50pm

freediver wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 1:16pm:

Pansi's concept of freedom lost:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 1:03pm:

I have lost nothing because I never wanted to publish crude cartoons about Muhammed or Jesus or any other prophet.

So tell us Pansi, at what point would you consider yourself to have lost something, and at what point would you actually stand up for your rights? Never? Better to let other people do it for you?

I wouldn't have a clue at this point in time, but it's certainly not some cartoon offending Muhammad. To me it would have to be a lot more important than that. Why start a war over a cartoon? Pathetic.

I stand up for my rights, but I'm not standing up for your fight against Islam, that's your baby and I'm happy to let you have it.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by bogarde73 on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 2:55pm

This is the nub of the matter Pansi:

When the Nazis (insert Islamofascists) came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.

When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.

When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.

When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I wasn't a Jew.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Dame Pansi on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 2:59pm

stryder wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 8:41pm:

Quote:

Dame pansi,from the THREAD, AMERICA

That is Dame pansi mind. said it right there

Used freedon of speech to let us see what he thinks, ;D ;D ;D

That's right stryder. In reference to economic power. Do you have any idea that America's great empire is about to fall flat on its face? Do you even know that, or more importantly do you acknowledge it? Do you know why? Because of unrestricted greed, unfettered capitalism.

Yes, they had it coming.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Dame Pansi on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 3:02pm

bogarde73 wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 2:55pm:

That's right bogey, only trouble is it's not Islam that's coming for you.

Why do you think Americans are hanging onto their weapons? not for a Muslim invasion.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by longweekend58 on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 3:23pm

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 2:39pm:

Then you will be fine when they come to your house and shoot you, your family and anyone walking past your house? Or do you grudgingly accept that some behaviour is unacceptable no matter the provocation?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by longweekend58 on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 3:24pm

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 2:50pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 1:16pm:

Pansi's concept of freedom lost:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 1:03pm:

I have lost nothing because I never wanted to publish crude cartoons about Muhammed or Jesus or any other prophet.

So tell us Pansi, at what point would you consider yourself to have lost something, and at what point would you actually stand up for your rights? Never? Better to let other people do it for you?

only accurate thing you've said in years.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by longweekend58 on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 3:25pm

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 2:59pm:

stryder wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 8:41pm:

Quote:

Dame pansi,from the THREAD, AMERICA

That is Dame pansi mind. said it right there

Used freedon of speech to let us see what he thinks, ;D ;D ;D

That might be your fervent wish (along with communism) but there is no evidence to suggest any such thing.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by nasus on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 3:57pm

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 2:59pm:

Dame pansi,from the THREAD, AMERICA
That is Dame pansi mind. said it right there
Used freedon of speech to let us see what he thinks, ;D ;D ;D[/quote]
That's right stryder. In reference to economic power. Do you have any idea that America's great empire is about to fall flat on its face? Do you even know that, or more importantly do you acknowledge it? Do you know why? Because of unrestricted greed, unfettered capitalism.

Yes, they had it coming.[/quote]

Let me enter your little argument. By the post it infers that America is about to fall. Greed and capitalism. "America's great empire is about to fall flat on its face. Actually America never had an Empire.
IF America falls it may be prudent to get some supplies into your house, a house well away from any roads or towns.
May I suggest it is in your best interest, oh! and your families that America not fall, or stumble or hick up. Yours and your families life depends on it.
The statement that you don't care, well you better care because if America does fall, what the hell do you think will happen in the first 48 hours after that. The American Dollar is critical, America owes China Upteen billions. Russia and China if America fall will be interesting to watch, think about not caring if they fall.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 3:59pm

Quote:

Pansi we already know you haven't put much thought into this. How about you think about it now? Where would you draw the line?

Quote:

I stand up for my rights

You have a right to mock Muhammed. So far all I see is you trying to get rid of it. You stand up for nothing. You don't even know if you would stand up for any right if they tried to take it off you.

Quote:

Why do you think Americans are hanging onto their weapons? not for a Muslim invasion.

Are the yanks going to invade us pansi?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Dame Pansi on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 4:24pm

Dame Pansi
Quote:
I stand up for my rights

freediver
You have a right to mock Muhammed. So far all I see is you trying to get rid of it. You stand up for nothing. You don't even know if you would stand up for any right if they tried to take it off you.

I do have a right to mock Muhammod, I am even allowed to mock Muhammod if I want to, but I don't want to. I don't even want to mock Jesus (although The Life of Brian is hilarious) or religion (except those Jews banging that little black box on their head against the wall are funny).

But all in all, I much prefer to mock Abbott, Shorty, Julie Bishop and Obama.

Of course I don't know what my reaction would be, until I know what's getting taken off me.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Dame Pansi on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 4:25pm

freediver wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 3:59pm:

Are the yanks going to invade us pansi?

I doubt it. Have you heard a rumour?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Dame Pansi on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 4:31pm

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 3:23pm:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 2:39pm:

They wouldn't know who to shoot first, there's so many people saying it.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Dame Pansi on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 4:38pm

if America does fall, what the hell do you think will happen in the first 48 hours after that.

First thing the banks close their doors.

That's why I have very little money in the bank, a small working account that I can afford to lose. Anyway pop over to "Thinking Globally" or down to "Finance and Economics" for this stuff, it's covered in more depth. I don't want the ire of Cods for hijacking her thread.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by nasus on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 5:00pm

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 4:38pm:

I do not know Cods, and I was quoting and responding to the post made by that person. There is no hijacking. IRE, we what live in fear? My sensei would be disappointed in me then.
Once the banks close there doors and the lights go out, it is then far to late. Cods will be gone in a second, followed by a period of some years when only brute force will prevail. The population will halve, and those with the most bullets will be king. After that some semblance of normality MAY follow, it's not a given.
Be living in a remote area, have many "items" don't want to call them weapons as actually anything like a biro I can use as such. Lots of ammunition and food. few will make it.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Quantum on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 5:06pm

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 4:38pm:

Little money in the bank? Do you keep most of it under the mattress on the chance the "banks close their doors"?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 5:12pm

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 4:38pm:

you wont LIKE me when I am angry......

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 5:20pm

freediver wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 9:25am:

Quote:

how come you think FREEDOM of SPEECH can compel a terrorist to like

Wow, this thread really was necessary. No cods, it cannot compel this.

every time I tead a post from you I shake my head...

how anyone can be stid stupid and put it out there for all to see I will never know..

theres me thinking rocky has WON the DILL OF THE DAY award.. and good old fd comes up with this selective tripe..

can we have a shaking the head emoji..please... just flexing my FOS

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 5:23pm

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 4:38pm:

what do you mean by FALL pansi?...if you think it will come to an END .....I am sorry but thats wishful thinking on your behalf....

but just supposing AMerica loses its extreme POWER...

and they do have a lot of POWER... and they do have FORT KNOX...

but supposing they do what then pansi.

who do you see replacing America??.... and will it be a good thing.?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by longweekend58 on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 5:29pm

cods wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 5:12pm:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 4:38pm:

you wont LIKE me when I am angry......

I don't think the qualifier is needed any more, cods.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by it_is_the_light on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 5:32pm

Quote:

and they do have a lot of POWER... and they do have FORT KNOX...

many blessings

you are living in the 30's doll face ..

fort knox is empty .. do a simple search

and get with the times lol ..

namaste

- : ) =

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by it_is_the_light on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 5:33pm

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 5:29pm:

cods wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 5:12pm:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 4:38pm:

you wont LIKE me when I am angry......

I don't think the qualifier is needed any more, cods.

quite right ,...carry on what ..,

namaste

- : ) =

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by it_is_the_light on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 5:35pm

Quantum wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 5:06pm:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 4:38pm:

Little money in the bank? Do you keep most of it under the mattress on the chance the "banks close their doors"?

http://wolfstreet.com/2015/01/18/fears-of-next-cyprus-trigger-bank-runs-in-greece/

wake up lol ...

:D :D :D :D :D

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by it_is_the_light on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 5:37pm

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/mar/26/cyprus-banks-closed-prevent-run-deposits

Cyprus banks remain closed to prevent run on deposits
Planned opening of Bank of Cyprus and Laiki delayed for at least two days to ensure the whole system functions 'smoothly'

Laiki, one of the two largest Cypriot banks, is to remain closed until Thursday at least. Photograph: Milos Bicanski/Getty Images
Josephine Moulds, Helena Smith in Nicosia, Ian Traynor in Brussels, Miriam Elder and Jill Treanor
Tuesday 26 March 2013 22.35 AEST
Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share via Email Share on LinkedIn Share on Google+
Shares
6
Comments
234
Banks in Cyprus will remain closed at least until Thursday and will then be subject to strict controls to prevent a bank run in the wake of the island's €10bn (£8.5bn) bailout.

All but the country's two biggest banks were slated to open on Tuesday, but the central bank now says all lenders will remain closed to ensure the banking system functions "smoothly". Asked whether Cyprus's banks will reopen on Thursday, Cyprus's finance minister Michalis Sarris said: "Yes, I think they will."

Speaking on Radio 4's Today Programme, Sarris said capital controls will be imposed on Cyprus "for several weeks", restricting the flow of money around the system.

The freezing of the Cypriot banking system follows an international rescue deal that involves restructuring the country's two largest lenders, with heavy losses for wealthy savers. President Nicos Anastasiades acknowledged on Monday that the country had come "a breath away from economic collapse" before its last-minute bailout.

This involved an agreement to radically restructure the country's largest lender, the Bank of Cyprus, and shut down its second largest bank, Laiki, in return for a €10bn bailout from the European Union, the European Central Bank and the IMF.

In a radical departure for a eurozone bailout, depositors in Laiki Bank could lose any savings above €100,000. Bigger savers in Bank of Cyprus will also be forced to contribute to the lender's recapitalisation. Sarris suggested on Monday they could face losses of around 40% on their assets.

After an initial rally on relief that Cyprus had secured a deal, markets took fright when the head of the group of eurozone finance ministers indicated that the rescue could be a template for similar situations.

The euro dropped 1% against the dollar on Monday and remained below $1.29 in early trade on Tuesday. Shares across the eurozone regained some of their losses. The FTSE 100 was up 0.1% and the German DAX was 0.3% higher, but Spain's IBEX was 0.4% lower in early trade.

:D :D :D :D :D :D :D

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Neferti on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 5:37pm

cods wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 5:20pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 9:25am:

Quote:

how come you think FREEDOM of SPEECH can compel a terrorist to like

Wow, this thread really was necessary. No cods, it cannot compel this.

Dill of the Day Award only goes to people who make more than 5 spelling errors in a post.

YOU WON so CONGRATULATIONS for being the "dumbest" poster this week.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by it_is_the_light on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 5:38pm

https://endgametime.wordpress.com/fort-knox-counterfiet-gold/

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Dame Pansi on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 5:42pm

cods wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 5:12pm:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 4:38pm:

you wont LIKE me when I am angry......

I was only joking cods. I see your stalker is back. did you know that Gandalf is a moderator? Calling you the dumbest poster could come under personal abuse....just saying.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 5:43pm

it_is_the_light wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 5:32pm:

Quote:

and they do have a lot of POWER... and they do have FORT KNOX...

many blessings

you are living in the 30's doll face ..

fort knox is empty .. do a simple search

and get with the times lol ..

namaste

- : ) =

you do believe America allows pics of inside dont you?..

of course they do probably do guided tours as well...

and you believe anything dont you...

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 5:47pm

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 5:42pm:

cods wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 5:12pm:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 4:38pm:

you wont LIKE me when I am angry......

I was only joking cods. I see your stalker is back. did you know that Gandalf is a moderator? Calling you the dumbest poster could come under personal abuse....just saying.

thanks pansi....I did know that.. but I look at it this way..

it depends on the stalker and how much I care what they say...

and this way also..

if they are picking on me it means they are leaving some other poor bastard alone...

if they think I am the dumbest poster then that their problem...I gather they dont understand me... ;D ;D ;D ;D

some people only come on here to abuse others...we have seen how they behave when we disagree with them... they cant stand it.. out comes all the name calling.....

bells start ringing they have lost.....and they dont like losing... ;) ;) its a fact pansi you watch.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 5:49pm

Neferti wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 5:37pm:

cods wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 5:20pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 9:25am:

Quote:

how come you think FREEDOM of SPEECH can compel a terrorist to like

Wow, this thread really was necessary. No cods, it cannot compel this.

Dill of the Day Award only goes to people who make more than 5 spelling errors in a post.

YOU WON so CONGRATULATIONS for being the "dumbest" poster this week.

gosh do you really have time to count spelling mistakes...wow...what a life you must lead.thats so sad. :(

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by longweekend58 on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 5:51pm

it_is_the_light wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 5:38pm:

https://endgametime.wordpress.com/fort-knox-counterfiet-gold/

who believes pictures of gold worth billions sitting on WOODEN PALLETS.

the pic is a rather obvious fraud.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by The Stunt-free Horse on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 5:51pm

cods wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 5:49pm:

Neferti wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 5:37pm:

cods wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 5:20pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 9:25am:

Quote:

how come you think FREEDOM of SPEECH can compel a terrorist to like

Wow, this thread really was necessary. No cods, it cannot compel this.

Dill of the Day Award only goes to people who make more than 5 spelling errors in a post.

YOU WON so CONGRATULATIONS for being the "dumbest" poster this week.

gosh do you really have time to count spelling mistakes...wow...what a life you must lead.thats so sad. :(

cods has never counted mistakes ;D ;D

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Dame Pansi on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 5:56pm

Thanks for the posts Master Light....the great American gold hoist. They got rid of Germany's gold for them too.

We are one serious stock market fall away from a bank run and that's until the queue gets too long, after that it will be $20 a day per customer, like Cyprus.

Eyes wide open. Be prepared, there's a cosmic shift coming and you don't want to be the one to fall through the crack.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 6:00pm

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 5:51pm:

it_is_the_light wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 5:38pm:

https://endgametime.wordpress.com/fort-knox-counterfiet-gold/

who believes pictures of gold worth billions sitting on WOODEN PALLETS.

the pic is a rather obvious fraud.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 6:05pm

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 5:56pm:

i wouldnt believe anything light puts up.. he goes mad only believes trash and not reality...America would n o more allow the world into fort knox...that they would into the White House bedroom...get real..

as it is pansi you didnt reply to my post.. post 80...I am curious as to how you see the word going if and when America crashes and burns..

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Quantum on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 6:12pm

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 5:56pm:

Apart from the obvious problem with the US getting rid of all of its gold, but being stupid enough to go to the trouble of making fake bars that are so light that they can be stored on wooden pallets. Ignoring that issue just for a moment, how much gold in dollars do you think should be in there?

Sure if it is all gone and fake it will be a scandal. It will be big news. There will be a massive investigation and heads will roll. But do you think there should be trillions of dollars worth of gold in there? Quadrillions even? How much in dollars do you think should be in there that the loss of it is going to cause the whole system to come down?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by stryder on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 7:00pm

I want to say, Even thoroughly i disagree with your opinion enitirely to the core, but it feels in invokes cowradice, that we should give up on freedom of sppeech, even if we make a mistake to offend, BUT DOES NOT DESERVE DEATH.

But i do undetstand what your trying to convey that there is a responsiblity when comes to using free speech.

But i dont like the idea of radiscalised with no hope of returniing to reason muslims scaring anyone to accept there barbaric ways.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 7:05pm

stryder wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 7:00pm:

huhummmmmmmmm who said IT DESERVED DEATH. to offend.... I mean...

what I have asked all along is

was printing the cartoon worth it??

if we could go back in time .. would you urge Charlie Hebdo to keep printing the cartoon..

knowing who would lose their lives....

is that cartoon really that important....and a threat to your FOS?.

so far I havent seen any more demand to our FOS from the boys....since they did what they said they would do...

kill the people printing the cartoons.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by stryder on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 7:07pm

cods wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 7:05pm:

stryder wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 7:00pm:

This is just more than a cartoon.

You see we see here that there is a right among people to tackle the question of religion and its relevance, and ISLAM IS PROVING ITSELF A HARD NUT.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 7:56pm

stryder wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 7:07pm:

cods wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 7:05pm:

stryder wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 7:00pm:

This is just more than a cartoon.

You see we see here that there is a right among people to tackle the question of religion and its relevance, and ISLAM IS PROVING ITSELF A HARD NUT.

a right ::) ::)......ok.. I will buy it.. so why havent I got the right to call fd the M word???

if I can be rude and obnoxious to a muslim.. why not fd?........and you for that matter..what is wrong with the M word?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Postmodern Trendoid II on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 8:36pm

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 2:39pm:

Good propaganda, Comrade. Blanket statements against Catholicism are acceptable in "progressives" circles but not against Islam or its denominations. This is progress.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Neferti on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 8:44pm

cods wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 7:56pm:

stryder wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 7:07pm:

cods wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 7:05pm:

stryder wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 7:00pm:

This is just more than a cartoon.

You see we see here that there is a right among people to tackle the question of religion and its relevance, and ISLAM IS PROVING ITSELF A HARD NUT.

Because you are as thick as a brick and have no clue and continue to make a fool of yourself?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by stryder on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 8:59pm

cods wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 7:56pm:

stryder wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 7:07pm:

cods wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 7:05pm:

stryder wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 7:00pm:

This is just more than a cartoon.

You see we see here that there is a right among people to tackle the question of religion and its relevance, and ISLAM IS PROVING ITSELF A HARD NUT.

I dont see your point here on this comparison between muslims and free diver ??

All im saying is there are people out there who use there freedom of speech and expression to offend christians, AND YOU AND OTHERS HAD NO PROBLEM WITH THAT BEFORE, RIGHT ???. and thats being going on for a long, long time and it was never made a fuss about it, but a few ???? muslims become offended by french mohamend cartoons and now your an advocate for there hurt feelings. ???

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Dnarever on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 9:23pm

If you were a criminal family would you name you child Speech ?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by it_is_the_light on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 9:36pm

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 5:51pm:

it_is_the_light wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 5:38pm:

https://endgametime.wordpress.com/fort-knox-counterfiet-gold/

who believes pictures of gold worth billions sitting on WOODEN PALLETS.

the pic is a rather obvious fraud.

:D :D :D :D

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by it_is_the_light on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 9:40pm

Quantum wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 6:12pm:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 5:56pm:

http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article14996.html

Gld ETF Warning, Tungsten Filled Fake Gold Bars
Commodities / Gold & Silver 2009
Nov 12, 2009 - 12:22 PM GMT
By: Rob_Kirby

1] - irregularities in the publication of the gold ETF - GLD’s bar list from Sept. 25 – Oct.14 where the length of the bar list went from 1,381 pages to under 200 pages and then back up to 800 or so pages.

2] - reports of 400 oz. “good delivery” bricks of gold found gutted and filled with tungsten within the confines of LBMA approved vaults in Hong Kong.

Why Tungsten?

If anyone were contemplating creating “fake” gold bars, tungsten [at roughly $10 per pound] would be the metal of choice since it has the exact same density as gold making a fake bar salted with tungsten indistinguishable from a solid gold bar by simply weighing it.

Unfortunately, there are now more sordid details to report.

When the news of tungsten “salted” gold bars in Hong Kong first surfaced, many people

who I am acquainted with automatically assumed that these bars were manufactured in

China – because China is generally viewed as “the knock-off capital of the world”.

Here’s what I now understand really happened:

The amount of “salted tungsten” gold bars in question was allegedly between 5,600 and 5,700 – 400 oz – good delivery bars [roughly 60 metric tonnes].

This was apparently all highly orchestrated by an extremely well financed criminal operation.

Within mere hours of this scam being identified – Chinese officials had many of the perpetrators in custody.

And here’s what the Chinese allegedly uncovered:

Roughly 15 years ago – during the Clinton Administration [think Robert Rubin, Sir Alan Greenspan and Lawrence Summers] – between 1.3 and 1.5 million 400 oz tungsten blanks were allegedly manufactured by a very high-end, sophisticated refiner in the USA [more than 16 Thousand metric tonnes]. Subsequently, 640,000 of these tungsten blanks received their gold plating and WERE shipped to Ft. Knox and remain there to this day. I know folks who have copies of the original shipping docs with dates and exact weights of “tungsten” bars shipped to Ft. Knox.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by it_is_the_light on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 9:41pm

http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/fort_knox_conundrum__208.html

The Fort Knox Conundrum: Chinese say they received bogus bars of gold traced to U.S.

rss202

By Pat Shannan

Could over 1 million bars of gold, much of which is still held in Fort Knox, Ky., be counterfeit? An October 2009 discovery that suggests this may be true has been suppressed by the mainstream media but has been circulating among the “big money” brokers and financial kingpins. It is just now being revealed to the public.

Gold is regularly exchanged between countries to pay debts and to settle the so-called balance of trade. It is often also used as a hedge against a falling currency. Gold is regularly traded and stored in vaults under the strict supervision of a special organization based in London, known as the London Bullion Market Association (LBMA). That’s why news of counterfeit gold bars was a surprise to many experts.

In October 2009, China reportedly received a large shipment of gold, containing some 6,000 bars, weighing 400 ounces each. When it was received, the Chinese government asked that tests be performed to guarantee the purity and weight of the gold bars. In this test, four small holes were drilled into the bars, and the metal was analyzed. Officials were shocked to find the bars were bogus. They contained cores of tungsten, with only an outer coating of real gold. What’s more, these gold bars, containing serial numbers for tracking, originated in the United States and had reportedly been stored in Fort Knox for years.

banner_newsletter

According to gold expert Theo Gray, there are very few metals that are as dense as gold. With only two exceptions, they all cost as much or more than gold. The standard gold bar for bank-to-bank trade, known as a “London good delivery bar,” weighs 400 troy ounces (more than 33 pounds), yet is no bigger than a paperback novel. To put it in perspective, a bar of steel the same size weighs only 13.5 pounds.

This was the problem that the Ethiopians had in early 2008 when they tried to dump millions of dollars in fake gold into South African banks. What were supposed to be bars of solid gold turned out to be nothing more than gold-plated steel. The South Africans quickly figured this out and sent the shipment back—apparently discovering the hoax with only minimal investigation.

The first exception to the weight of gold is depleted uranium (DU). This material is dirt cheap if you’re a government, but is hard for individuals to get. It’s also radioactive, which makes the handling of it impractical.

Interestingly enough, before DU was widely used as a U.S. weapons component to make shells more able to penetrate hardened targets, tungsten was used for that purpose.

But tungsten is vastly cheaper than gold—maybe $30 dollars a pound, compared to $1,200 an ounce for gold right now. It has exactly the same density as gold, to three decimal places. Therefore, it has to be drilled to detect the fraud. The only differences are that it’s the wrong color, and that it’s much harder than gold. Pure gold is soft and can be dented with a fingernail.

At first, many gold experts speculated that the fake gold must have originated in China, which is considered the world’s best knock-off producers. However, the Chinese government investigated and issued a statement pointing a finger squarely at the United States.

The Chinese claim that in 1995—during the Clinton administration (Robert Rubin, Alan Greenspan and Lawrence Summers)—between 1.3 million and 1.5 million 400-ounce tungsten blanks were manufactured by a sophisticated refiner in the United States, amounting to more than 16,000 metric tons. Some 640,000 of these tungsten blanks were then gold plated and shipped to Fort Knox, according to the Chinese, where they are said to remain to this day. The Chinese contend that the remaining collection of these 400-ounce fakes was eventually gold-plated and then “sold” into international markets.

The global market is literally “stuffed full of 400 ounce salted bars,” said one unnamed expert. “It’s enough to destroy the world markets.”

http://www.wealthdaily.com/articles/fake-gold-in-manhattan/3680

Fake Gold in Manhattan
Gold-Coated Tungsten Bars Still Showing Up

like +32 (-6) dislike Comments (3)
By Christian DeHaemer
Thursday, September 20th, 2012

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by it_is_the_light on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 9:44pm

well it seems many are clueless ...

no surprises there amongst the usual suspects

http://www.silverbearcafe.com/private/03.10/phonygold.html

Germany Latest Victim of Phony Gold Bar Scam
Pat Shannan

Amid international accusations that U.S. officials in the Clinton administration replaced gold in Fort Knox with phony, mostly tungsten bars that were later shipped to China and other places yet unknown, a German refinery has now discovered that it has received a bogus “gold” bar as well.

The video proof was shown on the German television station ProSieben that ran the news story covering W.C. Heraeus in Hanau, Germany, the world’s largest privately owned refinery.

In the story, Wilfried Horner, head of the gold foundry, shows a 500-gram bar (16.0755 troy ounces) received from an unidentified bank. The bar had the right physical dimensions to be an authentic gold bar, but one of the Heraeus employees suspected something.

After the bar was cut in half, the TV audience could plainly see that the dark insides were tungsten, with only a coating of gold on the outside.

While the story never aired on American TV, it is available on the Internet.

Last fall, Rob Kirby of Kirby Analytics in Toronto reported that China’s central bank had discovered nearly 6,000 400-ounce gold-plated tungsten bars among those it had recently received from bonded warehouses.

It was later learned that at least four counterfeit bars at other locations were found and that all had come from sources within the United States, including Fort Knox, according to the Chinese investigators.

As suspicions grow about counterfeit bars among those held in bonded warehouses for delivery against either COMEX or London Bullion Market Association contracts or shares of exchange-traded funds, investors could panic. It is believed this could be the reason for the blackout on news coverage in the United States on this story except for AFP.

Several metals have similar densities to gold. However, using these metals to produce fake gold is unprofitable due to their high cost. There are two metals that are suitable, from both a density and economic perspective, for manufacturing fake gold - uranium and tungsten.

These metals aren’t without their negatives. Uranium can be radioactive. Tungsten is extremely brittle - the exact opposite of gold. Additionally, tungsten has the highest known melting point of any non-alloyed metal at 3,422 degrees Celsius (6,192 F),making it difficult to work with. However, it appears that at least one high-temperature furnace is producing gilded tungsten products.

Gilded steel is a unconvincing form of fake gold. A steel bar identical in size to the standard 400-troy ounce gold bars commonly used in bank-to-bank trades would weigh only 162.5 troy ounces (about 60 percent lighter) and would be easily identifiable as counterfeit.

Gold’s unmistakable density, along with its scarcity, durability, and other qualities, made it attractive to be used as money for our nation’s founders, and its theft through Federal Reserve fakery over the past century has provoked these current problems of “banker control” via paper notes and credit over what was designed to be the actual money.

Thus far, the commodity exchanges have disclaimed any responsibility for the purity of the gold bars they are delivering against contracts. However, as stories of gold-plated tungsten bars in bonded warehouses continue to appear, brokers say we can expect the commodity exchanges to be forced - not legally, but to meet competition - to modify their business practices to provide a guaranty of purity for any bars they deliver.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Dnarever on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 9:47pm

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 5:51pm:

it_is_the_light wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 5:38pm:

https://endgametime.wordpress.com/fort-knox-counterfiet-gold/

who believes pictures of gold worth billions sitting on WOODEN PALLETS.

the pic is a rather obvious fraud.

In the movies they always put the gold behind bars so that it can not escape.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 9:55pm

stryder wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 8:59pm:

cods wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 7:56pm:

stryder wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 7:07pm:

cods wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 7:05pm:

stryder wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 7:00pm:

This is just more than a cartoon.

You see we see here that there is a right among people to tackle the question of religion and its relevance, and ISLAM IS PROVING ITSELF A HARD NUT.

I dont see your point here on this comparison between muslims and free diver ??

freediver has his own version of FREEDOM OF SPEECH have you tried calling or anyone else the M word??..

it wont happen up comes nice person instead.. its his version of FREE SPEECH..

its the same if you walked into a class room and threated the teacher you will see them in court if they dare send homework home again....you are not allowed to threaten even if it is FREEDOM OF SPEECH..

All im saying is there are people out there who use there freedom of speech and expression to offend christians, AND YOU AND OTHERS HAD NO PROBLEM WITH THAT BEFORE, RIGHT ???. and thats being going on for a long, long time and it was never made a fuss about it, but a few ???? muslims become offended by french mohamend cartoons and now your an advocate for there hurt feelings. ???

it has been going on for a LONG time...

and guess what...

this is the first time anyone has threatened to KILL over it?...

I am not advocating anything...why is that so hard....

I am just saying.. dont print the offending cartoons....because to day in 2015 we are dealing with certain people who IF THEY SAY THEY WILL KILL YOU>>> THEN THEY WILL..

c harlie said up you terrorists.. see if I care if you kill me and my staff,......

and you are saying he did the right thing... FOR FOS??..

I dont agree .. I prefer life rather than death..

all I am advocating for is no one dying for a cartoon..

if you are going to die by AK47 at least let it be worth while and at the very least arm your staff so they have an equal chance.....

is that really that hard to comprehend..

Christians and Jews and Catholics to my knowledge have never threatened to KILL over the c artoons.. although Pope Frances has said it isnt nice to mock peoples beliefs....its rather cowardly and spiteful I find..

but some find it amusing.....

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 9:58pm

Neferti wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 8:44pm:

cods wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 7:56pm:

stryder wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 7:07pm:

cods wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 7:05pm:

stryder wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 7:00pm:

This is just more than a cartoon.

You see we see here that there is a right among people to tackle the question of religion and its relevance, and ISLAM IS PROVING ITSELF A HARD NUT.

Because you are as thick as a brick and have no clue and continue to make a fool of yourself?

oh look its my very own pet stalker... with all her witty remarks...you must have used them all by now surely.??..even a wharfie like yourself must run out of cute comments after a while..

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:00pm

I did tell nef where I was hiding... I didnt expect her to find the way without the map....

so sorry to all those who are wondering what the hell she is all about...shes an escapee from PA...and there isnt anyone to abuse over there anymore so shes invited herself here.. and its my turn for the abuse..

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by it_is_the_light on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:08pm

cods wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:00pm:

many blessings

you are very popular ..

namaste

- : ) =

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:12pm

cods wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 6:53am:

If I so freely choose, an emphatic YES to all the above!

The inalienable Right to the Freedom of Speech, next to/along side of the absolute Right to Self-Defense are the most fundamental of Freedoms we as human beings possess, which are not granted to us by any government, but rather bestowed upon us by our Creator.

I'd be willing to give my life freely in order protect mine, as well as defending yours.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Amadd on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:23pm

Quote:

if you are going to die by AK47 at least let it be worth while and at the very least arm your staff so they have an equal chance.....

is that really that hard to comprehend..

Too right!! Give us our guns back, we need to arm ourselves against fanatical invaders.
The cops are arming themselves to the hilt because they're scared and ordinary citizens are left defenseless.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Dr. Caligari on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:32pm

Amadd wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:23pm:

Quote:

if you are going to die by AK47 at least let it be worth while and at the very least arm your staff so they have an equal chance.....

is that really that hard to comprehend..

Too right!! Give us our guns back, we need to arm ourselves against fanatical invaders.
The cops are arming themselves to the hilt because they're scared and ordinary citizens are left defenseless.

They have an intense cocoon of hate and dogma to protect them against the fictional enemy.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:37pm

Amadd wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:23pm:

Quote:

if you are going to die by AK47 at least let it be worth while and at the very least arm your staff so they have an equal chance.....

is that really that hard to comprehend..

Too right!! Give us our guns back, we need to arm ourselves against fanatical invaders.
The cops are arming themselves to the hilt because they're scared and ordinary citizens are left defenseless.

As well as against a Tyrannical Government.

The cops aren't arming themselves, we are allowing them to arm with our approval, as long as it's all in our behalf, & to our benefit, but in order to keep them in check we to must be armed with the same firepower they possess.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Amadd on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:41pm

Dr. Caligari wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:32pm:

Amadd wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:23pm:

Quote:

if you are going to die by AK47 at least let it be worth while and at the very least arm your staff so they have an equal chance.....

is that really that hard to comprehend..

Too right!! Give us our guns back, we need to arm ourselves against fanatical invaders.
The cops are arming themselves to the hilt because they're scared and ordinary citizens are left defenseless.

They have an intense cocoon of hate and dogma to protect them against the fictional enemy.

Yep. Funny that ain't it? The public is now stripped of firearms whilst the authorities will be gun-toting dictators forevermore..or until the next revolution.
History shows that the police are in no more danger than the public from terrorists.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:50pm

Amadd wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:41pm:

Dr. Caligari wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:32pm:

Amadd wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:23pm:

Quote:

if you are going to die by AK47 at least let it be worth while and at the very least arm your staff so they have an equal chance.....

is that really that hard to comprehend..

Too right!! Give us our guns back, we need to arm ourselves against fanatical invaders.
The cops are arming themselves to the hilt because they're scared and ordinary citizens are left defenseless.

They have an intense cocoon of hate and dogma to protect them against the fictional enemy.

Adolf Hitler once said, "To conquer a nation, you must first disarm its citizens" ..

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Dr. Caligari on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:52pm

Amadd wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:41pm:

Dr. Caligari wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:32pm:

Amadd wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:23pm:

Quote:

if you are going to die by AK47 at least let it be worth while and at the very least arm your staff so they have an equal chance.....

is that really that hard to comprehend..

Too right!! Give us our guns back, we need to arm ourselves against fanatical invaders.
The cops are arming themselves to the hilt because they're scared and ordinary citizens are left defenseless.

They have an intense cocoon of hate and dogma to protect them against the fictional enemy.

When the intensity of dogma in the air peaks, the cretins and worms slither out of their holes and howl for blood.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Amadd on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:59pm

Dr. Caligari wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:52pm:

Amadd wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:41pm:

Dr. Caligari wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:32pm:

Amadd wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:23pm:

Quote:

if you are going to die by AK47 at least let it be worth while and at the very least arm your staff so they have an equal chance.....

is that really that hard to comprehend..

Too right!! Give us our guns back, we need to arm ourselves against fanatical invaders.
The cops are arming themselves to the hilt because they're scared and ordinary citizens are left defenseless.

They have an intense cocoon of hate and dogma to protect them against the fictional enemy.

When the intensity of dogma in the air peaks, the cretins and worms slither out of their holes and howl for blood.

The "cretins and worms" have been crying foul for years without even half an opportunity to vote on issues that are of importance to them.
We've been voting for bs policies dictated to us for decades.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Dame Pansi on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:08am

Amadd wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:41pm:

Dr. Caligari wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:32pm:

Amadd wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:23pm:

Quote:

if you are going to die by AK47 at least let it be worth while and at the very least arm your staff so they have an equal chance.....

is that really that hard to comprehend..

Too right!! Give us our guns back, we need to arm ourselves against fanatical invaders.
The cops are arming themselves to the hilt because they're scared and ordinary citizens are left defenseless.

They have an intense cocoon of hate and dogma to protect them against the fictional enemy.

I have said all along...."know your enemy", it won't be the one you are expecting.

The terrorist scare tactic is just a measure for the authorities to get more power, with our approval. They're flying a false flag. "We've had intelligence reports about an imminent terrorist attack", shame they ignored the reports they got on the bloke that held up the coffee shop in Sydney.

What's after high alert? Shake in your boots alert? Are you scared enough yet?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:27am

Panther wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:37pm:

Amadd wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:23pm:

Quote:

if you are going to die by AK47 at least let it be worth while and at the very least arm your staff so they have an equal chance.....

is that really that hard to comprehend..

Too right!! Give us our guns back, we need to arm ourselves against fanatical invaders.
The cops are arming themselves to the hilt because they're scared and ordinary citizens are left defenseless.

total rubbish.....the cops have always been armed in this country and everyone knows it...we the people do not find the need to be armed and thats why we have a pretty good history....

if you take any n otice of the shoot outs we experience they are usually between two gangs trying to eliminate each other.... and good luck with that...

if you watched Underbelly they were busy killin g each other not the general public....

if my staff were threatened by maniacs.....and I wished to keep tormenting those maniacs..

the least I could do is arm my staff to the hilt...

charlie thought he could get away with it...

he sure learnt didnt he?

and I do hope the [ugly]cartoon business is thriving because a lot of blood was spilt for their FREEDOM OF SPEECH

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:32am

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:08am:

Amadd wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:41pm:

Dr. Caligari wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:32pm:

Amadd wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:23pm:

Quote:

if you are going to die by AK47 at least let it be worth while and at the very least arm your staff so they have an equal chance.....

is that really that hard to comprehend..

Too right!! Give us our guns back, we need to arm ourselves against fanatical invaders.
The cops are arming themselves to the hilt because they're scared and ordinary citizens are left defenseless.

They have an intense cocoon of hate and dogma to protect them against the fictional enemy.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/world/isis-executes-13-teenage-boys-for-watching-asian-cup-match-between-iraq-and-jordan/story-fni0xs63-1227190621535?sv=b938461dd8ba022e8b1b580ea2365aac

pansi.... I am shaking in mine...we are up against an appalling doctrin that is so POWER HUNGRY and full of HATE... why anyone would stir the evil up for a cartoon I have no idea......but we have sure stirred the maniacs into some kind of frenzy......if they think it will stop here........with just threats.......then be worried be very worried..

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by longweekend58 on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 8:21am

Panther wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:50pm:

Amadd wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:41pm:

Dr. Caligari wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:32pm:

Amadd wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:23pm:

Quote:

if you are going to die by AK47 at least let it be worth while and at the very least arm your staff so they have an equal chance.....

is that really that hard to comprehend..

Too right!! Give us our guns back, we need to arm ourselves against fanatical invaders.
The cops are arming themselves to the hilt because they're scared and ordinary citizens are left defenseless.

They have an intense cocoon of hate and dogma to protect them against the fictional enemy.

Adolf Hitler once said, "To conquer a nation, you must first disarm its citizens" ..

and a totally worthless statement today with hitech weaponry. A gun is of no consequence to an invading army with tanks, missiles, advanced fighters and hi tech weapons.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 9:04am

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 8:21am:

Panther wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:50pm:

Amadd wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:41pm:

Dr. Caligari wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:32pm:

Amadd wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:23pm:

Quote:

if you are going to die by AK47 at least let it be worth while and at the very least arm your staff so they have an equal chance.....

is that really that hard to comprehend..

Too right!! Give us our guns back, we need to arm ourselves against fanatical invaders.
The cops are arming themselves to the hilt because they're scared and ordinary citizens are left defenseless.

They have an intense cocoon of hate and dogma to protect them against the fictional enemy.

Adolf Hitler once said, "To conquer a nation, you must first disarm its citizens" ..

and a totally worthless statement today with hitech weaponry. A gun is of no consequence to an invading army with tanks, missiles, advanced fighters and hi tech weapons.

yet you claim a cartoon was worth kicking an angry nest of mad terrorists with all those weapons for.. ::) ::) ::)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by ian on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 9:06am

Panther wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:50pm:

n
Adolf Hitler once said, "To conquer a nation, you must first disarm its citizens" ..

No he didnt.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 9:41am

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 8:21am:

Panther wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:50pm:

Amadd wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:41pm:

Dr. Caligari wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:32pm:

Amadd wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:23pm:

Quote:

if you are going to die by AK47 at least let it be worth while and at the very least arm your staff so they have an equal chance.....

is that really that hard to comprehend..

Too right!! Give us our guns back, we need to arm ourselves against fanatical invaders.
The cops are arming themselves to the hilt because they're scared and ordinary citizens are left defenseless.

They have an intense cocoon of hate and dogma to protect them against the fictional enemy.

Adolf Hitler once said, "To conquer a nation, you must first disarm its citizens" ..

and a totally worthless statement today with hitech weaponry. A gun is of no consequence to an invading army with tanks, missiles, advanced fighters and hi tech weapons.

yet you claim a cartoon was worth kicking an angry nest of mad terrorists with all those weapons for.. ::) ::) ::)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 9:47am

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:08am:

What's after high alert? Shake in your boots alert? Are you scared enough yet?

There's a difference between being ignorant & scared (you), or being confidently secure because you've been alerted, & having been alerted, you have taken measures to confidently say you're prepared in the event (me).

If the day comes, I for one will not be laying down prostrate like an obedient sheeple, or crying my eyes out while I throw my pile of rocks at the enemy (coming from within our shores, not from outside) struggling to find my penknife to protect myself, my mates, & most importantly my family.

I'm prepared to go medieval on whomever needs an education on what resistance really is.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 9:58am

Panther wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 9:47am:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:08am:

What's after high alert? Shake in your boots alert? Are you scared enough yet?

there is every chance you may be put to the test...

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/world/french-muslim-groups-urge-calm-over-new-charlie-hebdo-cover/story-fni0xs63-1227184016838

you must love cartoons.. thats all I can say.....

I try very hard to use the M word but my FoS is sorely hampered by mindless attacks on MY FoS..

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 10:00am

cods wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:27am:

total rubbish.....the cops have always been armed in this country and everyone knows it...we the people do not find the need to be armed and thats why we have a pretty good history....

if you take any notice of the shoot outs we experience they are usually between two gangs trying to eliminate each other.... and good luck with that...

if you watched Underbelly they were busy killin g each other not the general public....

if my staff were threatened by maniacs.....and I wished to keep tormenting those maniacs..

the least I could do is arm my staff to the hilt...

charlie thought he could get away with it...

he sure learnt didnt he?

and I do hope the [ugly]cartoon business is thriving because a lot of blood was spilt for their FREEDOM OF SPEECH

Wake up, this isn't Tim Winton's Cloud Street Australia, this is 2015 Australia, infested by vermin that just love your ignorant naivety because taking you, & those akin to you, taking you down will be like emptying a barrel full of screaming babies with a pitch fork.

A man who won't die for something is not fit to live. - Martin Luther King

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 10:10am

Panther wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 10:00am:

cods wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:27am:

total rubbish.....the cops have always been armed in this country and everyone knows it...we the people do not find the need to be armed and thats why we have a pretty good history....

if you take any notice of the shoot outs we experience they are usually between two gangs trying to eliminate each other.... and good luck with that...

if you watched Underbelly they were busy killin g each other not the general public....

if my staff were threatened by maniacs.....and I wished to keep tormenting those maniacs..

the least I could do is arm my staff to the hilt...

charlie thought he could get away with it...

he sure learnt didnt he?

and I do hope the [ugly]cartoon business is thriving because a lot of blood was spilt for their FREEDOM OF SPEECH

dont forget MLKing.. was on the other side.. he was one of those being tormented. treated as underclass........or didnt you notice that bit??>..

if you or your family were being tormented BY IGNORANT CARTOONS to the point where you were driven to KILL people over it....

would you accept it when the judge said no you cannot kill someone

because he had every right to draw ignorant cartoons of your family....its called.Freedom of speech....

go on tormenting DreamryderX and his family...you have more rights than he does,,

try putting yourself in the shoes of those being humiliated day in day out...ask yourself how long before you got angry???... especially if it was your children being constantly mocked.........

would you seriously tell your children to suck it up because its FREEDOM OF SPEECH...????

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 10:11am

ian wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 9:06am:

Panther wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:50pm:

n
Adolf Hitler once said, "To conquer a nation, you must first disarm its citizens" ..

No he didnt.

Ok, proceed to start posting your litany of leftist, American anti-gun propaganda bloggy rags, & self-defining know it all progressive left professor links, that say he didn't ( because they hate quotes like that, that don't advance their leftist agenda) ---- that you've eaten up like a Sunday Roast Pig.

Go for it. I won't get deny your fun.

Utilize the powers of your free speech.

I'll defend your right to express your personal opinions, regardless of how foolish.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by The Outrage Bus on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 10:19am

Panther wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:50pm:

Amadd wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:41pm:

Dr. Caligari wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:32pm:

Amadd wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:23pm:

Quote:

if you are going to die by AK47 at least let it be worth while and at the very least arm your staff so they have an equal chance.....

is that really that hard to comprehend..

Too right!! Give us our guns back, we need to arm ourselves against fanatical invaders.
The cops are arming themselves to the hilt because they're scared and ordinary citizens are left defenseless.

They have an intense cocoon of hate and dogma to protect them against the fictional enemy.

Adolf Hitler once said, "To conquer a nation, you must first disarm its citizens" ..

http://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/disarm.asp

As you can see whilst the quote is true, its almost always taken out of context, as you have done here.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 10:23am

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 8:21am:

....... a totally worthless statement today with hitech weaponry. A gun is of no consequence to an invading army with tanks, missiles, advanced fighters and hi tech weapons.

That's right, you'll lay down, & play dead like a good lil obedient doggie. http://i.imgur.com/1fC1opP.gif

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 10:28am

cods wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 9:58am:

Panther wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 9:47am:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:08am:

What's after high alert? Shake in your boots alert? Are you scared enough yet?

WTF does the Financial ombudsman Service have to do with the price of your left footed sandals???

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by ian on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 10:29am

Panther wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 10:11am:

ian wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 9:06am:

Panther wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:50pm:

n
Adolf Hitler once said, "To conquer a nation, you must first disarm its citizens" ..

No he didnt.

expect your bulldust to be questioned. Also expect any lies you say to be challenged.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 10:33am

ian wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 10:29am:

Panther wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 10:11am:

ian wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 9:06am:

Panther wrote on Jan 20^th, 2015 at 10:50pm:

n
Adolf Hitler once said, "To conquer a nation, you must first disarm its citizens" ..

No he didnt.

expect your bulldust to be questioned. Also expect any lies you say to be challenged.

Ewwwwwwww, questioning my bulldust ..... now I've been put on notice! ..... duly noted.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by nasus on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 2:43pm

[quote author=cods if you are going to die by AK47 at least let it be worth while and at the very least arm your staff so they have an equal chance.....

is that really that hard to comprehend..[/quote]

Too right!! Give us our guns back, we need to arm ourselves against fanatical invaders.
The cops are arming themselves to the hilt because they're scared and ordinary citizens are left defenseless.

[/quote]

The cops aren't arming themselves, we are allowing them to arm with our approval, as long as it's all in our behalf, & to our benefit, but in order to keep them in check we to must be armed with the same firepower they possess.
[/i][/font][/size][/quote]

total rubbish.....the cops have always been armed in this country and everyone knows it...we the people do not find the need to be armed and thats why we have a pretty good history....

if you take any n otice of the shoot outs we experience they are usually between two gangs trying to eliminate each other.... and good luck with that...

if you watched Underbelly they were busy killin g each other not the general public....

if my staff were threatened by maniacs.....and I wished to keep tormenting those maniacs..

the least I could do is arm my staff to the hilt...

charlie thought he could get away with it...

he sure learnt didnt he?

and I do hope the [ugly]cartoon business is thriving because a lot of blood was spilt for their FREEDOM OF SPEECH[/quote]

The police in Australia have not always been armed, this is a recent development. There are still very many sworn members who are not armed. Also, we the people, that includes me, DO find the need to be armed if allowed by government. I know many of my friends who will be first on the list to be armed with concealed Carry.

We have not really had a "shoot out" there are very few shots fired in a general direction, usually at a home or a single gang member, usually ending in nothing, or a wounded toe nail. Criminals usually have firearms to protect their property or to intimidate others. Oh! And the "odd angry shot".
Underbelly was a TV show, people watch to much TV, the real world is nothing like that, thank God.
IT IS pointless in arming your staff if you so see fit, its who holds the firearms and there resolve to use it, fire it, kill with it. Then the massive training that goes with the use.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by The Outrage Bus on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 2:45pm

nasus wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 2:43pm:

Also, we the people, that includes me, DO find the need to be armed if allowed by government. I know many of my friends who will be first on the list to be armed with concealed Carry. .

May I ask why you find the need?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by nasus on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 2:52pm

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 2:45pm:

nasus wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 2:43pm:

Also, we the people, that includes me, DO find the need to be armed if allowed by government. I know many of my friends who will be first on the list to be armed with concealed Carry. .

May I ask why you find the need?

It is just something that needs to happen, for the safety and reassurance of the population, the times now are very uncertain. Also they do not appear to be getting any less stressful. Actually if you are asking you would never understand my reasoning. Best left like that.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by The Outrage Bus on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 2:54pm

nasus wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 2:52pm:

Uncertain times? Times have always been uncertain. Knowing there are people with concealed weapons around personally makes me less reassured.

But you are right, I'd never understand your reasoning, since it would be illogical.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by life_goes_on on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 3:02pm

Far out, what countries do these people live in to feel that they need to carry a concealed firearm?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by nasus on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 3:17pm

Life_goes_on wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 3:02pm:

Far out, what countries do these people live in to feel that they need to carry a concealed firearm?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 3:18pm

Life_goes_on wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 3:02pm:

Far out, what countries do these people live in to feel that they need to carry a concealed firearm?

WILL SOMEONE TELL THEM THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS ....."FREEDOM OF SPEECH"..

SO WHY BOTHER GETTING KILLED FOR IT..

STOP PRINTING CRUEL IGNORANT CARTOONS..

AND THAT MAY GO SOME WAY TO APPEASING OUR ANGRY FRIENDS...

AND CALMING THEM DOWN INSTEAD OF MAKING THINGS WORSE.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by The Outrage Bus on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 3:22pm

nasus wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 3:17pm:

Life_goes_on wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 3:02pm:

Far out, what countries do these people live in to feel that they need to carry a concealed firearm?

2 Flaws in the logic

1. is that by carrying, you're actually increasing the likelihood to carry it.

2. Its all based on the possibility of needing it, which I don't think exists

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Dr. Caligari on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 3:45pm

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 3:22pm:

nasus wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 3:17pm:

Life_goes_on wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 3:02pm:

Far out, what countries do these people live in to feel that they need to carry a concealed firearm?

2 Flaws in the logic

1. is that by carrying, you're actually increasing the likelihood to carry it.

2. Its all based on the possibility of needing it, which I don't think exists

You are discounting the possibility that conservatives have an innate suicide wish; or that they wish to assist other conservatives in fulfilling their conservative suicide wish.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by longweekend58 on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 4:26pm

nasus wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 3:17pm:

Life_goes_on wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 3:02pm:

Far out, what countries do these people live in to feel that they need to carry a concealed firearm?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Quantum on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 4:43pm

cods wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 3:18pm:

Life_goes_on wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 3:02pm:

Far out, what countries do these people live in to feel that they need to carry a concealed firearm?

If only there was an easy way to carm you down. Get down to the GP and gets some Xanax or something. This whole situation has turned you into one of the most irrational and abusive posters on the forum.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 4:46pm

Quantum wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 4:43pm:

cods wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 3:18pm:

Life_goes_on wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 3:02pm:

Far out, what countries do these people live in to feel that they need to carry a concealed firearm?

excuse me.. its you that is calling people names if they disagree with you...now you are suggesting I take medication all very abusive if you dont mid my pointing that out...

you are one very rude person...cannot talk about the topic in hand.. just abuse someone who doesnt think BULLYING is a nice thing to do..

but dont let FACTS get in the way of your sneering..

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by aquascoot on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 4:55pm

Quantum wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 12:20pm:

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 12:05pm:

Quantum wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 11:09am:

cods wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 10:43am:

Quantum wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 9:44am:

Enough abuse... cods is cods and is entitled to a view.. we can argue that view with reason

sounds fair ;)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Quantum on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 4:56pm

cods wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 4:46pm:

Quantum wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 4:43pm:

cods wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 3:18pm:

Life_goes_on wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 3:02pm:

Far out, what countries do these people live in to feel that they need to carry a concealed firearm?

BS. Read any of my early replies to you on this subject. I could not have been more polite and kept it to the topic. Once you started the whole "protector of pedophiles" BS, and accusing people of being fake heros letting others die for them, what did you expect?

You have gone full retard on this issue. What seemed to start off with you playing devils advocate has lead to you believing your own arguments. Now you just keep repeating the same shlt over and over again in FULL CAPITALS like a pissed off teenager. You don't need Xanax, you need a double dose of Horse tranquilizer.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by aquascoot on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 4:57pm

where the fook did they dig up this Dr Caligari specimen!!!

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Redneck on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 4:58pm

aquascoot wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 4:57pm:

where the fook did they dig up this Dr Caligari specimen!!!

I'm with u buddy!!

;D ;D ;D

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Quantum on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:01pm

aquascoot wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 4:57pm:

where the fook did they dig up this Dr Caligari specimen!!!

Oh the internet... It is never boring for a moment :)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by aquascoot on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:05pm

Quantum,
run for your life buddy.
this thread has got cods, pansi, greenswin, this Dr Caliagari fooker, dreamryder, Ian and the horse all chipping in.
Its like the perfect storm of shiit.
i have read it from start to finish and i'm nominating it for worst performance in a thread by the intellectually disabled for 2015.
all thats missing is pecker ;)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by life_goes_on on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:11pm

I've gotta say, and this is hard coming from a commie, but geez, the pendulum has certainly swung, and amongst the left on here, there are a few individuals that are crazier, nastier and more outright bonkers that what I've seen from our brothers and sisters on the right of late.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Dame Pansi on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:12pm

Quantum wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 4:56pm:

You don't need Xanax, you need a double dose of Horse tranquilizer.

You can get some of that off your other sock aquascoot.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by aquascoot on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:17pm

hes not my sock, i'm a farmer .
here i am on holidays.
after reading that thread, i'm in need of another break

008_001.jpg (57 KB | 16 )

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by nasus on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:23pm

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 4:26pm:

nasus wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 3:17pm:

Life_goes_on wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 3:02pm:

Far out, what countries do these people live in to feel that they need to carry a concealed firearm?

Apologies, just admit you are a Green, you have not the slightest idea what a firearm is whom it kills, and that firearm ownership actually reduces crime. I'm certain you will not come across, you are an anti gunner, no matter what you are shown as facts, you will always like the anti gun lobby find your own facts. be well, live long. There are many more countries in the world with larger deaths from handguns than America. As few actual handguns are used in assaults, but as they say, never let facts interfere with a good story.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Setanta on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:25pm

aquascoot wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:17pm:

hes not my sock, i'm a farmer .
here i am on holidays.
after reading that thread, i'm in need of another break

Why are you letting that skinny dude ride you? Doesn't look like fun. :'(

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Dame Pansi on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:33pm

Setanta wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:25pm:

aquascoot wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:17pm:

hes not my sock, i'm a farmer .
here i am on holidays.
after reading that thread, i'm in need of another break

Why are you letting that skinny dude ride you? Doesn't look like fun. :'(

Don't be nasty, that's Quantum.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by aquascoot on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:37pm

Setanta wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:25pm:

aquascoot wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:17pm:

hes not my sock, i'm a farmer .
here i am on holidays.
after reading that thread, i'm in need of another break

Why are you letting that skinny dude ride you? Doesn't look like fun. :'(

thats actually funny. you've saved the thread. ;)

i'm predicting it will go downhill soon though
i heard Jaqui Lambie is going to log on and make some comments

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Redneck on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:40pm

aquascoot wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:37pm:

Setanta wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:25pm:

aquascoot wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:17pm:

hes not my sock, i'm a farmer .
here i am on holidays.
after reading that thread, i'm in need of another break

Why are you letting that skinny dude ride you? Doesn't look like fun. :'(

thats actually funny. you've saved the thread. ;)

i'm predicting it will go downhill soon though
i heard Jaqui Lambie is going to log on and make some comments

She likes guys "Hung Like A Horse"

LOL ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:43pm

aquascoot wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:05pm:

what a charmer you are...

dismissed you may now go and and torment your cat or your children..either way you will obviously get a high out of it..

In the mean time we will struggle on with out your abuse..

you are far too intelligent for us.. so you think!

and it is important what you think regarding yourself... ::) ::)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:44pm

Redmond Neck wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:40pm:

aquascoot wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:37pm:

Setanta wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:25pm:

aquascoot wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:17pm:

hes not my sock, i'm a farmer .
here i am on holidays.
after reading that thread, i'm in need of another break

Why are you letting that skinny dude ride you? Doesn't look like fun. :'(

thats actually funny. you've saved the thread. ;)

i'm predicting it will go downhill soon though
i heard Jaqui Lambie is going to log on and make some comments

She likes guys "Hung Like A Horse"

LOL ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

that is probably what he was alluding too...

nothing like a bit of self praise.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Redneck on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:45pm

cods wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:44pm:

Redmond Neck wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:40pm:

aquascoot wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:37pm:

Setanta wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:25pm:

aquascoot wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:17pm:

hes not my sock, i'm a farmer .
here i am on holidays.
after reading that thread, i'm in need of another break

Why are you letting that skinny dude ride you? Doesn't look like fun. :'(

thats actually funny. you've saved the thread. ;)

i'm predicting it will go downhill soon though
i heard Jaqui Lambie is going to log on and make some comments

She likes guys "Hung Like A Horse"

LOL ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

that is probably what he was alluding too...

nothing like a bit of self praise.

Stay away from him cods!

Sounds like a skite to me!

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:46pm

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 4:26pm:

nasus wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 3:17pm:

Life_goes_on wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 3:02pm:

Far out, what countries do these people live in to feel that they need to carry a concealed firearm?

Respectfully, I ask you to please simply do your homework, & investigate your assertions.

They are incorrect, & your numbers are more than 5 times higher than the actual figures published by the FBI every year, for your (and everyone elses) researching pleasure.

Get the facts, & if you wish come back & post a correction.

The numbers aren't sweet by any means, but they are far, far lower than you suggest .... sorry.

Thanks

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:48pm

Redmond Neck wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:45pm:

cods wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:44pm:

Redmond Neck wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:40pm:

aquascoot wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:37pm:

Setanta wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:25pm:

aquascoot wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:17pm:

hes not my sock, i'm a farmer .
here i am on holidays.
after reading that thread, i'm in need of another break

Why are you letting that skinny dude ride you? Doesn't look like fun. :'(

thats actually funny. you've saved the thread. ;)

i'm predicting it will go downhill soon though
i heard Jaqui Lambie is going to log on and make some comments

She likes guys "Hung Like A Horse"

LOL ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

that is probably what he was alluding too...

nothing like a bit of self praise.

Stay away from him cods!

Sounds like a skite to me!

I do know a bragger when I see one...I have even seen the undies they wear with dare I say it padding???.....yep no need for socks anymore...

arent you just a little bit jealous.?....in my day it was only us girls that cheated... with tissues....now you can pay god knows what for what they call chicken fillets....does the same job as tissues....just costs more..lolol

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:50pm

Panther wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:46pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 4:26pm:

nasus wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 3:17pm:

Life_goes_on wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 3:02pm:

Far out, what countries do these people live in to feel that they need to carry a concealed firearm?

Respectfully, I ask you to please simply do your homework, & investigate your assertions.

They are incorrect, & your numbers are more than 5 times higher than the actual published figures for your (and everyone's) researching pleasure, by the FBI every year.

Get the facts, & if you wish come back & post a correction.

The numbers aren't sweet by any means, but they are far, far better than you suggest .... sorry.

Thanks

huhum actually this thread is about Australia.. and FoS..

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by greggerypeccary on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:54pm

Panther wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:46pm:

The FBI don't publish an "annual death toll from firearms" figure.

The annual death toll from firearms in the USA is around 33,000.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Redneck on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:59pm

cods wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:48pm:

Me ...Yes of course....

He reminds me of an old Vietnamese bloke I knew...

HimHungLong

or was it

HungLong?

Sad when you reach 70 it all becomes a bit vague!

Mmmm :( :(

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:06pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:54pm:

Panther wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:46pm:

The FBI don't publish an "annual death toll from firearms" figure.

The annual death toll from firearms in the USA is around 35,000.

Well, in raw numbers you are close, but when you remove the 67% +/- suicides by firearm, & cops on criminals by firearms, & criminals on criminals by firearms its much closer to 10,000 to 11,000.

Certainly not anywhere near 50,000...

Oh, & violent crime has dropped steadily in the last 10 years, while American gun sales & ownership are at an all time high.

More guns, less crime.

Oh, & CODS, I've just exercised my Freedom of Speech.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by greggerypeccary on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:10pm

Panther wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:06pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:54pm:

Panther wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:46pm:

The FBI don't publish an "annual death toll from firearms" figure.

The annual death toll from firearms in the USA is around 35,000.

Well, in raw numbers you are close, but when you remove the 67% +/- suicides by firearm, & cops on criminals by firearms, & criminals on criminals by firearms its much closer to 10,000 to 11,000.

If you remove those deaths, you aren't talking about an "annual death toll from firearms" figure.

The annual death toll from firearms is approximately 33,000 (not 35,000 as I previously stated).

" ... gun fatalities are rising again after a low point in 2000, according to the Atlanta-based Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Shooting deaths in 2015 will probably rise to almost 33,000 ... "

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-12-19/american-gun-deaths-to-exceed-traffic-fatalities-by-2015.html

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Setanta on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:11pm

aquascoot wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:37pm:

Setanta wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:25pm:

aquascoot wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:17pm:

hes not my sock, i'm a farmer .
here i am on holidays.
after reading that thread, i'm in need of another break

Why are you letting that skinny dude ride you? Doesn't look like fun. :'(

thats actually funny. you've saved the thread. ;)

i'm predicting it will go downhill soon though
i heard Jaqui Lambie is going to log on and make some comments

Just using my freedom of speech to ask the hard questions, had to be done!
Now if only the oligarchs hadn't stolen your wads of cash you'd be a real prize for Lambiekins.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by nasus on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:11pm

[quote author=longweekend58 link=]Far out, what countries do these people live in to feel that they need to carry a concealed firearm?
[/quote]

I live in Australia, and possibly prior to 2000 I would have agreed with you. However I was different then.
I think the quote goes something like this " I would rather carry and never ever need it, than need it and not carry."
Pistols weigh around 1.3kgs, easily concealable, no big deal, nothing happens, no one will ever know you carried. [/quote]

The USA experience dictates otherwise. More personally-owned guns kill their owners than attackers. Also, a fight among aussies is likely to be done with fists. In USA it is common to escalate to guns. Hence the 50,000 annual death toll from firearms vs our <100[/quote]

Not certain where you get your stupid inflated, incorrect, and dumb American figures from, some obscure manipulated figures I guess.

In Australia if our figures are <100, IT IS because we bloooddddy well only have 22 Million population as compared to the USA of 330 Million.
Try my figures:
United States 88.8 270,000,000 9,960 3.2
The 88.8 is firearms per person, the figure of 270 million is the actual number, THE 9,960 is the number of homicides by use of firearms, THE 3.2 is per 100,000 of population.
Thanks for posting you bias figures.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:15pm

nasus wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:11pm:

[quote author=longweekend58 link=]Far out, what countries do these people live in to feel that they need to carry a concealed firearm?

I live in Australia, and possibly prior to 2000 I would have agreed with you. However I was different then.
I think the quote goes something like this " I would rather carry and never ever need it, than need it and not carry."
Pistols weigh around 1.3kgs, easily concealable, no big deal, nothing happens, no one will ever know you carried. [/quote]

The USA experience dictates otherwise. More personally-owned guns kill their owners than attackers. Also, a fight among aussies is likely to be done with fists. In USA it is common to escalate to guns. Hence the 50,000 annual death toll from firearms vs our <100[/quote]

Not certain where you get your stupid inflated, incorrect, and dumb American figures from, some obscure manipulated figures I guess.

In Australia if our figures are <100, IT IS because we bloooddddy well only have 22 Million population as compared to the USA of 330 Million.
Try my figures:
United States 88.8 270,000,000 9,960 3.2
The 88.8 is firearms per person, the figure of 270 million is the actual number, THE 9,960 is the number of homicides by use of firearms, THE 3.2 is per 100,000 of population.
Thanks for posting you bias figures. [/quote]

Way ta shove it up his keister!! http://i.imgur.com/huWSrhp.png

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by aquascoot on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:16pm

Redmond Neck wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:40pm:

aquascoot wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:37pm:

Setanta wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:25pm:

aquascoot wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:17pm:

hes not my sock, i'm a farmer .
here i am on holidays.
after reading that thread, i'm in need of another break

Why are you letting that skinny dude ride you? Doesn't look like fun. :'(

thats actually funny. you've saved the thread. ;)

i'm predicting it will go downhill soon though
i heard Jaqui Lambie is going to log on and make some comments

She likes guys "Hung Like A Horse"

LOL ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

well unfortunately for her i use Artifical Insemination on all the cows

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:18pm

Redmond Neck wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:59pm:

cods wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:48pm:

Me ...Yes of course....

He reminds me of an old Vietnamese bloke I knew...

HimHungLong

or was it

HungLong?

Sad when you reach 70 it all becomes a bit vague!

Mmmm :( :(

I think you are thinking about the Asian piano player...when someone called out
do you know.. you have one hanging down..

and he replied.. sorry me have never heard of that song

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by longweekend58 on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:25pm

aquascoot wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:05pm:

I don't think even the peccahead would sink to the levels exhibited here.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by greggerypeccary on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:25pm

nasus wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:11pm:

Not certain where you get your stupid inflated, incorrect, and dumb American figures from, some obscure manipulated figures I guess.

In Australia if our figures are <100, IT IS because we bloooddddy well only have 22 Million population as compared to the USA of 330 Million.
Try my figures:
United States 88.8 270,000,000 9,960 3.2
The 88.8 is firearms per person, the figure of 270 million is the actual number, THE 9,960 is the number of homicides by use of firearms, THE 3.2 is per 100,000 of population.
Thanks for posting you bias figures.

Bias figures?

You actually moved the goal posts.

He said: "annual death toll from firearms"

The annual death toll from firearms in the US is approximately 33,000.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by longweekend58 on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:27pm

nasus wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:23pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 4:26pm:

nasus wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 3:17pm:

Life_goes_on wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 3:02pm:

Far out, what countries do these people live in to feel that they need to carry a concealed firearm?

and speaking of facts... but of course you aren't are you? And it is always the same with you pro-gun nutters. You deny virtually everything and pretend that guns keep you safe. yes there are a few countries with hire gun deaths eg South Africa, Brazil, Mexico. So that's the crowd you aim to beat?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by longweekend58 on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:30pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:25pm:

nasus wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:11pm:

[quote author=longweekend58 link=]Far out, what countries do these people live in to feel that they need to carry a concealed firearm?

I live in Australia, and possibly prior to 2000 I would have agreed with you. However I was different then.
I think the quote goes something like this " I would rather carry and never ever need it, than need it and not carry."
Pistols weigh around 1.3kgs, easily concealable, no big deal, nothing happens, no one will ever know you carried.

The USA experience dictates otherwise. More personally-owned guns kill their owners than attackers. Also, a fight among aussies is likely to be done with fists. In USA it is common to escalate to guns. Hence the 50,000 annual death toll from firearms vs our <100

Not certain where you get your stupid inflated, incorrect, and dumb American figures from, some obscure manipulated figures I guess.

In Australia if our figures are <100, IT IS because we bloooddddy well only have 22 Million population as compared to the USA of 330 Million.
Try my figures:
United States 88.8 270,000,000 9,960 3.2
The 88.8 is firearms per person, the figure of 270 million is the actual number, THE 9,960 is the number of homicides by use of firearms, THE 3.2 is per 100,000 of population.
Thanks for posting you bias figures.

The annual death toll from firearms in the US is approximately 33,000.

[/quote]

so.. the figure is 33,000 instead of 50,000. does that in IN WAY change the argument?? They have 16 times our population and 96 times our homicide rate. we have around 100 gun deaths a year or around 1/3300 of the USA.

It hardly makes a pro-gun argument does it?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by longweekend58 on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:31pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:25pm:

nasus wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:11pm:

The annual death toll from firearms in the US is approximately 33,000.

"annual death toll from firearms"

and your point is what exactly?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by longweekend58 on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:34pm

Panther wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:46pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 4:26pm:

nasus wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 3:17pm:

Life_goes_on wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 3:02pm:

Far out, what countries do these people live in to feel that they need to carry a concealed firearm?

Ive had this debate more times than you can count. And the statistics the pro-gun lobby come up with are astonishing. They exclude accidents and anything else they can. I actually debated with one nutter that thinks the gun death toll is 250 per year. (yep, not a typo)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by life_goes_on on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:36pm

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:31pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:25pm:

nasus wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:11pm:

The annual death toll from firearms in the US is approximately 33,000.

"annual death toll from firearms"

and your point is what exactly?

Hahahaha you're trying to fight with someone on your side of the argument.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by greggerypeccary on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:37pm

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:31pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:25pm:

nasus wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:11pm:

The annual death toll from firearms in the US is approximately 33,000.

"annual death toll from firearms"

and your point is what exactly?

He's quoting the wrong figures.

The toll is much higher than what he's claiming.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:42pm

Freedom of Speech

Quote:

One sperm says to the other sperm, "How far is it to the ovary?"

The other sperm says, "Relax. We haven't even passed her tonsils yet."

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by longweekend58 on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:42pm

Gun rights people are always entertaining. And stupid.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by nasus on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:44pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:37pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:31pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:25pm:

nasus wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:11pm:

The annual death toll from firearms in the US is approximately 33,000.

"annual death toll from firearms"

and your point is what exactly?

He's quoting the wrong figures.

The toll is much higher than what he's claiming.

Sorry I have attempted several times to place my links onto the post. I every time am confronted with "you cannot use live links" etc. I need 100 post before I can use a live link. Even if I could use the links, an ANTI gunner Is an ANTI gunner, anti everything, have no idea what a firearm is, I'm certain if I had a flintlock pistol, which are fun to use, I'm certain they would deny my ownership. To an anti gunner, a flintlock is a military style weapon, and nothing will change their narrow minds.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Gnads on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:45pm

Now back to Freedom of Speech

Here's a guy expressing his about the religion that got Cods on her high horse over the Charlie Hebdo atrocity

now if Cods had this blokes guts her opinion may be respected ....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Ana9w3uSNA

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by longweekend58 on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:45pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:37pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:31pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:25pm:

nasus wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:11pm:

The annual death toll from firearms in the US is approximately 33,000.

"annual death toll from firearms"

and your point is what exactly?

He's quoting the wrong figures.

The toll is much higher than what he's claiming.

I think I had a 'quoting problem' thinking you said something that nasus said.

oops:)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by greggerypeccary on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:46pm

cods wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:18pm:

Redmond Neck wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:59pm:

cods wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:48pm:

Me ...Yes of course....

He reminds me of an old Vietnamese bloke I knew...

HimHungLong

or was it

HungLong?

Sad when you reach 70 it all becomes a bit vague!

Mmmm :( :(

I think you are thinking about the Asian piano player...when someone called out
do you know.. you have one hanging down..

and he replied.. sorry me have never heard of that song

There's an old bloke in the nursing home playing the piano on a hot day with shorts on.

One of the ladies listening to his concert notices a ball, followed by another ball, making their way out of his shorts.

To try and head off a catastrophe she leaps up and whispers in his ear: ”Do you know your nuts are hanging down through the old wicker chair?”

To which he replies, “No, I don’t do country and western, but if you hum a few bars I’ll pick it up pretty quick.”

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by longweekend58 on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:48pm

nasus wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:44pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:37pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:31pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:25pm:

nasus wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:11pm:

The annual death toll from firearms in the US is approximately 33,000.

"annual death toll from firearms"

and your point is what exactly?

He's quoting the wrong figures.

The toll is much higher than what he's claiming.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by nasus on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 7:12pm

[quote author=greggerypeccary
arent you just a little bit jealous.?....in my day it was only us girls that cheated... with tissues....now you can pay god knows what for what they call chicken fillets....does the same job as tissues....just costs more..lolol[/quote]

Me ...Yes of course....

He reminds me of an old Vietnamese bloke I knew...

Him Hung Long or was it Hung Long? Sad when you reach 70 it all becomes a bit vague!

Mmmm :( :(
[/quote]

I think you are thinking about the Asian piano player...when someone called out
do you know.. you have one hanging down..
and he replied.. sorry me have never heard of that song[/quote]
There's an old bloke in the nursing home playing the piano on a hot day with shorts on.
One of the ladies listening to his concert notices a ball, followed by another ball, making their way out of his shorts.
To try and head off a catastrophe she leaps up and whispers in his ear: ”Do you know your nuts are hanging down through the old wicker chair?”
To which he replies, “No, I don’t do country and western, but if you hum a few bars I’ll pick it up pretty quick.”[/quote]

I am confused, this topic is clearly freedom of speech, pages of it. You with this post bring it to another level, "like who cares, as long as I get a post", crude and off topic. You are a very sad case.
Yes the is freedom of speech and you are allowed to post whatever you like, crude, inappropriate and what a waste of time. >:(
Not sure what I can say about that idiot Lambie, stay with the theme, or possibly you are just anti everything, nothing better to do and just post because you can. Some old people should just quietly pass into the night, and enjoy what few years they have.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Dnarever on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 7:17pm

FREEDOM OF SPEECH.

Shhh - quite or the Liberals will put a price on it.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by nasus on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 7:27pm

[quote author=longweekend58 "annual death toll from firearms"
[/quote]

now that more like it! Express your indignity like the pro-gun nutjob you are! After all, you think carrying a gun makes you safer, but safer from what? Violence is not exactly a major Australian problem and especially not murder.

It could be interesting to debate with you but I suspect you have no interest in facts nor in discussion pros and cons. I suspect you just love guns and... that's the end of it for you.[/quote]

You will find I am far from a pro-gun nut job as you posted. I strongly believe in the freedom of the press, freedom of speech, anti men who hold hands, pro women's rights, anti communism, a free and democratic Australia, anti feminism and them that want to be what they are not.

Be well.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by life_goes_on on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 7:39pm

Quote:

So, please don't tell me what or who I am, I know only to well.

Please?

A green vase being balanced on the head of a sea lion.

Do I win a prize?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by The Outrage Bus on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 7:48pm

nasus wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 7:27pm:

You will find I am far from a pro-gun nut job as you posted. I strongly believe in the freedom of the press, freedom of speech, anti men who hold hands, pro women's rights, anti communism, a free and democratic Australia, anti feminism and them that want to be what they are not.

Apart from the pro womens rights thing, you have every criteria ticked for a pro gun nut.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by longweekend58 on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 8:31pm

nasus wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 7:27pm:

[quote author=longweekend58 "annual death toll from firearms"

now that more like it! Express your indignity like the pro-gun nutjob you are! After all, you think carrying a gun makes you safer, but safer from what? Violence is not exactly a major Australian problem and especially not murder.

It could be interesting to debate with you but I suspect you have no interest in facts nor in discussion pros and cons. I suspect you just love guns and... that's the end of it for you.[/quote]

You will find I am far from a pro-gun nut job as you posted. I strongly believe in the freedom of the press, freedom of speech, anti men who hold hands, pro women's rights, anti communism, a free and democratic Australia, anti feminism and them that want to be what they are not.

I have carried a gun, been places I would rather not have been at particular moments in time. Visited the shrine on day that few know, but we understand. Cried for a few who are no longer with us, and completed what was asked of me. I have bleed and paid a price I was prepared to pay, they don't ask twice. I visit some who were once the ones who gave, and sat in silence as times changed. I do not love guns, I find violence abhorrent, I stupidly will stand for the downtrodden if they are challenged, irrespective of their faith or leanings. I am unable to walk past a situation that is none of my business if I feel the odds are unequal. I wrote in some book years ago, I drink so I cannot remember and then drink some more so I can forget. So, please don't tell me what or who I am, I know only to well. Guns do not make me fell safe, I am safe by virtue of who I am and my past. I can use a biro, belt, or anything else within reach or available. there is no end to it. It is not about violence, it is about people who would use it to subjugate others that I object to. Be well. [/quote]

I could make an attempt at working out what you are trying to say, but clever people make their positions clear. You are just a nutter showing all the signs of why you should be the last person to ever carry a gun... or be allowed outside without supervision.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by stryder on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 8:33pm

nasus wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 7:27pm:

[quote author=longweekend58 "annual death toll from firearms"

now that more like it! Express your indignity like the pro-gun nutjob you are! After all, you think carrying a gun makes you safer, but safer from what? Violence is not exactly a major Australian problem and especially not murder.

It could be interesting to debate with you but I suspect you have no interest in facts nor in discussion pros and cons. I suspect you just love guns and... that's the end of it for you.[/quote]

You will find I am far from a pro-gun nut job as you posted. I strongly believe in the freedom of the press, freedom of speech, anti men who hold hands, pro women's rights, anti communism, a free and democratic Australia, anti feminism and them that want to be what they are not.

I have carried a gun, been places I would rather not have been at particular moments in time. Visited the shrine on day that few know, but we understand. Cried for a few who are no longer with us, and completed what was asked of me. I have bleed and paid a price I was prepared to pay, they don't ask twice. I visit some who were once the ones who gave, and sat in silence as times changed. I do not love guns, I find violence abhorrent, I stupidly will stand for the downtrodden if they are challenged, irrespective of their faith or leanings. I am unable to walk past a situation that is none of my business if I feel the odds are unequal. I wrote in some book years ago, I drink so I cannot remember and then drink some more so I can forget. So, please don't tell me what or who I am, I know only to well. Guns do not make me fell safe, I am safe by virtue of who I am and my past. I can use a biro, belt, or anything else within reach or available. there is no end to it. It is not about violence, it is about people who would use it to subjugate others that I object to. Be well. [/quote]

Great post, but Im also at odds with ownership of trigger based weaponry, it just only looks good on a clint eastwood movie, and no police force in the world would embrace that.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 8:33pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:46pm:

cods wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:18pm:

Redmond Neck wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:59pm:

cods wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 5:48pm:

Me ...Yes of course....

He reminds me of an old Vietnamese bloke I knew...

HimHungLong

or was it

HungLong?

Sad when you reach 70 it all becomes a bit vague!

Mmmm :( :(

I think you are thinking about the Asian piano player...when someone called out
do you know.. you have one hanging down..

and he replied.. sorry me have never heard of that song

I knew I had got it all wrong...its pretty old too...

we thought it hilarious when were young......now I am not too sure..

its the age thing I think?... :)

and now NASUS understands where the irate terrorist are coming from.... ::) ::)..

sorry but you did say crude..amongst your rant,,

were you exercising your FoS???.... ;)

its best we talk about how many are killed by firearms in America. ::) ::) even though none of us live in America..and someone will come up with the right answer in the end...I am sure.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Rocketanski on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 8:33pm

...

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 8:36pm

Gnads wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 6:45pm:

when you figure out just exactly what I am talking about...I might be interested in what you have to say...

in the mean time.. I am happy both myself and Pope Frances are on the same page..

what you think doesnt interest me at all..hillbilly.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Gnads on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 8:42pm

Now who's calling people names Codsey wadsey?

Hypocrite ... fancy you assuming an air of superiority & casting aspertions as to a persons intelligence ;D

I don't have to tolerate your abuse or incessant ranting about the cowardice you express in kowtowing to Muslims removing your FOS. ::)

btw you go round & round so much I don't think you even know what you're talking about.

Hirdy Girdy Woman

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 8:47pm

Gnads wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 8:42pm:

I was living up to YOUR version of FoS isnt abuse part of your version??>..

or does it only apply when your dishing it out... ::) ::)

lets see you say boo when they arrive on your doorstep....asking for your opinion regarding the cartoon.. ::) ::) ::)

as Pope Frances said he would punch someone if they insulted his mother I am sure he would agree with hillbilly. :)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by nasus on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 8:51pm

Life_goes_on wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 7:39pm:

Quote:

So, please don't tell me what or who I am, I know only to well.

Please?

A green vase being balanced on the head of a sea lion.

Do I win a prize?

NO< you get nothing, your stupidity only gets you to the exit, No prize, do not pass go, do not collect. To the gulags with you, where you belong with your idiotic cohorts. You actually need to look at what you post, make some attempt to appear 1/2 intelligent.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by nasus on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 8:56pm

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 7:48pm:

nasus wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 7:27pm:

Apart from the pro womens rights thing, you have every criteria ticked for a pro gun nut.

DO I label you, do I put you particularly into a box, into a sub layer, some category which you would strongly object to? No I do not, hence to call me a nut I find offensive, but it is your right to say what you wish, without regard to the statement. Great is it not? I strongly believe I should be reported to the authorities, "gun nut o this forum" please remove. Pro women rights, what do you know or care about that topic, do you even comprehend the ramifications?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by stryder on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 8:57pm

Being a coward does carry consequences to the soul.

Disppointed in you cods, :D

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by stryder on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 8:57pm

Being a coward does carry consequences for the soul.

Disappointed in you cods. :D

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 8:58pm

Freedom of Speech

Quote:

      A kid's sitting at the kitchen table.
      He says, "Mom, I'm gay."
      She says, "Does that mean you suck men's cocks?"
      He says, "Yeah."
      She says, "Don't you ever complain about my cooking."

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 8:59pm

stryder wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 8:57pm:

Being a coward does carry consequence to the soul.

Disppointed in you cods. :D

is coward abuse??? just incase you know who steps in he thinks hillbilly is...

so what have I done now??...

I am on the same page as the Pope you know..

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 9:00pm

Panther wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 8:58pm:

Freedom of Speech

Quote:

      A kid's sitting at the kitchen table.
      He says, "Mom, I'm gay."
      She says, "Does that mean you suck men's cocks?"
      He says, "Yeah."
      She says, "Don't ever complain about my cooking."

UGH!

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by stryder on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 9:05pm

cods wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 8:59pm:

stryder wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 8:57pm:

Being a coward does carry consequence to the soul.

Disppointed in you cods. :D

is coward abuse??? just incase you know who steps in he thinks hillbilly is...

so what have I done now??...

I am on the same page as the Pope you know..

;D ;D ;D ;D
The radical muslims dont,

if they had a half a chance in a moment, they would behead him to spread fear in the christian world.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 10:28pm

stryder wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 9:05pm:

cods wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 8:59pm:

stryder wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 8:57pm:

Being a coward does carry consequence to the soul.

Disppointed in you cods. :D

is coward abuse??? just incase you know who steps in he thinks hillbilly is...

so what have I done now??...

I am on the same page as the Pope you know..

;D ;D ;D ;D
The radical muslims dont,

if they had a half a chance in a moment, they would behead him to spread fear in the christian world.

what utter rubbish....you think everyone else is all bad ....but you are all bloody good

if they killed him another would take his place... even you must have worked that out..

acting as bad as the bad guys doesnt do it for me...

if that makes a me a coward in your eyes.. so be it..

I feel for these Japanese men who are now being held for money that they know will never be paid...

how human beings can treat other humans being like this I will never know...

however if it means US being as bad and treating them the same way.....I say no to that....

two wrongs dont make a right for me.. and no matter what the situation that never changes...

terrorists think threatening death is the way to go...

but they are not threatening another army or terrorist group..

they are threatening office workers who have no skills when it comes to armed warfare..

is that fair.... of course it isnt..

but we are not dealing in fair we are dealing with lunatics...how do you deal with lunatics.. almost invisible lunatics?????....

acting as bad as them is hardly going to change them into responsible human beings..

we attack them they attack us.. but they do it in a way.. we will never do it.. and they know that...

we would never take hostages and chop heads off..

would we??>...

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by stryder on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 10:44pm

cods wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 10:28pm:

stryder wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 9:05pm:

cods wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 8:59pm:

stryder wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 8:57pm:

Being a coward does carry consequence to the soul.

Disppointed in you cods. :D

is coward abuse??? just incase you know who steps in he thinks hillbilly is...

so what have I done now??...

I am on the same page as the Pope you know..

;D ;D ;D ;D
The radical muslims dont,

if they had a half a chance in a moment, they would behead him to spread fear in the christian world.

You are fill to the till with so much crap in this rationale of the being a coward, for safetys sake

You lay out a case of surrending everything to the fear of radical muslims idiots, WHO WOULD KILL THE POPE IN ANY WAY THEY CAN IF HE WAS IN REACH.

You are so disgusting and revolting cods you truly are, i cannot believe you think this rationale is right.

Go to hell, thats what i think of you.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Setanta on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 10:46pm

cods wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 10:28pm:

we would never take hostages and chop heads off..

would we??>...

If by we you me Australians, well, yes, we have. Go read about some of the reprisals against Aboriginals.

Quote:

About 800 metres from the huts the defenceless Aboriginal people were hacked and slashed to death. They were beheaded and their headless bodies were left where they fell. The stockmen then set up camp, drinking and bragging about their killings.
http://www.creativespirits.info/aboriginalculture/history/myall-creek-massacre-1838

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Dr. Caligari on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 10:50pm

stryder wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 10:44pm:

cods wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 10:28pm:

stryder wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 9:05pm:

[quote author=cods link=1421614428/213#213 date=1421837975][quote author=michael_bubble link=1421614428/210#210 date=1421837828]Being a coward does carry consequence to the soul.

Disppointed in you cods. :D

is coward abuse??? just incase you know who steps in he thinks hillbilly is...

so what have I done now??...

I am on the same page as the Pope you know..

;D ;D ;D ;D
The radical muslims dont,

if they had a half a chance in a moment, they would behead him to spread fear in the christian world.

Go to hell, thats what i think of you.

Strange behaviour! Inviting people you are in conflict with to your home.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Dame Pansi on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 6:15am

You're not a coward cods, you're just sensible.

There's sensible and there's stupidity.

Brave or stupid?

There will always be some journalist, comedian, author or whatever that crosses the line to insult Islam and there will always be some radical to kill him for it.

He will know where the line is drawn by previous events or a not so subtle warning from some Muslim group or fanatic.

I'm not talking about a funny cartoon or skit, I mean straight out insulting. I think we all know the difference between brutally insulting and a bit of innocent humour or a little 'dig'.

You've been warned, take heed or take the consequences, it's your choice.

Incidentally, did anyone watch Adam Hills last night? First time I've watched it and he had some pommy comedians on, the show centred around this very subject.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Postmodern Trendoid II on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 7:03am

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 6:15am:

You're not a coward cods, you're just sensible.

There's sensible and there's stupidity.

Brave or stupid?

There will always be some journalist, comedian, author or whatever that crosses the line to insult Islam and there will always be some radical to kill him for it.

He will know where the line is drawn by previous events or a not so subtle warning from some Muslim group or fanatic.

I'm not talking about a funny cartoon or skit, I mean straight out insulting. I think we all know the difference between brutally insulting and a bit of innocent humour or a little 'dig'.

You've been warned, take heed or take the consequences, it's your choice.

Good propaganda, Comrade. We mustn't insult Islam, but the bankers, Christians, CEOs, white people, conservatives, Americans, Jews, rich people, successful people, Murdoch, business owners are fair game. This is progress.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Dame Pansi on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 7:10am

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 7:03am:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 6:15am:

You're not a coward cods, you're just sensible.

There's sensible and there's stupidity.

Brave or stupid?

There will always be some journalist, comedian, author or whatever that crosses the line to insult Islam and there will always be some radical to kill him for it.

He will know where the line is drawn by previous events or a not so subtle warning from some Muslim group or fanatic.

I'm not talking about a funny cartoon or skit, I mean straight out insulting. I think we all know the difference between brutally insulting and a bit of innocent humour or a little 'dig'.

You've been warned, take heed or take the consequences, it's your choice.

It's knowing where to stop, that's the tricky bit. Stupid people never know when to stop, that's why prisons and cemeteries are full of them.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by longweekend58 on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 7:13am

Panther wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 8:58pm:

Freedom of Speech

Quote:

very funny. not sure there is anywhere I can use it... but still gave me a laugh

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 7:14am

Setanta wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 10:46pm:

cods wrote on Jan 21^st, 2015 at 10:28pm:

we would never take hostages and chop heads off..

would we??>...

If by we you me Australians, well, yes, we have. Go read about some of the reprisals against Aboriginals.

Quote:

ok.. but havent we come a long way since those dark days??.. I mean its been a week or two since the last one hasnt it? ::) ::)

did you know the last execution by guillotine in France was in 1977...

I dont see any point in draggin g up history...I really dont....its what is happening right this minute.. and how to stop it that matters...we and by that I mean Australia has stopped doing an enormous amount of things.. weve moved forward at least I have..

no country has a 100% PROUD HISTORY....what they have is a PROUD FUTURE. with a bit of luck

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by longweekend58 on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 7:16am

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 7:10am:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 7:03am:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 6:15am:

You're not a coward cods, you're just sensible.

There's sensible and there's stupidity.

Brave or stupid?

There will always be some journalist, comedian, author or whatever that crosses the line to insult Islam and there will always be some radical to kill him for it.

He will know where the line is drawn by previous events or a not so subtle warning from some Muslim group or fanatic.

I'm not talking about a funny cartoon or skit, I mean straight out insulting. I think we all know the difference between brutally insulting and a bit of innocent humour or a little 'dig'.

You've been warned, take heed or take the consequences, it's your choice.

It's knowing where to stop, that's the tricky bit. Stupid people never know when to stop, that's why prisons and cemeteries are full of them.

And that's the point you don't get. In NORMAL circumstances I might agree with you, but this is not a normal circumstance. This is a matter of principle. People were MURDERED in the name of some religion that doesn't like comics and so we are duty-bound to step up and defend a freedom of speech that we don't really approve of or care about. Do you get that? We are not defending a comic but a principle.

At some point in time we all have to stand up for things that are important. The particular circumstance is immaterial, but the principle is not.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 7:23am

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 7:10am:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 7:03am:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 6:15am:

You're not a coward cods, you're just sensible.

There's sensible and there's stupidity.

Brave or stupid?

There will always be some journalist, comedian, author or whatever that crosses the line to insult Islam and there will always be some radical to kill him for it.

He will know where the line is drawn by previous events or a not so subtle warning from some Muslim group or fanatic.

I'm not talking about a funny cartoon or skit, I mean straight out insulting. I think we all know the difference between brutally insulting and a bit of innocent humour or a little 'dig'.

You've been warned, take heed or take the consequences, it's your choice.

It's knowing where to stop, that's the tricky bit. Stupid people never know when to stop, that's why prisons and cemeteries are full of them.

its like talking to the devil himself isnt it pansi...

what a sorry lot they are..

all they do is read WHAT THEY WANT TO READ...

then they insult people telling them to go to hell...I think thats where the forum is just quietly..hell

the ignorance shown on here by MALES...is astounding it really is....they are bullies yet dont see it.. each and every one of them has insulted us over and over again...its meant to shut us up and make us go to hell..you do know that dont you???....

bullies playground bullies....

even telling me to take horse medication and now go to hell..

charming....

couldnt argue if their life depended on it.. because they know they will lose..and like 7 yr olds they spit the dummy when they lose...

I am proud of the way I think about this..no religion should be brought down and denigrated like we do....to abuse others is a disgusting way to make a living...

but it goes on and as we can see the bwave encourage it.. they think its manly... ::) ::)and or a FoS ;D ;D

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 7:27am

pansi didnt watch Adam Hill but I have done its so late I was watching the tennis.. we are doing well so far so good...

I am sorry I missed the show I think its good to hear everyone on this topic.......and whats happened.. we can all learn from it... not the bwave ones on here of course....they know how to deal with this....head on. ::)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by it_is_the_light on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 7:42am

cods wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 7:23am:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 7:10am:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 7:03am:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 6:15am:

You're not a coward cods, you're just sensible.

There's sensible and there's stupidity.

Brave or stupid?

There will always be some journalist, comedian, author or whatever that crosses the line to insult Islam and there will always be some radical to kill him for it.

He will know where the line is drawn by previous events or a not so subtle warning from some Muslim group or fanatic.

I'm not talking about a funny cartoon or skit, I mean straight out insulting. I think we all know the difference between brutally insulting and a bit of innocent humour or a little 'dig'.

You've been warned, take heed or take the consequences, it's your choice.

It's knowing where to stop, that's the tricky bit. Stupid people never know when to stop, that's why prisons and cemeteries are full of them.

many blessings beloved being

why do these ones attack you , one may well ask ...

one may observe that you are in constant judgement from a place of judgement you judge others and they may take offence ...

yet one such as I am merely observes this

with so very much love

does this comfort you ?

so be it

namaste

- : ) =

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by it_is_the_light on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 7:46am

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 7:16am:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 7:10am:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 7:03am:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 6:15am:

You're not a coward cods, you're just sensible.

There's sensible and there's stupidity.

Brave or stupid?

There will always be some journalist, comedian, author or whatever that crosses the line to insult Islam and there will always be some radical to kill him for it.

He will know where the line is drawn by previous events or a not so subtle warning from some Muslim group or fanatic.

I'm not talking about a funny cartoon or skit, I mean straight out insulting. I think we all know the difference between brutally insulting and a bit of innocent humour or a little 'dig'.

You've been warned, take heed or take the consequences, it's your choice.

It's knowing where to stop, that's the tricky bit. Stupid people never know when to stop, that's why prisons and cemeteries are full of them.

many blessings

when one such as you are takes side in any argument

the chosen argument is now retarded as you lend your warped vision to that side of debate..

which is ok and cool for any logical thinker this is good ...

it is very good for you are your greatest adversary

and do not even realise this fact

and so be it

namaste

- : ) =

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 7:46am

it_is_the_light wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 7:42am:

osted by: it_is_the_light Posted on: Today at 7:42am
cods wrote Today at 7:23am:
Dame Pansi wrote Today at 7:10am:
Postmodern Trendoid II wrote Today at 7:03am:
Dame Pansi wrote Today at 6:15am:
You're not a coward cods, you're just sensible.

There's sensible and there's stupidity.

Brave or stupid?

There will always be some journalist, comedian, author or whatever that crosses the line to insult Islam and there will always be some radical to kill him for it.

He will know where the line is drawn by previous events or a not so subtle warning from some Muslim group or fanatic.

I'm not talking about a funny cartoon or skit, I mean straight out insulting. I think we all know the difference between brutally insulting and a bit of innocent humour or a little 'dig'.

You've been warned, take heed or take the consequences, it's your choice.

Good propaganda, Comrade. We mustn't insult Islam, but the bankers, Christians, CEOs, white people, conservatives, Americans, Jews, rich people, successful people, Murdoch, business owners are fair game. This is progress.

It's knowing where to stop, that's the tricky bit. Stupid people never know when to stop, that's why prisons and cemeteries are full of them.

its like talking to the devil himself isnt it pansi...

what a sorry lot they are..

all they do is read WHAT THEY WANT TO READ...

then they insult people telling them to go to hell...I think thats where the forum is just quietly..hell

the ignorance shown on here by MALES...is astounding it really is....they are bullies yet dont see it.. each and every one of them has insulted us over and over again...its meant to shut us up and make us go to hell..you do know that dont you???....

bullies playground bullies....

even telling me to take horse medication and now go to hell..

charming....

couldnt argue if their life depended on it.. because they know they will lose..and like 7 yr olds they spit the dummy when they lose...

I am proud of the way I think about this..no religion should be brought down and denigrated like we do....to abuse others is a disgusting way to make a living...

but it goes on and as we can see the bwave encourage it.. they think its manly... and or a FoS

many blessings beloved being

why do these ones attack you , one may well ask ...

one may observe that you are in constant judgement from a place of judgement you judge others and they may take offence ...

yet one such as I am merely observes this

with so very much love

does this comfort you ?

so be it

namaste

funny that I could have swore it is "I" who is being judged..

maybe like most on here you only read what you want to read........and what you believe the person is saying.. and not what they really are saying..

but I forgive you.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by it_is_the_light on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 7:47am

cods wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 7:46am:

it_is_the_light wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 7:42am:

many blessings

I forgive you too for you are loved

yet these others take offence to being judged

go figure ..

namaste

- : ) =

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by it_is_the_light on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 7:49am

yet further

I do not judge those whom judge

this is merely observed

with so very much love

namaste

- : ) =

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 8:20am

it_is_the_light wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 7:47am:

cods wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 7:46am:

it_is_the_light wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 7:42am:

many blessings

I forgive you too for you are loved

yet these others take offence to being judged

go figure ..

namaste

- : ) =

yeah me too.. and I dont like being bullied either

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by it_is_the_light on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 8:44am

many blessings

there is one way to stop bullying ...

forgiveness and compassion

when you do this, the magnetic field around you is impenetrable

and so it is for do you see any being bullying the divine light here before you ?

haha and also

I love you for you are a fine and honourable being

namaste

- : ) =

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 9:00am

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 7:16am:

This is a matter of principle. People were MURDERED in the name of some religion that doesn't like comics and so we are duty-bound to step up and defend a freedom of speech that we don't really approve of or care about. Do you get that? We are not defending a comic but a principle.

At some point in time we all have to stand up for things that are important. The particular circumstance is immaterial, but the principle is not.

+1

As I've always said, I may vehemently disagree with what you've said or done, & argued to all ends of this earth, but I will defend your right to say or do what you do (Freedom of Speech/Expression) with my last drop of blood, with my very life, so help me God.

I've stood side by side with many brave men who have done exactly that.

They laid down their lives so we can exercise our freedom to say what we say, & do what we do.

To that I am eternally grateful.

May they rest in peace.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by it_is_the_light on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 9:05am

Panther wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 9:00am:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 7:16am:

many blessings

fine and honourable pursuits these remain

and so be it

namaste

- : ) =

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by aquascoot on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 9:15am

it_is_the_light wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 7:49am:

yet further

I do not judge those whom judge

this is merely observed

with so very much love

namaste

- : ) =

good stuff Light.

sometimes you post waffle (well actually a lot of the time you do), but sometimes you hit the nail on the head. and this is one of those times.

cods is being a bit judgemental about the fact that others are judging her.

you have nailed it.

now this may just be a case of

"if the light posts SO MUCH STUFF, he may eventually post something inciteful"

or it may just be that you really are inciteful.

either way , be at peace.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 9:21am

Panther wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 9:00am:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 7:16am:

so you know people who died for a cartoon....WOW..

I would think those who died in the real trenches are spinning in their graves..

btw I still cant say the M word..have you tried your FoS on these boardslately?? have you tried to use the S word...

freedom to say and do what we do...REALLY! :)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 9:23am

its good to hear those that died in France died for principles and not a cartoon....it must make their loved ones feel a whole lot better.. :)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:08am

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:09am

cods wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 9:21am:

Panther wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 9:00am:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 7:16am:

The subject matter, your fixation with cartoons, means nothing.

It's the principal, they died for a principal.

If it was some cartoon, or if it was your sainted mothers broken chastity belt, it makes no never mind.

It's the principal.......period

And no, I don't give a flying rats ass if I can say some meaningless swear words on this particular forum or not.

As with all rights, the right to exercise a particular right rests with the one wanting to exercise that right, & their desire to do so.

Now, I exercised my right, simply because I wished to, & for no other reason.

If there is a penalty to be paid, that goes with the territory.

There is always a price for Freedom, 'cause Freedom don't come Free. ;)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by longweekend58 on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:20am

cods doesn't get 'principles'. this entire debate is about a PRINCIPLE, not a cartoon. She doesnt get 'scale of offence' when discussing child crimes either.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:27am

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:20am:

cods doesn't get 'principles'. this entire debate is about a PRINCIPLE, not a cartoon. She doesnt get 'scale of offence' when discussing child crimes either.

Well, my sun doesn't rise or set depending on how her feeble feminine mind wants to massage it.

She's simply a woman, & credit is exacted where credit is due.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Quantum on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:37am

cods wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 7:23am:

the ignorance shown on here by MALES...is astounding it really is....they are bullies yet dont see it.. each and every one of them has insulted us over and over again...its meant to shut us up and make us go to hell..you do know that dont you???....

No. There are females who think you are an idiot as well.

You really are taking this defence of Muslims are bit too far. Now you're even playing the victim as well. I don't why you think you can go around calling people "pedophile protectors" and expect nothing but sweet words back. You are a man hating sexist bitter fool and you are getting everything you deserve.

Quote:

couldnt argue if their life depended on it.. because they know they will lose..and like 7 yr olds they spit the dummy when they lose...

You lost last week. Now we are justing making sure everyone knows that. You have not being able to make an argument except for screaming "beehive" as if that is the last word. Your understanding of this situation is simply shocking.

Quote:

but it goes on and as we can see the bwave encourage it.. they think its manly... ::) ::)and or a FoS ;D ;D

No one is claiming to be a hero. We can just recognize chicken shlt when we see it.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:40am

its interesting isnt it.?..

had they not drawn the ugly cartoon they would still be alive..yet somehow this isnt about what they drew???. ::)

I just hope those good folks who worked at charlie realize they died for the worlds principle thats all

I cant get it out of my head

what must their last thoughts have been as they saw these masked madmen rush in.. not even a chance to say i love you to their loved ones...their last moments looking into the eyes of pure HATRED......

but of course they died for principles...

well done you guys the ultimate sacrifice...

.I am not sure it was worth it.. and or how our FoS has changed since your life was taken....

but I am sure it will become clear soon..

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Sprintcyclist on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:43am

cods wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 9:21am:

Panther wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 9:00am:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 7:16am:

they did not die for a cartoon.

they were murdered by muslims

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:44am

Quantum wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:37am:

No one is claiming to be a hero. We can just recognize chicken shlt when we see it.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by perceptions_now on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:46am

For all actions & in-actions, there are Consequences!

And, for everything, there are limitations!

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:49am

Panther wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:27am:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:20am:

cods doesn't get 'principles'. this entire debate is about a PRINCIPLE, not a cartoon. She doesnt get 'scale of offence' when discussing child crimes either.

Well, my sun doesn't rise or set depending on how her feeble feminine mind wants to massage it.

She's simply a woman, & credit is exacted where credit is due.

really hey you are agreeing with a paedo lover you know........ you and longy putting all your FoS to good use..... I think its wonderful

when you guys going to march for YOUR principles then..?
will you be wearing one of longies child abusers have rights as well t/shirts????>.

he also thinks child porn is ok .. its his second FoS... he thinks it isnt bad if its just on computers....

hes an authority on paedos...

and hates anyone who makes a stand against child abuse....

its his principles you see.

its a paedos right to do as he does..... >:( >:(..

so put me down all you like.. but I dont care for your choice of friends..

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:50am

Sprintcyclist wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:43am:

cods wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 9:21am:

Panther wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 9:00am:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 7:16am:

they did not die for a cartoon.

they were murdered by muslims

The people I knew were not, but those in Paris with the magazine were.

But not to give those devils any due, those cartoonist & friends also died for the right to do what they did.......a right no Islamic can control.....hence their murderous dummy spit!

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:52am

perceptions_now wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:46am:

For all actions & in-actions, there are Consequences!

And, for everything, there are limitations!

sitting on the fence again I see perc

what do you mean about inaction.. that sounds like what our principled lads want.....its gone past FoS its now about principles... ;D ;D ;D ;D

fd will be disappointed.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:53am

Sprintcyclist wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:43am:

cods wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 9:21am:

Panther wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 9:00am:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 7:16am:

they did not die for a cartoon.

they were murdered by muslims

sprint your HATRED is worse than any terrorists.. I am disgusted by it

your hatred blinds you to everything.....

more so because you cannot see it...

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 11:01am

cods wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:49am:

Panther wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:27am:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:20am:

cods doesn't get 'principles'. this entire debate is about a PRINCIPLE, not a cartoon. She doesnt get 'scale of offence' when discussing child crimes either.

Well, my sun doesn't rise or set depending on how her feeble feminine mind wants to massage it.

She's simply a woman, & credit is exacted where credit is due.

A lot of things seem to bother you hunny, & I'm no doctor, but professional help may hold the key to your possible inferiority complex, & your desire to lash out & judge everyone on an emotional level that ....... hey, what date is it?

Does this date mean something special to anyone here?

Cods....

Long.....

Sprint.....

Anyone else??

I just wonder did similar conversations take place before?

About 28 days or so ago??

Never mind....just thinkin' out loud here.....

Someone just needs a stiff one I guess....

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Dr. Caligari on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 11:10am

Panther wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 11:01am:

cods wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:49am:

Panther wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:27am:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:20am:

cods doesn't get 'principles'. this entire debate is about a PRINCIPLE, not a cartoon. She doesnt get 'scale of offence' when discussing child crimes either.

Well, my sun doesn't rise or set depending on how her feeble feminine mind wants to massage it.

She's simply a woman, & credit is exacted where credit is due.

A lot of things seem to bother you hunny, & I'm no doctor, but professional help may hold the key to your possible inferiority complex, & your desire to lash out & judge everyone on an emotional level that ....... hey, what date is it?

Does this date mean something special to anyone here?

Cods....

Anyone else??

I just wonder did similar conversations take place before?

About 28 days or so ago?? smileyfaze.tk/slides/imthinkin6.gif

Never mind....just thinkin' out loud here.....

Someone just needs a stiff one I guess.... smileyfaze.tk/slides/chuckle002.gif

smileyfaze.tk/slides/shots.gif

You lost that argument with yourself. Get help urgently.

You are having too many stiff ones.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by nasus on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 11:28am

cods wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:40am:

its interesting isnt it.?..
had they not drawn the ugly cartoon they would still be alive..yet somehow this isnt about what they drew???. ::)
I just hope those good folks who worked at charlie realize they died for the worlds principle thats all
I cant get it out of my head
what must their last thoughts have been as they saw these masked madmen rush in.. not even a chance to say i love you to their loved ones...their last moments looking into the eyes of pure HATRED......
but of course they died for principles...
well done you guys the ultimate sacrifice...
.I am not sure it was worth it.. and or how our FoS has changed since your life was taken....
but I am sure it will become clear soon..

I do not like people bullying members by word on posts in forums. WE can have our say, without vitriol or the constant tagging. We are all entitled to an opinion, and use words to express our thinking. Don't like labels, and I guess its a two way street, one starts the other does not know when to stop. Everyone wants the last word, the last sting. Guess in a very small way that is Freedom of Speech. To express oneself in words that are meant to offend others is what I object to. Yea, so what, just putting it out there.

Now, reading this post "principal" I focus on that because as well as freedom, it is also about principal, what we believe in, whether others understand or even believe in our principal is not the point. Good people on principal will do many thing, and if need be die for that principal, that line drawn in the sand over which others may not cross. It is a symbolic line, a word, deed, belief, but a line never the less.
Since the dawn of time men and women have died for principals, freedom, the right to speak and be heard. To not be Subjugated to follow their God or belief. There are some who cannot and never will understand why some are willing to die for a belief, a principal. This is what makes us different. There are many who will watch as another is set upon by many, they do nothing out of fear that they may then also be attacked. I have a problem with this, but then I am not of that mindset.
WE, and being an Australian I will not speak of others, we have since the Boar war sent men and women into conflict areas, for reasons that some cannot and will not ever understand. Some people cannot understand why another will take up arms to defend a small piece of dirt, here or in other places.
During the Vietnam war it was impossible to convince on side that we needed to be there, they did not understand, communism was not a word they understood.
Supporting allies was not a word they understood. All the way with LBJ was something they did not understand.
However the men and women who went, so to pay an ultimate sacrifice went mainly because that was their job. "theirs was not to reason why, theirs was but to do or die". Tennyson. That is to simplistic, but they went because their country asked them to, some mothers and fathers never understood, they also marched in anti demonstrations. So, the argument rages, why does one person NOT understand what that principal to proceed on a certain cause can lead to, why do they continue down a path that can at times ask for that ultimate sacrifice. Possibly because we all think differently. Sons die, are wounded or maimed, fathers, uncles and brothers and sisters never return, MOTHERS ask why?
I have no answer, I'm not certain anyone else does either, for if we did, then the word PRINCIPAL would be understood and no questions asked, but I fear words to some are just words, they need to seek more and exact retribution.
Possibly the west, that's us, are more understanding of freedom of speech and freedom of expression, those in other lands of other faiths may not be so understanding and hence they se us as infidels and feel the need to follow what course that is way beyond our understanding.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by longweekend58 on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 11:40am

cods wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:49am:

Panther wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:27am:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:20am:

cods doesn't get 'principles'. this entire debate is about a PRINCIPLE, not a cartoon. She doesnt get 'scale of offence' when discussing child crimes either.

Well, my sun doesn't rise or set depending on how her feeble feminine mind wants to massage it.

She's simply a woman, & credit is exacted where credit is due.

you really deserve a ban you drongo. Calling people paedo supporters deserves both a ban and in real life, a punch in the face. Don't you realise how pitiful you sound calling people paedos because they don't agree with your cowardly, disgraceful backdowns?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Quantum on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 12:12pm

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 11:40am:

cods wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:49am:

Panther wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:27am:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:20am:

cods doesn't get 'principles'. this entire debate is about a PRINCIPLE, not a cartoon. She doesnt get 'scale of offence' when discussing child crimes either.

Well, my sun doesn't rise or set depending on how her feeble feminine mind wants to massage it.

She's simply a woman, & credit is exacted where credit is due.

I'm amazed at how cods has gone from being just the confused old lady to one of the most aggressively abusive members on this forum in just a week. She always had a bit of irrational man hatred, but now she is just straight out insane.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by longweekend58 on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 12:41pm

Quantum wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 12:12pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 11:40am:

cods wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:49am:

Panther wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:27am:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:20am:

cods doesn't get 'principles'. this entire debate is about a PRINCIPLE, not a cartoon. She doesnt get 'scale of offence' when discussing child crimes either.

Well, my sun doesn't rise or set depending on how her feeble feminine mind wants to massage it.

She's simply a woman, & credit is exacted where credit is due.

she has certainly lost it bigtime.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Sprintcyclist on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 1:08pm

cods wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:53am:

Sprintcyclist wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:43am:

cods wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 9:21am:

Panther wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 9:00am:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 7:16am:

they did not die for a cartoon.

they were murdered by muslims

sprint your HATRED is worse than any terrorists.. I am disgusted by it

your hatred blinds you to everything.....

more so because you cannot see it...

thanks cods. Love you too

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by aquascoot on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 1:30pm

threads got worse. i didnt think this would be possible :D

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by greggerypeccary on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 1:34pm

cods wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:53am:

sprint your HATRED is worse than any terrorists.. I am disgusted by it

your hatred blinds you to everything.....

more so because you cannot see it...

Sprint advocates terrorism.

"Raze every Mosque to the ground"

Yet, for some reason, he thinks he's better than other terrorists.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Redneck on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 2:05pm

Jesus! Settle down cods!!!

Breath slowly in slowly out!

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by The Grappler Hebdo (je suis) on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 2:20pm

** chews popcorn, pops a new beer..... sits back and enjoys the fracas....**

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Black Orchid on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 2:37pm

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by it_is_the_light on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 2:42pm

aquascoot wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 9:15am:

it_is_the_light wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 7:49am:

yet further

I do not judge those whom judge

this is merely observed

with so very much love

namaste

- : ) =

many blessings aqua and yes

beloved being the light transmits much information

it is so , and so be it

does this comfort thee ?

im interested

namaste

- : ) =

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by longweekend58 on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 3:20pm

Redmond Neck wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 2:05pm:

Jesus! Settle down cods!!!

Breath slowly in slowly out!

be careful! she'll call you a Paedo soon.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Dr. Caligari on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 3:26pm

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 3:20pm:

Redmond Neck wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 2:05pm:

Jesus! Settle down cods!!!

Breath slowly in slowly out!

be careful! she'll call you a Paedo soon.

She called Longweekend58 out?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by nasus on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 3:32pm

Dr. Caligari wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 3:26pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 3:20pm:

Redmond Neck wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 2:05pm:

Jesus! Settle down cods!!!

Breath slowly in slowly out!

be careful! she'll call you a Paedo soon.

She called Longweekend58 out?

Are you stirring again, feeling lonely.
I feel this is there thread and they do not wish any intruders, they want this debate, no it cannot be a debate, to much slinging, name calling, swearing, AND no progress or possible outcome for any one. Lots of anger here and someone should walk away. Or no more chocolate cookies.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Redneck on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 3:35pm

The bully boys are out in force today!

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Redneck on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 4:15pm

bump

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 4:27pm

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 11:40am:

cods wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:49am:

Panther wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:27am:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:20am:

cods doesn't get 'principles'. this entire debate is about a PRINCIPLE, not a cartoon. She doesnt get 'scale of offence' when discussing child crimes either.

Well, my sun doesn't rise or set depending on how her feeble feminine mind wants to massage it.

She's simply a woman, & credit is exacted where credit is due.

you dont want me to look for them do you???

you shouted long and loud when mums were complaining about about not knowing when paedos were living in their streets,,

you said..

they have served their time.. leave them alone....and more....

you were completely on their side.. so dont try to wriggle out of it now..

why would you have brought them into this otherwise???????..

you thought sneering at me for supporting kids was the way to go....erk...

come on you being so smart you think we all suffer memory loss....I have only had one or two run ins with you......and unless you use my ID I stay away from you for the simple reason I dont like paedophiles and or people who support the..

so turn everything back on me as you are wont to do.. most nasty minded people wouldnt know how to debate something anyway and you are more that in that group..as you demonstrate every day

personal abuse it all you have got and you lie with the best of them

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 4:29pm

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 3:20pm:

Redmond Neck wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 2:05pm:

Jesus! Settle down cods!!!

Breath slowly in slowly out!

be careful! she'll call you a Paedo soon.

no longy ONLY YOU dont try to share your shame....

when I have time I will look for those threads.. you better believe it..

I did not call anyone a PAEDO BTW stop lying..

I called you a PAEDO SUPPORTER....so stop the bloody lies.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 4:33pm

Redmond Neck wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 3:35pm:

The bully boys are out in force today!

you should get out more red they are following me all over the forum as they see their manhood being threatened....they havent worked it out yet what they are fighting for......one says FoS another Principle.. even though they havent got any themselves...

and others think Hitler will come back if we stop insulting cartoons...its all kind of got murky

so now I think its a manhood problem..

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Setanta on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 6:02pm

cods wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 4:33pm:

Redmond Neck wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 3:35pm:

The bully boys are out in force today!

You should give it up cods, you're going from amusingly dotty to off the deep end. Don't play the victim over this either, it's just an observation, this is my first post in this thread(oops second) but I have read it all.

I'm with you as far as I wouldn't draw those cartoons and don't know why one would but that's as far as it can go. It was their choice and legal FoS in France, did they deserve to die? No. But just as a race car driver knows the risk and continues, so did these people. If they choose to do it and think it's worth it, as they do because they are continuing, you need to let them. It's that simple. Murder is not legal, the cartoons are.

If you bring up the line "would you do this if they threatened to kill your family??!?!?" I would put it to my family and ask, not just cave in as you advise, I have 3 sons and I doubt they or my wife would cave, maybe they would, we haven't been in that situation.

Anyway. you need to let it go, you are not going to change anyone's mind with the arguments you are using.

Save your sanity.
Forgive remember.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 6:24pm

Setanta wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 6:02pm:

die? No. But just as a race car driver knows the risk and continues, so did these people. If they choose to do it and think it's worth it, as they do because they are continuing, you need to let them. It's that simple. Murder is not legal, the cartoons are.

If you bring up the line "would you do this if they threatened to kill your family??!?!?" I would put it to my family and ask, not just cave in as you advise, I have 3 sons and I doubt they or my wife would cave, maybe they would, we haven't been in that situation.

Anyway. you need to let it go, you are not going to change anyone's mind with the arguments you are using.

Save your sanity.
Forgive remember.

yep lets all talk about Stephen Fry marrying his boy friend???>. ::) ::)

btw you can do that you know... if this is so boring....

how come you dont tell fd the same thing..

or maybe quantum....

lets be just a tiny bit fair here sentanta.

neither me nor pansi are abusing anyone....we dont mention old bitches.. I have been told to eat horse medicine...

where were you when that was thrown at myself???...

on the clive palmer political board rocky suggests I eat Pal dog food...why??? you would need to ask him as it has nothing to do with an ything... but its abuse of myself..

I find this topic very very relevant for the moment....

its starting a chain reaction.. ,maybe you havent noticed..but yes ISIL is now making direct threats to Australia.....

are they sick of the bullying and insults..

maybe I dont know..

all I do kn ow setanta is....

I wouldnt poke a stick into the eye of a mad bull..

these brave men would ::)

I say good luck to them..

do you agree your freedom of speech is safer than ever before over this sacrifice.....?

btw I dont think I have used would you look after your family...

maybe!!!! but it isnt a line I think solves anything to be honest.....I know that self preservation is a human thing....

what I did or may have asked.

is would you not have printed that cartoon had you had that warning??>..

or would you take that risk?..

most turn the attack back onto myself...

like it or not all those dead.. were members of someones family.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Setanta on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 6:37pm

cods wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 4:27pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 11:40am:

cods wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:49am:

Panther wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:27am:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:20am:

cods doesn't get 'principles'. this entire debate is about a PRINCIPLE, not a cartoon. She doesnt get 'scale of offence' when discussing child crimes either.

Well, my sun doesn't rise or set depending on how her feeble feminine mind wants to massage it.

She's simply a woman, & credit is exacted where credit is due.

removed - wrong post responded to.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Setanta on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 6:40pm

cods wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 6:24pm:

Setanta wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 6:02pm:

:o See what I mean a bout the deep end?

edit:

Quote:

what I did or may have asked.
is would you not have printed that cartoon had you had that warning??>..
or would you take that risk?..
most turn the attack back onto myself...
like it or not all those dead.. were members of someones family.

Yes, I would if I thought it was important. Charlie is continuing so they think it is. I don't but it's not my call, I think they suck... but... You just don't bow to threats unless you want to be threatened every day.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Setanta on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 7:13pm

Cods, let me ask you a question in terms you should understand...

Would you stay with an abusive cruel hubby if he threatened your life if you left? Sure you can take out an AVO but they don't stop murder, people ignore them, it happens far too often. So would you, for your safety and the threat of loss of life, stay and be walked over?

From what you have said on this thread, you would.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by longweekend58 on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 7:50pm

cods wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 4:27pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 11:40am:

cods wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:49am:

Panther wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:27am:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:20am:

cods doesn't get 'principles'. this entire debate is about a PRINCIPLE, not a cartoon. She doesnt get 'scale of offence' when discussing child crimes either.

Well, my sun doesn't rise or set depending on how her feeble feminine mind wants to massage it.

She's simply a woman, & credit is exacted where credit is due.

you are an arsehole cods and deserve all the contempt and abuse you are getting now. You simply cannot cope with anyone having an opinion that disagrees with you. the paedo claims are disgraceful and indicative of the horrid person you have become. after all, is anyone calling you a terrorist because of your weak attitude to them? Is anyone calling you a supporter of terrorism because you oppose standing up to them?

Or should we start calling you a terrorist sympathiser because by your own insane thinking methods, you clearly are.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 8:05pm

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 7:50pm:

cods wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 4:27pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 11:40am:

cods wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:49am:

Panther wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:27am:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:20am:

cods doesn't get 'principles'. this entire debate is about a PRINCIPLE, not a cartoon. She doesnt get 'scale of offence' when discussing child crimes either.

Well, my sun doesn't rise or set depending on how her feeble feminine mind wants to massage it.

She's simply a woman, & credit is exacted where credit is due.

Ok.....Time Out..

As I see it, there seems to be 2 sides.

Both have gotten as far apart as possible.

Both are hovering precariously on the outer edges.

Now, lets try to focus all that combative energy, away from baseless name calling, & into constructive, hard nosed, flat out productive debate closer to the center.

Will you guys try, or are we in a death spiral with no way out?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 8:09pm

Setanta wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 7:13pm:

you say I have troub le understanding... ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)

the two are completely different...and you know it...

but if I dont answer I will never hear the end of it..so here goes..

I am in a relationship that is violent...

you didnt say if he started off THREATENING DEATH...

you do know this is crucial dont you??

you see he would only have had to lift his hand to me.. and I would be gone........

what has this to do with FREEDOM OF SPEECH btw?...

women have left husband who threaten death.. if they leave and then they get thrown off balconies even when they havent left....

this sadden me actually that you use domestic violence as an example when we are dealing with more than domestic violence....

this group of people.. yes they are human beings the worst kind...

will do EVERYTHING THEY SAY THEY WILL...

not all men will kill their partners for leaving even though thats the threat..

how ever I wouldnt like to say these terrorist jihadists might never do what they say they will..

would you??>...

I prefer to believe them 100%.. one of the reasons is..

they glory in death... smelling someone blood,hanging heads on fence posts doesnt give them nightmares.. they thrive on it....

they even teach their young sons.. ways and means...its their life its all they live for..

what I am saying and have been for days.. which no one will admit

is NO I DO NOT THINK DRAWING A CARTOON WAS WORTH 17 PEOPLE DYING..

DO I BELIEVE THE CARTOON CSHOULD HAVE BEN WITHDRAWN YES I DO

DO I SEE IT AS A THREAT TO OUR FREEDOM OF SPEECH..

I SAY

WHAT FREEDOM OF SPEECH IS THAT?..

DO I THINK INSULTING ALL FORMS OF RELIGION SHOULD BE STOPPED...

YES I DO...

DO I FIND IT AMUSING OR CLEVER NO I DONT

DO I THINK IT IS A FORM OF BULLYING..

YES I DO...

WOULD IT BOTHER ME IF I NEVER SAW THIS TYPE OF CARTOON AGAIN

N O IT WOULDNT...

WOULD IT HAVE BEEN AN INFRINGEMENT ON OUT FOS HAD THEY WITHDRAWN IT..

I DOUBT ANYONE WOULD HAVE BEEN ANY THE WISER
AS THOSE PEOPLE WOULD BE ALIVE NOW...

IF BY ANY SLIM CHANCE IT DID IMPINGE ON MY FOS
THEN ITS A SACRIFICE I WOULD B E PREPARED TO MAKE...

MY ONLY CRIME IS NOT WAN TING PEOPLE KILLED AND NOT WANTING THIS TO SPREAD AROUND THE WORLD...

IS THAT PLAIN ENOUGH FOR YOU

PLEASE DO NOT BRING DOMESTIC VIOLENCE INTO THIS... MONIS WAS ON BAIL FOR IT... IN CASE YOU HAVE FORGOTTEN SO SOON...AND HIS POOR EXWIFE ISNT HERE TO TELL HER SIDE OF IT.. >:( >:(

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 8:10pm

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 7:50pm:

cods wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 4:27pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 11:40am:

cods wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:49am:

Panther wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:27am:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:20am:

cods doesn't get 'principles'. this entire debate is about a PRINCIPLE, not a cartoon. She doesnt get 'scale of offence' when discussing child crimes either.

Well, my sun doesn't rise or set depending on how her feeble feminine mind wants to massage it.

She's simply a woman, & credit is exacted where credit is due.

RUN ALONG FERAL. YOU HAVE NOTHING WORTH LISTENING TOO i AM AFRAID..

BTW DITTO THE ABOVE FOR YOU

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 8:11pm

DREAMRYDER i am not attacking or abusing anyone...

or do you prefer to ignore that bit?..

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by aquascoot on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 8:12pm

it_is_the_light wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 2:42pm:

aquascoot wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 9:15am:

it_is_the_light wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 7:49am:

yet further

I do not judge those whom judge

this is merely observed

with so very much love

namaste

- : ) =

many blessings aqua and yes

beloved being the light transmits much information

it is so , and so be it

does this comfort thee ?

im interested

namaste

- : ) =

light, i think thats the point.
Even someone with no idea will sometimes just say a randomly intelligent thing.
And i imagine (whilst not being a statistician) that if you say lots of things , you will eventually get something right.
Sort of like "even a dead watch is correct twice a day"
Anyway, youre quite a unique individual.
Do you go on internet dating sites.
They always seem to feature guys who ride jetski's, are fabulous in the kitchen, love international travel and are members of a few wine clubs.
Would it be OK if i set up a false account on say RSVP under your name and we just posted some of your musings online and maybe we could set up a few coffee dates and you could get back to us.
I know no freemasons will probably contact you but there are a lot of "spiritual women" who could benefit from your guidance.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Rocketanski on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 8:13pm

cods wrote on Jan 19^th, 2015 at 6:53am:

Ugly cartoons of Mo are a blast!!! Personally I could never imagine killing a person over a cartoon and anybody who thinks that's justified is seriously sick in the head. :P :P :P

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by it_is_the_light on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 8:13pm

Setanta wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 7:13pm:

many blessings there is no surprise

the question is illogical and a red herring thrown

from a limp wrist .. fear not beloved

this is forgiven so be at peace

namaste

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by nasus on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 8:15pm

[quote author=DreamRyderX She doesnt get 'scale of offence' when discussing child crimes either.[/quote]

Well, my sun doesn't rise or set depending on how her feeble feminine mind wants to massage it.

As I see it, there seems to be 2 sides.

Both have gotten as far apart as possible.

Both are hovering precariously on the outer edges.

Now, lets try to focus all that combative energy, away from baseless name calling, & into constructive, hard nosed, flat out productive debate closer to the center.

Will you guys try, or are we in a death spiral with no way out?
[/quote]

I agree with your post, I tried earlier but this is their battle for supremacy, we the unclean are not wanted or needed, they are waiting for the other side to stop first, but I do not like the odds, one side has various members, as best as I can ascertain the other side 2.
They are at the limits, both will eventually stall and fall to earth, they will reach VNE soon. Then crash and burn.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Setanta on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 8:40pm

cods wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 8:09pm:

Setanta wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 7:13pm:

See, over the edge again. I never said "you have trouble understanding..." I said I would put it in terms you should understand.

It has everything to do with the topic. You think people should "shut up" when threatened, many(most) don't follow that line of thought. I don't and my wife wouldn't put up with it. If that's the way you choose to live your life and you would be a door mat just because someone threatened you... What can I say? Enjoy your life but it's not for me. It doesn't matter if it started off that way or not, it what is now that matters. If you really are in that kind of relationship, take the risk and get out while you can or you might just end up a statistic anyway.

What Monis did is of no import to what I am saying and you asking me not to bring DV into it because of what he did is just ridiculous.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 8:44pm

nasus wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 8:15pm:

[quote author=DreamRyderX She doesnt get 'scale of offence' when discussing child crimes either.

Well, my sun doesn't rise or set depending on how her feeble feminine mind wants to massage it.

As I see it, there seems to be 2 sides.

Both have gotten as far apart as possible.

Both are hovering precariously on the outer edges.

Now, lets try to focus all that combative energy, away from baseless name calling, & into constructive, hard nosed, flat out productive debate closer to the center.

Will you guys try, or are we in a death spiral with no way out?

I agree with your post, I tried earlier but this is their battle for supremacy, we the unclean are not wanted or needed, they are waiting for the other side to stop first, but I do not like the odds, one side has various members, as best as I can ascertain the other side 2.
They are at the limits, both will eventually stall and fall to earth, they will reach VNE soon. Then crash and burn. [/quote]

Such is true, unfortunately the concept of Freedom of Speech is alive in practice here, but the true meaning & the principals involved in maintaining it, are lost within the forest of confusion & ignorance.

Some people never had the actual freedom to lose.

Sort of like being in a jungle, absent any predictors.

They think they have an understanding of Freedom & Liberty, but the concepts are beyond them...out of their intellectual grasp.

Therefore they aren't willing to protect the Freedom of Speech against any & all aggressors, & are willing to relinquish parts of their Freedom, in the hopes of maintaining what they want, but in the end they end up forfeiting the entire package to the aggressors they trusted only wanted an insignificant portion of their Freedom & Liberty.

Fatal mistake........

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by nasus on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 8:58pm

[quote author=DreamRyderX link

As I see it, there seems to be 2 sides.

Both have gotten as far apart as possible. Both are hovering precariously on the outer edges. Now, lets try to focus all that combative energy, away from baseless name calling, & into constructive, hard nosed, flat out productive debate closer to the center.

Will you guys try, or are we in a death spiral with no way out?[/i][/font][/size]
[/quote]

Such is true, unfortunately the concept of Freedom of Speech is alive in practice here, but the true meaning & the principals involved in maintaining it, are lost within the forest of confusion & ignorance.

Some people never had the actual freedom to lose. Sort of like being in a jungle, absent any predictors.

They think they have an understanding of Freedom & Liberty, but the concepts are beyond them...out of their intellectual grasp.

Therefore they aren't willing to protect the Freedom of Speech against any & all aggressors, & are willing to relinquish parts of their Freedom, in the hopes of maintaining what they want, but in the end they end up forfeiting the entire package to the aggressors they trusted only wanted an insignificant portion of their Freedom & Liberty.

Fatal mistake........
[/quote]

Freedom of speech is not really in question here, this to both parties engaging in all manner of name calling could not care less about the concept. If the concept is beyond both the parties is irrelevant. Just because you are ignorant or stupid does not mean you loose by virtue of that stupidity the right to freedom of speech. Intellectual grasp is another furphy. We as a collective ensure that those whom cannot see are the ones most protected. We that see the light need to ensure it remains alight so that all can see and share in the light. We ensure no-one forfeits any liberties that are bestowed on them by virtue of being, they are their for eternity. They are not chips in a poker game.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 9:01pm

Freedom of Speech

Kinda touches all the bases, don't it!

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Setanta on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 9:04pm

cods wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 8:09pm:

MY ONLY CRIME IS NOT WAN TING PEOPLE KILLED AND NOT WANTING THIS TO SPREAD AROUND THE WORLD...

IS THAT PLAIN ENOUGH FOR YOU

I know that, you keep repeating it. What you don't understand is that most people would rather risk losing their lives than live as slaves under the threat of death and you would prefer them not to and that you actually think this would stop the threats. It won't, the more you fold the harder they will stand on your neck and they might just kill you anyway.

You cherish the Charlie cartoonists lives more than they do, they are still making them. Let them make that choice. Yes we know they have families but it their choice.

As I've said, I'm not supporting the cartoons, they suck but that is not the point. It's legal and they choose to.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by longweekend58 on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 9:05pm

Panther wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 9:01pm:

Freedom of Speech

Kinda touches all the bases, don't it!

it does at that.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 9:26pm

Setanta wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 9:04pm:

cods wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 8:09pm:

MY ONLY CRIME IS NOT WAN TING PEOPLE KILLED AND NOT WANTING THIS TO SPREAD AROUND THE WORLD...

IS THAT PLAIN ENOUGH FOR YOU

I am talking to myself...

when have i abused you or anyone else on this topic for having their own opinion?????????..

just provide a link and I will do my best to see your point..

its you thinking and your mates all men I might add.. that are attacking MY THINKING.....

and believe it or not it is ONLY THINKING

I have no power to make anyone stop drawing cartoons..

you all sound as if I am going to go out now and demand the World stop drawing..

check it all sentanta dont put the blame on me...

the only one I have had a go at regarding freedom of speech is fd.. because of his hypocritcal freedom of speech system on here.........

I have said and still do believe there is not such thing as

freedom of speech even though you are prepared to die for it and claim those in France died for it..

thats ok I am not fighting with anyone over it.. its them fighting with me..

I have had every insult thrown at me....and not a word from the likes of yourself...

do I cherishtheir lives more than they do... hahahaha what a silly comment..

they didnt believe did they???....

I do.. maybe you dont either.. and you sound like you will forfeit your families lives for the right to print a cartoon......

I would much rather save lives.... than throw them away...sorrrrrrrry if that rubs you up the wrong way...

but its how I feel....and none of the bully boys have made em change my mind....in fact it makes me dig my heels in more...

you know I dont believe all those employees where fully aware of the danger they were in...they didnt seem to have a locked door...no arms ready to at least have a bit of a chance...

do yopu think they kept the worst of it from them?? after all some of them may have said.. nope my life is worth more than a cartoon...

dont you think it was rather odd no one seemed afraid enough to even lock the door.???????....

ok I look at everything differently I know...but if it was me.. at least I think I would have insisted having a cop right outside the door not the building and hav e all sorts of locks and bolts...it looked to me like they were sitting ducks..

if your family said they would die rather than stop the cartoon wouldnt you are least give them something to fight back with..????...

I am not judging you you after brought your family into this... its me that getting judged left right and centre....must be something I said... or more like I didnt say..

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 9:37pm

Yesterday, hundreds of thousands of people gathered in the Russian region of Chechnya for a protest against the depiction of the Prophet Mohammed in Charlie Hebdo.

Protesters marched through the streets of downtown Grozny, releasing balloons and carrying posters that read 'Hands off our beloved prophet' and 'Europe has only united us'.

The rally took place near the Heart of Chechnya mosque in Grozny, with the regional leader denouncing Charlie Hebdo as 'vulgar and immoral'
+24
The rally took place near the Heart of Chechnya mosque in Grozny, with the regional leader denouncing Charlie Hebdo as 'vulgar and immoral'

'More than 800,000 people took part in the event in the centre of Grozny,' the Russian interior ministry said.

On Friday, Chechen leader Ramzan Kadyrov wrote on his official Instagram account that those who defended Charlie Hebdo were his 'personal enemies', and vowed that at least 1 million people would join the government-sponsored protest in Grozny.

Russia, which has a large and restive Muslim population and waged two devastating wars against Chechnya in the 1990s, offered its condolences to France after the attack but has warned local publications against reprinting the Charlie Hebdo cartoons that featured the Prophet Mohammed.

Roskomnadzor, the Russian communications oversight agency, sent letters to several local publications barring them from re-publishing the French caricatures, and issued a warning to nationwide publications on its Facebook page last week.

thought you may be interested in this sentanta

its from bogards thread Islams Strategy towards the West...... he seems to be keeping his eye on whats happening overseas.... whilst everyone is beating me up.....they seem to have taken their eyes off the ball...

thumb your noses at them for sure....its called freedom of speech isnt it?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Setanta on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 9:37pm

cods wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 9:26pm:

Setanta wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 9:04pm:

cods wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 8:09pm:

MY ONLY CRIME IS NOT WAN TING PEOPLE KILLED AND NOT WANTING THIS TO SPREAD AROUND THE WORLD...

IS THAT PLAIN ENOUGH FOR YOU

I give up.. You've gone from a little dotty to deranged, slightly unsettled to unhinged, mildly preposterous to psychotic.

You say you would rather save lives but what comes out of your mouth(fingers) is you would rather slave lives.

I'm out.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 9:39pm

Setanta wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 9:37pm:

I give up.. You've gone from a little dotty to deranged, slightly unsettled to unhinged, mildly preposterous to psychotic.

off you go then.... ::) ::)...

you will like my last post even less...

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 9:46pm

cods wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 9:26pm:

its you thinking and your mates all men I might add.. that are attacking MY THINKING.....

and believe it or not it is ONLY THINKING

I act & am on my own.....I'm my own person, & I'm nobodies 'Mate' on this forum.

I have no power to make anyone stop drawing cartoons..

you all sound as if I am going to go out now and demand the World stop drawing..

check it all sentanta dont put the blame on me...

the only one I have had a go at regarding freedom of speech is fd.. because of his hypocritcal freedom of speech system on here.........

I have said and still do believe there is not such thing as

freedom of speech even though you are prepared to die for it and claim those in France died for it..

thats ok I am not fighting with anyone over it.. its them fighting with me..

I have had every insult thrown at me....and not a word from the likes of yourself...

do I cherishtheir lives more than they do... hahahaha what a silly comment..

they didnt believe did they???....

I do.. maybe you dont either.. and you sound like you will forfeit your families lives for the right to print a cartoon......

I would much rather save lives.... than throw them away...sorrrrrrrry if that rubs you up the wrong way...

but its how I feel....and none of the bully boys have made em change my mind....in fact it makes me dig my heels in more...

you know I dont believe all those employees where fully aware of the danger they were in...they didnt seem to have a locked door...no arms ready to at least have a bit of a chance...

do yopu think they kept the worst of it from them?? after all some of them may have said.. nope my life is worth more than a cartoon...

dont you think it was rather odd no one seemed afraid enough to even lock the door.???????....

ok I look at everything differently I know...but if it was me.. at least I think I would have insisted having a cop right outside the door not the building and hav e all sorts of locks and bolts...it looked to me like they were sitting ducks..

Only people that live in fear, live huddled in a corner, their doors locked, dead-bolted, blockaded....

My door has one simple lock, easy to break in, but if I know your comin' you're in for a surprise when you get in........Swiss Cheese anyone!!??

if your family said they would die rather than stop the cartoon wouldnt you are least give them something to fight back with..????...

They do, I've seen to that, & they are well trained in personal security methodology & measures of armed survival too.

I am not judging you you after brought your family into this... its me that getting judged left right and centre....must be something I said... or more like I didnt say..

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Setanta on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 9:56pm

Quote:

check it all sentanta dont put the blame on me...

the only one I have had a go at regarding freedom of speech is fd.. because of his hypocritcal freedom of speech system on here.........

Last post Cods.

I didn't put any blame on you except that of wanting to be a victim of your own well meant but unrealistic view of the world.

FD owns the site, it's his property, that's where the difference lays. The kind of FoS you want here is the same as me asking can I come into your home and say what I like or will you make the rules? His property, his rules. Now do I think the filters etc should exist? Nope, I disagree with him too but it's not my site so I don't demand he uncensor nice person.

edit: As long as I can say frontbottom all is good! ;)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by nasus on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:10pm

cods wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 9:37pm:

Yesterday, hundreds of thousands of people gathered in the Russian region of Chechnya for a protest against the depiction of the Prophet Mohammed in Charlie Hebdo.

thought you may be interested in this sentanta

its from bogards thread Islams Strategy towards the West...... he seems to be keeping his eye on whats happening overseas.... whilst everyone is beating me up.....they seem to have taken their eyes off the ball...

thumb your noses at them for sure....its called freedom of speech isnt it?

Sentanta is trying to show you a clear path. You post about all manner of persons in Russia and Chechnya and marches for what.
The question I ask you, What do you actually believe in your heart, which is from what I read in the right place.
I agree with nothing so far you have written, for you appear to be lashing out at those who bait you.
I tried desperately to explain in my sill simplistic way what I thought you are seeking, but alas I was wrong.
All you are doing, and it is not me that is judging you, is destroying your credibility.
Sometimes it is wiser to walk away, if possible, that to destroy what you have built. But as a newbie, I am not across all what proceeded. Go with God.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:56pm

Setanta wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 9:56pm:

Quote:

check it all sentanta dont put the blame on me...

the only one I have had a go at regarding freedom of speech is fd.. because of his hypocritcal freedom of speech system on here.........

did you check out bogies thread...

and it wasnt about what I want.. I do understand what your saying and I agree.. however fd went on a rampage about freedom of speech and would not answer any questions he only came back with his own stupid questions about appeasement.....as ikf there is any appeasing a raging wounded bull...

when I say there is no such thing as FoS I get abused....then here you are saying exactly what I have been saying....we all make our own rules when it comes to freedom of speech....

so all this crap about dying for it.. it just that crap....a figment of peoples imagination,.....

if fd didnt have rules regarding FoS imagine the state of the place....but he wouldnt admit it....

this is why it seems I have raged on about something...fd is very annoying.....

as for the cartoon.. was it worth dying for????...

no good saying it was the principle.. you have just admitted its rubbish...lolol.

we can beg to differ.. but have a read of what happen ing in the real world..... we get a bit carried away with our own opinions... its not as if we can change the world....we have to be united to do that.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:59pm

nasus wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:10pm:

cods wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 9:37pm:

not another light spare me...

toddle off dear lectures I dont need and especially from a newbie...theres a nice thread on Stephen Fry getting married..

right up your street..

my credibility is fine thanks... your the one that sounds like you are a sandwich short of a picnic.. :D

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by stryder on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 11:15pm

I guess cods has embraced her cowardice like a hugging a teddy bear, and being defiant with some of the most insane and stupid reasons to throw away the ideas of freedom of speech that i have ever heard,

Cods has proved she has no real defining principles because SHE KNOWS THAT ISLAMO BULLIES CAN SCARE THE S**** OUT OF HER and bend whatever principles she thinks she ever had, TO THERE WILL.

How I imagine Cods.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Amadd on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 11:19pm

Gee, I don't know if Cods (wallop) is really understanding how deranged somebody would need to be to commit such a murderous act in cold blood. It's terrible that so-called humans like that walk this earth.
They're just like another Julian Knight or Martin Bryant. There is no hope of appeasing them. They'll just look for another reason to carry out their blood lust. They are deranged and need to be stopped.
The reply by the muslim community seems to be one of appeasement also. Fat lotta good it ever did them. They consistently cry to the west for real help whilst facing Mecca.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Setanta on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 11:36pm

cods wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 10:56pm:

Setanta wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 9:56pm:

Quote:

check it all sentanta dont put the blame on me...

the only one I have had a go at regarding freedom of speech is fd.. because of his hypocritcal freedom of speech system on here.........

Glad you've calmed a bit.

Cods, there is a difference to what you can publicly say/do according to the law, than you can do in someone's home/property. FD, here, is the home owner, he may not let you burn flags in his home. In public out the front of his home you can burn the flag, do you see the difference?

It's not about dying for it but it comes to that sometimes, those Charlies wouldn't have done it otherwise, they knew there was a risk and I dare say were trying to provoke a response. They probably didn't think it would go down the way it did but they made the decision. I don't agree with their means of protest but what they are saying by going back to work and making more cartoons is you won't put your boot on my neck and that is their lawful right and as unfortunate as more cartoons are, that is the right thing to do.

It sucks hairy ones but that is the way it is, I don't have to like it but that's life. If you let someone stand over you once, they will be back for more. That's the part you are not getting.

You don't just stand up to bullies until they threaten to kill you, then walk away.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by stryder on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 11:36pm

Amadd wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 11:19pm:

Thats what is so stupid about argument.

She thinks we should bend our ideas of freedom of speech and expression to Islamo bullies, BECAUSE THEY CARRY GUNS AND ARE PSYCHOTIC ENOUGH TO KILL IF THEY ARE OFFENDED ???

I cant believe it. ;D

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Lisa Jones on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 6:18am

Why is it, that some people here seem to think that freedom of speech is synonymous with freedom of stupidity?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 6:51am

Setanta wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 11:36pm:

no good saying it was the principle.. you have just admitted its rubbish...lolol.

we can beg to differ.. but have a read of what happen ing in the real world..... we get a bit carried away with our own opinions... its not as if we can change the world....we have to be united to do that.

Glad you've calmed a bit.

Cods, there is a difference to what you can publicly say/do according to the law, than you can do in someone's home/property. FD, here, is the home owner, he may not let you burn flags in his home. In public out the front of his home you can burn the flag, do you see the difference?

It's not about dying for it but it comes to that sometimes, those Charlies wouldn't have done it otherwise, they knew there was a risk and I dare say were trying to provoke a response. They probably didn't think it would go down the way it did but they made the decision. I don't agree with their means of protest but what they are saying by going back to work and making more cartoons is you won't put your boot on my neck and that is their lawful right and as unfortunate as more cartoons are, that is the right thing to do.

It sucks hairy ones but that is the way it is, I don't have to like it but that's life. If you let someone stand over you once, they will be back for more. That's the part you are not getting.

You don't just stand up to bullies until they threaten to kill you, then walk away

I dont see to hav e a way with words on a computer I dont know what makes you think I was upset about anything.....but I can assure you I wasnt and I am not..

I am quite comfortable with the way I see this terrible event and how I THINK/HOPE it could have been avoided...

do I want world peace... sure do...and I do know aggression isnt the way to world peace...

sentanta going on about FoS was a dig at fd.....and anyone who thinks this appalling event has kept their fos safe and sound....

to believe for one moment.. stopping tormenting people would interfere in their every day FoS

almost makes me smile..

I am the one being abused... have you noticed that??

people usually abuse when they are losing not when they are winning...

how do you know they KNEW the full brunt of the risk they were taking???? had they had heads delivered to their doors????.....

to me it comes down to being pig headed and kicking the beehive.. sorry to bring that up again...but we cant actually kick the angry terrorists can we...

this was pure provocation...and this is what most do not understand..

they went out of their way to provoke someone who was made enough to kill wan tingly over something that has not the remotest thing to do with FoS...

the mechanic has placed a thread without a link saying terroists will March through Sydney today..

maybe this is a chance for all the bwave lads on here to go and show how much they value their fos...and march down the same street with placards claiming they will fight anyone for it...

whats the betting I dont see any of that... they feel much better after they have said it all to cods.. I know..

one of the problems I have with your last comment is

I saw Charlie as the BULLY...

they did the provoking..the name calling the insulting.. like the bully in the play ground...what does he use for a weapon????.......

I dont think there are many people who do not know how upset fanatics get regarding their god and religion....extraordinary oh god yes...we dont think like them.. christ is a swear word for us...so we think .. ok go away and suck it up...we are just having fun...

the facts are they dont like it they dont it at all...

and now we have a different kind of terrorists he will kill to stop you...simple as ABC..

I am wondering how many magazines are now printing up cartoons of muhammad knowing full well they will be plastered all over their ceilings..

is pickering still drawing them I havent heard???...

I wish you well.. and hope you never have to defend your FOS..

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 6:53am

Lisa Jones wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 6:18am:

Why is it, that some people here seem to think that freedom of speech is synonymous with freedom of stupidity?

stryder and longweekend I think thats one for you..guys

::) ::)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 6:54am

stryder I love chickens....

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by aquascoot on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 7:38am

Lisa Jones wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 6:18am:

Why is it, that some people here seem to think that freedom of speech is synonymous with freedom of stupidity?

Hi Lisa, if you are saying its "stupid" to have posted the cartoons, you may have a point....but that's not the point.

If I have a mad stallion at my place (and ive had a few) I would be "stupid' to get in the roundyard with him.

But that's not the point.

You cant allow a mad critter to run amok in your kingdom (as others have rightly said ...this is appeasement....and it would only make the stallion MORE dangerous, MORE aggressive, MORE of a threat.

So, as ruler of the farm, you have a duty of care to yourself and every other animal living under YOUR protection to tame this beast.

You will have to put in a lot of effort, you will have to isolate him, you will have to "turn up the heat" and "turn it up relentlessly" til he comes to the realisation that YOU are in charge. You will have to turn him into a whipped dog, you will have to dominate, you will have to be the alpha, you will have to show him "who's boss" relentlessly and unceasingly.
This does not have to be done in an emotional hateful way. It is an education process.

I think if Vlad Putin was PM of france, the correct protocols would be put in place.

No messing about, you cant have wild animals running amok and you use a stockwhip, a cattle prod, a rifle , a shotgun or a frigging artillery piece to eliminate the threat but you never, ever, ever, ever appease a wild animal as it only emboldens them and makes the task more difficult down the track. ;)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 7:45am

Quote:

Cods, there is a difference to what you can publicly say/do according to the law, than you can do in someone's home/property. FD, here, is the home owner, he may not let you burn flags in his home. In public out the front of his home you can burn the flag, do you see the difference?

If you let someone stand over you once, they will be back for more. That's the part you are not getting.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Lisa Jones on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 8:05am

freediver wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 7:45am:

Quote:

Good luck trying to explain this one Setanta. I actually think cods already knows this but is just trying to change the subject. She throws it out constantly, but she ignores every single response.

[quote]If you let someone stand over you once, they will be back for more. That's the part you are not getting.

Another point that has been made for cods over and over again - and to which she will not respond. She appears to think that appeasing terrorists will make them leave you alone, and her principle strategy for debating this key issue is to cover her ears and chant.[/quote]

Oh FD, have you only JUST noticed this? The rest of us have been enduring it throughout her incessant hyper mode driven 36 000 posts. Her baiting has reached beyond insane levels. Those of us who have in frustration, tried to engage with her, have found ourselves on the receiving end of an ill deserved ban.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 8:08am

Just ignore her then. There is no shortage of people like that, and they are not an excusing for lack of self control.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Redneck on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 8:11am

aquascoot wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 7:38am:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 6:18am:

Why is it, that some people here seem to think that freedom of speech is synonymous with freedom of stupidity?

A good analogy, well put! :)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Lisa Jones on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 8:15am

freediver wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 8:08am:

Just ignore her then. There is no shortage of people like that, and they are not an excusing for lack of self control.

Believe you me, many of us are..now. In fact we post around her so as to not be baited by her again. Hey FD, isn't there something in Forum Rules about those who bait? Yes, I believe there is. It would be nice to see that rule enforced for a change. Just saying.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 8:19am

Quote:

Hey FD, isn't there something in Forum Rules about those who bait? Yes, I believe there is.

It says ignore them.

Quote:

I think if Vlad Putin was PM of france, the correct protocols would be put in place.

Russia has instructed it's media not to publish the cartoons.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Dame Pansi on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 8:20am

I'll jump on the war on Islam bandwagon when they take away something that really matters, until then I'll sit back and watch the shenanigans.

Have they taken away or even tried to take away anything that's important to your lifestyle yet?....and don't come back with that nonsense about Christmas and Easter.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Dame Pansi on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 8:23am

freediver wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 8:19am:

Quote:

Hey FD, isn't there something in Forum Rules about those who bait? Yes, I believe there is.

It says ignore them.

[quote]I think if Vlad Putin was PM of france, the correct protocols would be put in place.

Russia has instructed it's media not to publish the cartoons.

[/quote]

Why? I wonder if Mr Putin can envisage a likely event before it happens?

Maybe he sees no reason to throw petrol on the fire for the sake of a cartoon. Russia is a very religious nation, they wouldn't like their prophet insulted....do unto others sort of thing.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Lisa Jones on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 8:28am

freediver wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 8:19am:

Quote:

Hey FD, isn't there something in Forum Rules about those who bait? Yes, I believe there is.

It says ignore them.

It also says something about those initiating the situation. You can't have a master baiter on the loose, running around with forum immunity ... can you?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Dame Pansi on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 8:28am

Lisa Jones wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 8:05am:

freediver wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 7:45am:

Quote:

Oh FD, have you only JUST noticed this? The rest of us have been enduring it throughout her incessant hyper mode driven 36 000 posts. Her baiting has reached beyond insane levels. Those of us who have in frustration, tried to engage with her, have found ourselves on the receiving end of an ill deserved ban.[/quote]

An ill deserved ban? I would think if you got banned you broke at least one forum rule.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by aquascoot on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 8:33am

freediver wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 8:19am:

Quote:

Hey FD, isn't there something in Forum Rules about those who bait? Yes, I believe there is.

It says ignore them.

[quote]I think if Vlad Putin was PM of france, the correct protocols would be put in place.

Russia has instructed it's media not to publish the cartoons.

[/quote]

Good old Vlad, he's not stepping in the round yard with the mustang.
I'll bet he has a "sterner" way of dealing with the muslim rebels in the south of Russia then wandering around with a little sign saying
Je Suis Vlad. ;) ;)

They be feeling the full force of vlad's "re - education" until they submit to the alpha.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Lisa Jones on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 8:38am

Pansi, we have a situation here and it's affecting a lot of us. K?

Given where this discussion is heading, I would much prefer to raise these issues (and a few more) in the Feedback Board, but I cannot find the post button to do so.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Dame Pansi on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 8:47am

Lisa Jones wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 8:38am:

OMG!....a situation you say? We haven't had one of those for a while.

What affect is it having on you, Lisa? Take a seat, have a cup of tea and a Tim Tam and let's discuss it.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Lisa Jones on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 9:05am

Hmmm... still can't see the POST button for Feedback here.

Interesting...

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 9:07am

Quote:

I'll jump on the war on Islam bandwagon when they take away something that really matters, until then I'll sit back and watch the shenanigans

Pansi this is just another way of you refusing to say just how low you would stoop to appease terrorists. To most people, freedom of speech matters. Where would you draw the line Pansi?

Quote:

It also says something about those initiating the situation.

Lisa, if you are confused, quote it, and I will explain it for you.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by ian on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 9:11am

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 8:20am:

Come on Pansi, get real. They took away our right to draw offensive caricatures of the prophet Muhammed and publish them in a little known foreign cartoon mag we will never see or wish to. My Saturday nights are ruined.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Gnads on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 10:19am

cods wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 4:33pm:

Redmond Neck wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 3:35pm:

The bully boys are out in force today!

You're about as threatening to anyones manhood as Julian Clary ;D ;D ;D

Julian_Clary.jpg (11 KB | 45 )

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Lisa Jones on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 10:38am

freediver wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 9:07am:

Quote:

I'll jump on the war on Islam bandwagon when they take away something that really matters, until then I'll sit back and watch the shenanigans

Pansi this is just another way of you refusing to say just how low you would stoop to appease terrorists. To most people, freedom of speech matters. Where would you draw the line Pansi?

[quote]It also says something about those initiating the situation.

Lisa, if you are confused, quote it, and I will explain it for you.

[/quote]

I'm more confused as to why I cannot post this in Feedback. Any ideas FD?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Phemanderac on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 10:48am

Lisa Jones wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 10:38am:

freediver wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 9:07am:

Quote:

I'll jump on the war on Islam bandwagon when they take away something that really matters, until then I'll sit back and watch the shenanigans

Lisa, if you are confused, quote it, and I will explain it for you.

I'm more confused as to why I cannot post this in Feedback. Any ideas FD?
[/quote]

I am going to go out on a bit of a limb and suggest you might be trying to "reply" to a locked thread...

Just a thought.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Lisa Jones on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 11:49am

Phemanderac wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 10:48am:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 10:38am:

freediver wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 9:07am:

Quote:

I'll jump on the war on Islam bandwagon when they take away something that really matters, until then I'll sit back and watch the shenanigans

Lisa, if you are confused, quote it, and I will explain it for you.

I'm more confused as to why I cannot post this in Feedback. Any ideas FD?

I am going to go out on a bit of a limb and suggest you might be trying to "reply" to a locked thread...

Just a thought.[/quote]

No. I just do not have the post button. I only have view access. My topic has been moved from Chat to Feedback by FD. I'm trying to post in it over there but I cannot. K?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 12:00pm

You should be able to reply to the thread now:

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1421955982

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Lisa Jones on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 12:02pm

freediver wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 12:00pm:

You should be able to reply to the thread now:

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1421955982

Ok. I'll see if it works now.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Lisa Jones on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 12:07pm

freediver wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 12:00pm:

You should be able to reply to the thread now:

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1421955982

Indeed I can. Thanks FD.

Can you please answer a simple question re Global Mods in Feedback?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Dame Pansi on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 5:38pm

freediver wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 9:07am:

Quote:

I'll jump on the war on Islam bandwagon when they take away something that really matters, until then I'll sit back and watch the shenanigans

Pansi this is just another way of you refusing to say just how low you would stoop to appease terrorists. To most people, freedom of speech matters. Where would you draw the line Pansi?

Where would I draw the line?

If they took away my freedom to actively engage in public protest, that's it, war on, until then nah!....I don't do offensive, insulting cartoons about prophets so I'm safe for now.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by red baron on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 5:51pm

Think this says it all ..Red

If only all our politicians stop the politically correct spin and be as refreshingly straight forward as this guy! I'm sure you won't see this interview aired in the mainstream media.
Part of the transcript of an interview aired on Al Jazeera that a friend sent me, where Scott Morrison, MP was invited for comment.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Transcript Station:
Al JaZeERa ENGLISH
Date:
9/1/2015...
Program: The STREAM Time:7:06 AM
Compere:
AL JAZEERA Summary ID:W00059934129
---------------------------

INTERVIEW ON CHARLIE HEBDO KILLINGS

MORRISON: I’m sorry. I have to interrupt here. I’m sorry I am not going to sit here and listen to people stupidly suggest that the French or the magazine or anyone brought this on themselves. Are you for real? We have a dozen people dead, killed in the name of a religious belief and you are seriously going to even slightly justify this?
COMPERE: I don’t think anyone is justifying anything here.
MORRISON: Well that’s not what I am hearing. I’m hearing this vaguely worded defence that France shouldn’t have done this and Sarkozy said that two years ago, and if they didn’t draw Mohammed then this might not of happened or whatever. It is obscene and a gutless way of almost saying they all deserved this. Well if you believe that you are about as bad as the idiot who thinks the pretty girl in the short skirt is asking to be raped so she better watch out.
COMPERE: That’s a ridiculous comparison.
MORRISON: Is it ridiculous? Tell me how? It’s the “you were asking for it” way of thinking. Your logic is those who drew the pictures should have known better and should have known what the response would be. Where as I say, if you can’t accept that people have different views to you then maybe the problem is with you if your response is the pull out an AK and go nuts.
COMPERE: Well, the material was designed to offend.
MORRISON: And so what. A lot of what I’ve heard here today has offended me but if you’re civilised, and I think that’s a major issue with some of the people we are talking about, if you are civilised you just get on with it. We shouldn’t have to have special rules for special people.
COMPERE: No-one is suggesting special rules just an understanding that some things are offensive.
MORRISON: So OK, we can have a bit of fun with the Pope, with Buddha, Jesus Christ on the Cross, The Dalai Lama, The Queen, Barack Obama. Want to add to the list? But not anything or anyone associated with Muslims. They’re special apparently. And that’s where all this free speech talk I’m hearing falls to bits. If you defend free speech then you defend offensive speech as well. It’s real easy to stand up for the nice stuff but sometime it gets ugly and if you are fair dinkum, as we say in Australia, you stand for all. Now, I’m not fond of Jesus Christ jokes but if you crack one you shouldn’t fear a few goons showing up with AK47s and shooting everyone in the office dead at their desks. So please, spare me the justification garbage for these terrorists being upset and just responding to provocation. If you think they are even slightly justified for killing people who drew some pictures then I’m afraid you are over in their column.
COMPERE: OK I take your point but if you deliberately set out to offend there are consequences.
MORRISON: Yes there are. People might not buy your magazine or you get nasty letters in the mail from upset people but not a dozen of your workmates dead at their desks, and here we are again talking about consequences. It’s back to the same argument as the pretty girl in the bar example. If you think she’s asking to be raped you are, in my view, unfit for civilised society. You are uncivilised and maybe that’s something we should be spending a bit of energy on.
* * End * *
Transcript produced by iSentia

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 5:56pm

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 5:38pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 9:07am:

Quote:

I'll jump on the war on Islam bandwagon when they take away something that really matters, until then I'll sit back and watch the shenanigans

Pansi this is just another way of you refusing to say just how low you would stoop to appease terrorists. To most people, freedom of speech matters. Where would you draw the line Pansi?

Is publishing a cartoon mocking Muhammed a form of public protest?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 11:29pm

freediver wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 5:56pm:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 5:38pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 9:07am:

Quote:

I'll jump on the war on Islam bandwagon when they take away something that really matters, until then I'll sit back and watch the shenanigans

Pansi this is just another way of you refusing to say just how low you would stoop to appease terrorists. To most people, freedom of speech matters. Where would you draw the line Pansi?

Is publishing a cartoon mocking Muhammed a form of public protest?

Did somebody say cartoooon??????

I dunno who that guy is supposed ta be, but he sure don't look none too comfy.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Dame Pansi on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 6:16am

freediver wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 5:56pm:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 5:38pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 9:07am:

Quote:

I'll jump on the war on Islam bandwagon when they take away something that really matters, until then I'll sit back and watch the shenanigans

Pansi this is just another way of you refusing to say just how low you would stoop to appease terrorists. To most people, freedom of speech matters. Where would you draw the line Pansi?

Is publishing a cartoon mocking Muhammed a form of public protest?

I don't know, maybe, maybe not, you'd have to ask the cartoonist what exactly their intention is, what the reasoning is for attacking Muhammad and those that worship him.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 7:46am

So the war might be on, and you might be on the anti-Islam bandwagon, depending on the intention of the cartoonists?

Or did you mean only if they took away the right to protest in ways that you approve of?

Looks like Pansi shares Abu's interpretation of freedom:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 7:17am:

They haven't taken away any rights, that's the point. Anyone is still free to do the cartoon thing, if they so desire and if they're prepared to die for their cause.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by A goat called Honeybuns on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 9:22am

red baron wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 5:51pm:

Scott Morrison MP?
No, some guy called Jason Morrison.
Wrong yet again, Red.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Phemanderac on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 9:38am

Freedom of speech is a fine ideal that I support, well of course, unless you are responding to a taunt on a forum at least - then it's not ok.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by A goat called Honeybuns on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 9:45am

Phemanderac wrote on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 9:38am:

Freedom of speech is a fine ideal that I support, well of course, unless you are responding to a taunt on a forum at least - then it's not ok.

Geez, read the fuggin' rules.
"If you participate in any kind of flame war you will be suspended, regardless of who started it or who you think ‘deserved it’. "

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 9:48am

Phemanderac wrote on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 9:38am:

Freedom of speech is a fine ideal that I support, well of course, unless you are responding to a taunt on a forum at least - then it's not ok.

The true Freedom of Speech has no actual boundaries.

One is free to say anything they wish, to anyone they wish, & be as pure or distasteful as they wish.

Speech does not have to be liked to be spoken.

No law in government can regulate speech until after it is spoken, & then only depending upon the resolve of those choosing to exercise their right.

Government can fine me....but only after I've said my piece, & it's hit your ears or eyes, & after I pay my fine I'm free to say whatever I wish, again.

As long as my desire to say what I wish is stronger than the penalty, my free speech prevails.

Those who died in Paris, are dead but not silenced. The Islamics who murdered them didn't count on the many thousands upon thousands of other free minded people prepared to lift up their torches of Freedom & Liberty in their stead.

Those who died in Paris are dead, but not silenced.

They will never be silenced!

http://imgur.com/HNmaQYz.jpg

http://imgur.com/9jkyJzp.jpg

http://imgur.com/RDsV9Yc.jpg

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Phemanderac on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 9:54am

Life_goes_on wrote on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 9:45am:

Phemanderac wrote on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 9:38am:

Freedom of speech is a fine ideal that I support, well of course, unless you are responding to a taunt on a forum at least - then it's not ok.

Geez, read the fuggin' rules.
"If you participate in any kind of flame war you will be suspended, regardless of who started it or who you think ‘deserved it’. "

I did read them, this is what they start with....

"Do not post personal criticism of other members. Do not respond to personal criticism of yourself or other members."

Now honestly, that which you quoted is not applied unilaterally or with any level of consistency. Neither is that which I quoted by the way....

To my mind this makes the apparent boundary to said "freedom of speech" somewhat wishy washy, unclear, inconsistent, untrustworthy and to be certain - not credible.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 10:21am

Phemanderac wrote on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 9:54am:

Life_goes_on wrote on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 9:45am:

Phemanderac wrote on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 9:38am:

Freedom of speech is a fine ideal that I support, well of course, unless you are responding to a taunt on a forum at least - then it's not ok.

Geez, read the fuggin' rules.
"If you participate in any kind of flame war you will be suspended, regardless of who started it or who you think ‘deserved it’. "

Hey, I understand your position, but our Freedom of Speech -- your Freedom of Speech -- is here on this particular forum just as long as the powers that be choose to tolerate what is said. The moment they lose their sense of humor, like a band of gypsies, we will need to travel elsewhere.

I appreciate the courtesies that the owners of this forum have extended to me & us, for it is they who are the real patriots of Freedom & Liberty!

Our Freedom of Speech travels far & wide, but only at the pleasure of those who ~~hear~~ tolerate it.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Phemanderac on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 10:28am

Panther wrote on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 10:21am:

Phemanderac wrote on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 9:54am:

Life_goes_on wrote on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 9:45am:

Phemanderac wrote on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 9:38am:

Freedom of speech is a fine ideal that I support, well of course, unless you are responding to a taunt on a forum at least - then it's not ok.

Geez, read the fuggin' rules.
"If you participate in any kind of flame war you will be suspended, regardless of who started it or who you think ‘deserved it’. "

Whilst I appreciate that which you say, for my part, the "they" you speak of actually are the limiters by and large of any perception of free speech on this board.

Hardly a shining example of patriots to free speech, in my humble opinion at least.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 10:39am

A forum is not a democracy to be controlled by a vote of the mob. The owner(s) has/have full latitude in how he/they decide to enforce their (not our) rules or not.

Until you are banned for what you say, you are free to say whatever comes to mind.

Just as long as you accept the possibility of penalty, which always exists alongside the freedom to prevent chaos.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by ian on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 10:42am

Panther wrote on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 10:39am:

A forum is not a democracy to be controlled by a vote of the mob. The owner(s) has/have full latitude in how he/they decide to enforce their (not our) rules or not.

Until you are banned for what you say you are free to say whatever comes to mind.

Just as long as you accept the possibility of penalty, which always exists alongside the freedom.

Its either free speech or it isnt? which is it? Free speech only exists without penalty, with penalty there is no free speech. Suggest you grab a dictionary and a book of logical reasoning and take it from there .

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 10:49am

ian wrote on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 10:42am:

Panther wrote on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 10:39am:

A forum is not a democracy to be controlled by a vote of the mob. The owner(s) has/have full latitude in how he/they decide to enforce their (not our) rules or not.

Until you are banned for what you say you are free to say whatever comes to mind.

Just as long as you accept the possibility of penalty, which always exists alongside the freedom.

You really don't completely understand Freedom, do you.

Freedom is not an absolute.

With Freedom comes responsibility.

If you are banned, you have the Freedom to take your words with you, to wherever you wish to say them.

No one can stop you from going, just as no one can force you to not exercise your Freedom of Speech, because you can only be penalized after your words have already been said, & after your words have been heard or seen.

Penalties are a condition you FREELY accepted upon accepting your membership.

You weren't forced into becoming a member were you?

You exercised your Freedom of Choice, did you not?

.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by ian on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 11:18am

Like i said, get yourself a dictionary and start looking up the words you are using because you dont understand them.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 11:37am

ian wrote on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 11:18am:

Like i said, get yourself a dictionary and start looking up the words you are using because you dont understand them.

Or on the other hand, you ~~are~~ might be using a faulty interpretation of what you have read, or someone else might have read for you.

As I said before, Freedom is not an absolute.

No one can do everything they conceive of doing, or saying, without needing to take personal responsibility for what they wish to say, do, actually say, or think of saying or doing.

That said, it isn't until after you have exercised your Freedom of Speech, can a penalty for saying what you said, or doing what you did, can be imposed -- if at all.

You can also freely chose to disregard any such penalty, but by doing so you must be willing to accept -- accept full responsibility -- for any ramifications to your actions & decisions.

In the end, you had free speech, you expressed your Freedom of Speech, & what you did or said was heard & or seen.

Now, you can either attempt to understand that, or continue to chase your own tail until you drop dead of exhaustion.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Phemanderac on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 11:54am

I think there is a gap between the "dictionary" meaning of the word freedom and the application of the word in terms of speech and expression...

That is where some of this apparent confusion/debate is coming from quite clearly.

The dictionary term after all does not mention any LIMITS and, in point of fact, does for all intent and purpose read as an absolute.... particularly this little gem,

"2. exemption from external control, interference, regulation, etc."

That would seem pretty "absolute" to me.

However, I also acknowledge that the stated definition of "Freedom of Speech" does have some stated "regulations" in it generally. This regulations depend on Government of the day and how they interpret them.... Still, it certainly suggests a bit of a lie to the use of the word freedom in association with speech and expression.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 12:16pm

Phemanderac wrote on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 11:54am:

I agree to a point.

There are regulations placed on the Freedom of Speech (along with remedies/penalties) by Governments (which in & of themselves are instituted to govern at our will, & by a rule of law we ourselves, or our forbearers, initially establish).

That said, when do those remedies/penalties get imposed?

Before you express yourself, or after you freely express yourself?

If you agree that it is only after the deed is done, then you would have to agree that the moment you expressed yourself you were expressing your Right to the Freedom of Speech.

The way I look at it, that Freedom is not absolute, might be (I'm not perfect, closer than yesterday, but not there yet ;) ) better explained here:

Quote:
........The freedom that an individual or community or state seeks must be consistent with a similar freedom for other individuals, communities or states. National, economic, religious or cultural freedom expresses itself in and by means of the duality of existence. It lives on duality and is sustained by duality; therefore it has to be relative and limited and cannot be infinite. It exists in varying degrees. Even when it is won through persistent effort, it cannot be a permanent attainment, since the external conditions having once been secured are not secured forever but are capable of deteriorating in the course of time.

Now, that said, the Freedom of Speech was not bestowed upon mankind by any person, or by any government.

It is a 'Natural Right' bestowed upon man way before memory, the moment we first spoke, therefore our Freedom of Speech is unlimited/absolute.

Restricted maybe by government, but only after the fact that we have the 'Natural Right' to utilize it.

We can say it, we can express it, but we may be penalized for doing so.

We have to take a personal responsibility in making the choice to use it or not.

Government is powerless to stop you.

All they can do is attempt to deter you, or attempt to stop you from doing/saying something again.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 2:31pm

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 6:16am:

freediver wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 5:56pm:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 5:38pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2015 at 9:07am:

Quote:

I'll jump on the war on Islam bandwagon when they take away something that really matters, until then I'll sit back and watch the shenanigans

Pansi this is just another way of you refusing to say just how low you would stoop to appease terrorists. To most people, freedom of speech matters. Where would you draw the line Pansi?

Is publishing a cartoon mocking Muhammed a form of public protest?

I don't know, maybe, maybe not, you'd have to ask the cartoonist what exactly their intention is, what the reasoning is for attacking Muhammad and those that worship him.

they will get their chance isnt their a march today somewhere.....and their can make up their own placards.asking

"why you dumbarse muslims upset about iddy biddy cartoons... that happen to make me and my mates laugh.."

those who know what being at the brunt of insults and ridicule is like and why are they so bothered about it.?? I am sure will be happy to explain it to them. ::)

it would appear most aussies are in fear of losing the FoS..so get out there boys use your very own FoS and maybe get some answers...

it must have some meaning pansi.. no one in their right mind would ignore a DEATH warning from mad animals in 2015 unless it MEANT something..

it just appears to have escaped us two.... ::) ::)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Dame Pansi on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 2:54pm

Were you one of the fourteen people told to move on by police for antagonising the Islamic rally at Lakemba last night, freediver?

How far would you go to assert your freedom of speech rights?

Who put their life on the line for their rights? their freedoms?

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-01-23/anti-charlie-hebdo-protesters-in-sydney-reject-freedom-of-speech/6043866

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 3:36pm

Phem is chanting the same stupid mantra as cods. Freedom of speech does not entitle you to compel someone else to publish your tripe.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Aussie on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 3:42pm

freediver wrote on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 3:36pm:

Phem is chanting the same stupid mantra as cods. Freedom of speech does not entitle you to compel someone else to publish your tripe.

Neither does it entitle you to use your privileged access to a schmedia outlet to abuse, ridicule and bring into disrepute billions of people because of their religious faith. That access involves the exercise of responsibility and is not carte blanch to publish your said tripe.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 3:47pm

freediver wrote on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 3:36pm:

Phem is chanting the same stupid mantra as cods. Freedom of speech does not entitle you to compel someone else to publish your tripe.

did you wear your FoS t/shirt to the march fd???>..

nuffink you fink muslims can do about it..

I am sure you did...FoS is in the minds of the beholders..

can I stand outside your home and shout insults at you and your family FD.....???
all in the name of FoS..

btw I have just done time from the boards........yet even you must have seen some of the personal abuse thats been directed at myself.. all in the name of FoS....and thats been ok with you.... ::)

yet my FoS was stopped in its tracks....

can I guess FD thinks banning his opposition mean he has won the debate????????...how immature.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 3:51pm

Aussie wrote on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 3:42pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 3:36pm:

Phem is chanting the same stupid mantra as cods. Freedom of speech does not entitle you to compel someone else to publish your tripe.

its called BULLYING or TORMENTING.. which is A>OK on fds forum...

he labels it FoS....

a bad case of dont do as I DO

do as I SAY..syndrome.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Redneck on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 3:54pm

You might need to run a global mods election freediver, they sound a bit annoyed!

Merely a suggestion...just saying!

Your Pal Red ;)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 3:57pm

Aussie wrote on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 3:42pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 3:36pm:

Phem is chanting the same stupid mantra as cods. Freedom of speech does not entitle you to compel someone else to publish your tripe.

Yes it does Aussie. That is exactly what it means.

It is not privileged access. It is my own website. Anyone can set one up.

Quote:

yet my FoS was stopped in its tracks....

No it wasn't cods. You remained free to whine away to your heart's content.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Aussie on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 4:07pm

freediver wrote on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 3:57pm:

Aussie wrote on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 3:42pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 3:36pm:

Phem is chanting the same stupid mantra as cods. Freedom of speech does not entitle you to compel someone else to publish your tripe.

[quote]Yes it does Aussie. That is exactly what it means.

It is not privileged access. It is my own website. Anyone can set one up.

No, indeed it does not freediver. Access to schmedia brings responsibility as I said, and you did not address that in any way. While you may own the place....(and as you say.....'big deal') that in itself does not put you above the Law which requires you to refrain from abuse, ridicule and bringing into disrepute billions of people because of their religious faith.

(And just to add a tad.....no, cods was not allowed to remain free to whine away to her heart's content. Not at all.)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 4:15pm

Muhammed was a war-mongering, thieving, raping, torturing pedophile. The ideology he spawned and it's followers are the greatest modern threat to freedom and democracy.

How does that sound Aussie?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Aussie on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 4:28pm

freediver wrote on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 4:15pm:

Muhammed was a war-mongering, thieving, raping, torturing pedophile. The ideology he spawned and it's followers are the greatest modern threat to freedom and democracy.

How does that sound Aussie?

No sound here, but it looks like a kid in kindergarten poking his tongue out at the volunteer looking after him.

Ya see.....from where I sit, I see a religion spawned out of the idea that a sky fairy chose some virgin called Mary, said fairy somehow snuck down to Earth, and while Mary's poor hard working Husband Jo was out erecting things, the fairy did the deed....disappeared back to the sky....and then poor old Mary had to tell Jo that she was preggers, even though poor old Jo never got to do the deed with her, and some bloke called Jesus Christ was the outcome.

Those who follow that bloke are responsible for far more deaths than the followers of some Arab bloke I could not care less about, but I never see or read you ridiculing, abusing and bringing into disrepute the followers of the spawn of a most mysteriuous yet indisputably, adulterous relationship.

That you go out of your way to ridicule Islam tells me that you believe you occupy the higher intellectual ground and that the followers of Mo are nutters...yet you implicitly believe the followers of that Jesus bloke (yes the bloke that Mary bird gave birth to) are the okay guys, despite the zillions they have killed in the name of that Jesus bloke.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Dame Pansi on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 4:30pm

freediver wrote on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 3:57pm:

Quote:

yet my FoS was stopped in its tracks....

No it wasn't cods. You remained free to whine away to your heart's content.

Just not on the Ozpolitics forum because there's certain rules about what you can and can't say, your very own rules freediver......FoS lol!!!!

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 4:34pm

freediver wrote on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 3:57pm:

Aussie wrote on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 3:42pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 3:36pm:

Phem is chanting the same stupid mantra as cods. Freedom of speech does not entitle you to compel someone else to publish your tripe.

Yes it does Aussie. That is exactly what it means.

It is not privileged access. It is my own website. Anyone can set one up.

Quote:

yet my FoS was stopped in its tracks....

No it wasn't cods. You remained free to whine away to your heart's content.

not on YOUR FORUM....where it counts...you STOLE IT.. b ut didnt mind ABUSERS ABUSING ME...

what do you think about FoS on facebook???>...

do you think its fair.. it is in the same bracket as a magazine after all...

our media such as it is.. is like us members guided by the LAW s of those in charge...

the media is expected to govern FoS with responsibility.... and they know there is CONSEQUENCES.....

they would also lose a licence if they persisted.

so if one of your children were being vilified via facebook.. would you tell your child

thats that person using his FoS rights...

WHICH I WILL FIGHT FOR?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 4:37pm

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 4:30pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 3:57pm:

Quote:

yet my FoS was stopped in its tracks....

No it wasn't cods. You remained free to whine away to your heart's content.

Just not on the Ozpolitics forum because there's certain rules about what you can and can't say, your very own rules freediver......FoS lol!!!!

only what he deems pansi only what fd thinks are FoS....rules...if I called him the M word.. well?????????

I am sure you read some of the abuse that I received from his mates on here.... all FoS according to fds rules... ::) ::)he doesnt mind blokes abusing women that for sure...even displaying little temper tantrums... ::) ::).. it suits fd.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 4:39pm

Quote:

Ya see.....from where I sit, I see a religion spawned out of the idea that a sky fairy chose some virgin called Mary, said fairy somehow snuck down to Earth, and while Mary's poor hard working Husband Jo was out erecting things, the fairy did the deed....disappeared back to the sky....and then poor old Mary had to tell Jo that she was preggers, even though poor old Jo never got to do the deed with her, and some bloke called Jesus Christ was the outcome.

I see Aussie. So you are only prepared to exercise your freedom of speech when it comes to Christianity? But because Muslims scare you, you will appease them and discard your freedom to do that same thing?

Quote:

That you go out of your way to ridicule Islam tells me that you believe you occupy the higher intellectual ground and that the followers of Mo are nutters...

I support freedom of speech and democracy. This is the higher ground Aussie, and to suggest anything else is nothing short of spineless.

Quote:

Just not on the Ozpolitics forum

Still don't get it do you Pansi? Do I need to dumb it down further for you, or are you just pretending you can't understand?

Quote:

not on YOUR FORUM....where it counts...

So this forum is the be all and end all of your freedom of speech? That's sad.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Dame Pansi on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 4:50pm

freediver wrote on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 4:15pm:

Muhammed was a war-mongering, thieving, raping, torturing pedophile. The ideology he spawned and it's followers are the greatest modern threat to freedom and democracy.

How does that sound Aussie?

If that's how you feel, you should have printed off a couple of hundred flyers saying that, and distributed them to the Muslims at the Lakemba rally last night. There's no good being quiet about it when your FoS is at risk. It's a cause worth dying for, isn't it?

There's sure to be more rallies so here's some things to put on your flyer, add your own as desired:

We will not be silenced.

We will insult your prophet Muhammad.

Your prophet was a paedophile.

Your prophet was a rapist.

We will insult Islam.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Aussie on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 4:50pm

Quote:

Show me one post I have made in which I say that Muslims scare me. They don't because I don't care about them any more than I care about Christian/Hindu/Buddhist/Calathumpian etc etc nutters.

Quote:

I support freedom of speech and democracy. This is the higher ground Aussie, and to suggest anything else is nothing short of spineless.

'Spineless.' Gawd you are quite the keyboard hero, aren't you? You rabbit on here under your own protection, and not once, I'll bet, have you ever actually fronted a Mosque raving on with your bigotted hatred. That's what you 'sound' like freediver, a bigotted hater. How 'spineless' have you really been freediver?

Ya know what? Unlike you and your cheerleaders, I don't care if the major religion in Australia is Islam. Why should I. It will not bother me one iota.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 9:23pm

Pansi have you figured out yet what freedom of speech means for your right to compel me to publish your idiotic tripe?

Quote:

Show me one post I have made in which I say that Muslims scare me. They don't because I don't care about them any more than I care about Christian/Hindu/Buddhist/Calathumpian etc etc nutters.

Muslim nutters are the only ones you are trying to appease. You are happy to mock Christianity. With Islam it is the opposite.

Quote:

Ya know what? Unlike you and your cheerleaders, I don't care if the major religion in Australia is Islam. Why should I. It will not bother me one iota.

Are there any other places in the world where Muslims are the majority where you would actually want to live Aussie? Not many would let you get away with mocking Islam the way you mock Christianity in this thread.

Think about it.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by A.G on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 10:46pm

Freedom of speech is such cop out- most bullies use the old "freedom of speech" mantra to give themselves permission to bully. A thinly veiled excuse crossing an almost imperceptible and very blurred line - FoS is just a war of semantics weighted in favour of the bully/terrorist etc.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Postmodern Trendoid II on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 11:42pm

Good propaganda here, Comrades. We mustn't insult Islam, but we should continually insult Christianity as we "progressives" have been doing for the past 150 years. This is progress

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Phemanderac on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 12:55am

freediver wrote on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 3:36pm:

Phem is chanting the same stupid mantra as cods. Freedom of speech does not entitle you to compel someone else to publish your tripe.

What a wormy statement...

Demonstrate where I "compel you to publish my tripe...." I defy you to. You won't, you can't as such, you lied!

All I have been doing is pointing out the hypocrisy of your stated position vs the reality of what you practice. No compulsion in anything I have said towards what you publish. In point of fact, I am extremely clear that it is your board, your little sandpit.

You have said nothing in your attacks to demonstrate otherwise. All your tough talk labeling others, yours are the cowardly actions (regardless of whether you have fromage appetites or not), you talk the talk alright but you clearly do not walk the walk.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 5:58am

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 11:42pm:

Good propaganda here, Comrades. We mustn't insult Islam, but we should continually insult Christianity as we "progressives" have been doing for the past 150 years. This is progress

read carefully....

when CHristian or Jewish extreme fanatics start saying they will kill the next person who insults them..

thats you see the difference Christian and Jews have massive sense of humours...they take it on the chin.. even when it really is extreme...

but our friends from the extreme Muslims do not have a sense of humour..

if we are so CHristian why is it so hard for us to stop tormenting them???>..

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by stryder on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 7:40am

freediver wrote on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 4:15pm:

Muhammed was a war-mongering, thieving, raping, torturing pedophile. The ideology he spawned and it's followers are the greatest modern threat to freedom and democracy.

How does that sound Aussie?

Spot on, from where Im sitting ;D ;D

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by athos on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 8:05am

Proposal for new independent Australia celebrations:

1. Australian day to be celebrated from the day when Australia gets own Australian head of state (either President or Monarch) and stop being a British colony.
It will be from 03. 09. 2019

2. Instead Anzac Day to be celebrated [b]Resistant invasion day from 2 May 2019 which represent day when multicultural defended resisted Japanese invasion in 1942.

Apologies to Aussie British Colonial Nationalist friends for being politically incorrect.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 8:27am

Quote:

Freedom of speech is such cop out- most bullies use the old "freedom of speech" mantra to give themselves permission to bully.

Crap.

Quote:

A thinly veiled excuse crossing an almost imperceptible and very blurred line - FoS is just a war of semantics weighted in favour of the bully/terrorist etc.

AG, contrary to your delusions, people who mock you online are not the same as terrorists. The terrorists are openly trying to destroy freedom of speech.

Quote:

What a wormy statement...
Demonstrate where I "compel you to publish my tripe...." I defy you to. You won't, you can't as such, you lied!

It is a statement of principle Phem. You, cods, pansi and the rest of the apologists are trying to deflect from your spineless appeasement by accusing me of hypocrisy. You suggest that because I do not allow a free-for-all on this forum that I do not genuinely value freedom of speech. Of course, you will not discuss this either. You just repeat the same old idiotic mantras.

Quote:

All I have been doing is pointing out the hypocrisy of your stated position vs the reality of what you practice. No compulsion in anything I have said towards what you publish. In point of fact, I am extremely clear that it is your board, your little sandpit.

And having standards in no way limits your freedom of speech, right? How exactly is this hypocrisy? Does having standards on this forum mean I cannot object to terrorists murdering cartoonists? If there is a less stupid interpretation of your accusation, now would be the time to offer it.

Quote:

when CHristian or Jewish extreme fanatics start saying they will kill the next person who insults them..

So cods, you only appease those who vaguely threaten you?

Quote:

thats you see the difference Christian and Jews have massive sense of humours...they take it on the chin.. even when it really is extreme...

They have senses of humour now, because people have stood up to them in the past, and developing a sense of humour was the only way to cope with freedom of speech. They did not develop a sense of humour by laughing at spineless appeasers.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Aussie on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 10:18am

Quote:

Show me one post I have made in which I say that Muslims scare me. They don't because I don't care about them any more than I care about Christian/Hindu/Buddhist/Calathumpian etc etc nutters.

Quote:

Muslim nutters are the only ones you are trying to appease. You are happy to mock Christianity. With Islam it is the opposite.

I am trying to appease no-one. I am not mocking Christianity or Islam. You are mocking Islam, yet you give the clear and obvious opportunity to do the same with Christianity a mile wide berth through you silence. To make it clear to you......I don't give a stuff about sky fairies or their devotees, yet you seem to want to make a mocking of just one religion your determined life ambition.

Quote:

Ya know what? Unlike you and your cheerleaders, I don't care if the major religion in Australia is Islam. Why should I. It will not bother me one iota.

Quote:

No there is not, and there are many where the majority religion is Christian I would actually not want to live in. However, if I did go to a Country where Islam is the religion, I would not mock Islam. If I did go to a Country where the majority religion was Hindu, I would not mock that religion. I simply do not care what sky fairy people choose to believe in, as it is none of my bloody business.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 10:25am

Quote:

Does it upset you that I don't criticise them all in equal measure Aussie? You sound just like Brian Ross with this nonsense.

Quote:

To make it clear to you......I don't give a stuff about sky fairies or their devotees

Don't you think some religious people find find this offensive? You mock religions without giving it a second thought. You do not even realise you are doing it because no-one is going on a violent rampage over it. You only notice it when Islam gets mocked, because the terrorists have trained you to speak for them without even realising what you are doing.

Quote:

yet you seem to want to make a mocking of just one religion your determined life ambition

I want to maintain the right to do so. I guarantee you that if Christians tried to destroy freedom of speech, I would stand against them. As has been pointed out to you countless times already, it is the Muslims, not the Christians, who are slaughtering people in an effort to destroy freedom of speech. Did it ever occur to you that perhaps this is why so many focus their criticism on Islam?

Quote:

You would not mock Islam from here. Why do your principles depend on who forms the majority? Is it some kind of popularity contest?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Phemanderac on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 10:56am

freediver wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 8:27am:

Quote:

What a wormy statement...
Demonstrate where I "compel you to publish my tripe...." I defy you to. You won't, you can't as such, you lied!

So, actual short answer, no you cannot back up your hysterical claims about my position in this discussion....

In effect, that is lying.

At this point nothing you say is backed by principals to be blunt.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Aussie on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 12:55pm

I'll respond to this, and then 'wunaway' as freediver childishly puts it:

Quote:

You would not mock Islam from here. Why do your principles depend on who forms the majority? Is it some kind of popularity contest?

Why build strawmen, freediver? Am I not saying what you want me to say, so you want to do that for me?

I said none of those things.

I did not say I would/would not mock Islam from here, or anywhere. I could not be bothered, and I think it is odd that people (like you) want to go out of their way to do it. To make your day a little.....I believe it is unnecessary, and indicative of an 'intellectual' superiority complex that anyone go out of their way to mock anyone, including those of any particular religious faith, and I believe it is wrong to kill people who so mock. I have little respect for either side in fact. It's a bit of a toss up. Poke a bear, he's gonna lash out. Poke fun at a religion, its zealots will lash out. However, they are not bears, and killing is taking it too far. But.....those who mock should not whinge when a reaction comes their way.

I did not say anything about "principles depending on who forms the majority." I said that there are many countries including Islamic and Christian where I would not choose to live.

I also said nothing about a "popularity content."

It seems, given what you've posed to me, and from what you have posted concerning Phemanderac that you are so blinkered that you can only see every response you get as an appeasement of Islamic retards when in fact, especially in my case, it is not. I just do not care enough to make it something it is not and, with single minded obsession, the centre of my Universe like you do.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Lisa Jones on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 1:00pm

stryder wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 7:40am:

freediver wrote on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 4:15pm:

Muhammed was a war-mongering, thieving, raping, torturing pedophile. The ideology he spawned and it's followers are the greatest modern threat to freedom and democracy.

How does that sound Aussie?

Spot on, from where Im sitting ;D ;D

Funnily enough, for once I totally agree with something FD has posted. However, I'll make sure this never happens again.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Yadda on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 1:54pm

Aussie wrote on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 3:42pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 24^th, 2015 at 3:36pm:

Phem is chanting the same stupid mantra as cods. Freedom of speech does not entitle you to compel someone else to publish your tripe.

Neither does it entitle you to use your privileged access to a schmedia outlet to abuse, ridicule and bring into disrepute billions of people because of their religious faith.

That access involves the exercise of responsibility and is not carte blanch to publish your said tripe.

Aussie,

Could it be possible, that 'billions of people' [i.e.moslems], actively bring themselves into disrepute ?

In their tacit support of ISLAM, and their support of what ISLAM promotes in the world ?

It is 'the moslem' himself, and it is their own choice, to become/remain a moslem [especially when a moslem, is resident in a secular nation like Australia! ].

[i.e. it is their 'life' choice, to support the worldview which their 'faith' promotes. i.e. political intimidation, political violence and murder. ]

Aussie,

It is 'the moslem' himself, who chooses to associate himself, with a violent and murderous philosophy [ISLAM] which promotes political violence and murder !!

Whose members, revere a person [Mohammed] who was a murderer [and promoted political violence and murder].

THE HADITH....

"...the Prophet said, 'If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him." - DEAD.
hadithsunnah/bukhari/ #004.052.260

And Mohammed was an abductor [an enslaver of men, women and children] and a rapist. [.....just like ISIS is, in Syria/Iraq, today!!!]

Aussie,

It is 'the moslem' himself, who chooses to associate himself, with a 'faith' which promotes a 'ideals' like this; ----->

IMAGE...

Sheikh Yassir al-Burhami

Quote:

How Circumstance Dictates Islamic Behavior
January 18, 2012

Preach Peace When Weak, Wage War When Strong

"...all notions of peace with non-Muslims are based on circumstance.

When Muslims are weak, they should be peaceful; when strong, they should go on the offensive."

Sheikh Yassir al-Burhami - an ISLAMIC scholar and Egyptian Salafi leader
http://www.raymondibrahim.com/from-the-arab-world/how-circumstance-dictates-islamic-behavior/

.
.
.
.

+++

MOHAMMED WAS AN ABDUCTOR OF WOMEN, AND A RAPIST....

Quote:

"We went out with Allah's Messenger" = = Mohammed was in the company of these men.

"on the expedition to the Bi'l-Mustaliq and took captive some excellent Arab women" = = it was some form of raiding party, where they, 'took captive some excellent Arab women'.

"and we desired them" = = hmmmm, i wonder what that means?

"for we were suffering from the absence of our wives" = = ah, in the absence they wives, they desired these women for sex, to satisfy their sexual lust.

"(but at the same time) we also desired ransom for them." = = in their minds, they sought to sexually 'use' these captive Arab women, and then let their menfolk redeem them.

"So we decided to have sexual intercourse with them" = = yep, Allah's finest, sought to sexually 'use' these 'excellent' captive Arab women.

Those [above] extracts from the Hadith are cited, with references, here;

Bikeway rapist gets 25 years in jail
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1251431040/8#8

ISLAM SANCTIONS THE - MURDER - OF THOSE WHO ARE NOT MOSLEMS [BECAUSE THEY REJECT ISLAM]

Yadda wrote on Dec 30^th, 2014 at 8:25am:

ISLAMIC LAW teaches - EVERY MOSLEM - that murdering those who are not moslems [i.e. those who reject ISLAM], is a lawful act.

That 'precept' of faith is mainstream within ISLAM.

ISIS know it.

Al-Qaeda know it.

The Saudis know it.

And EVERY moslem who is living among us, here in Australia, knows it.

ISLAMIC LAW....
"Ibn 'Umar related that the Messenger of Allah, upon whom be peace, said, "I have been ordered to kill the people until they testify that there is no god except Allah, and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and they establish prayer and pay the zakah. If they do that, their blood and wealth are protected from me save by the rights of Islam. Their reckoning will be with Allah." (Related by al-Bukhari and Muslim.) "
fiqhussunnah/fus1_06

ISLAMIC LAW....
"Ibn 'Abbas reported that the Prophet said: "The bare essence of Islam and the basics of the religion are three [acts], upon which Islam has been established. Whoever leaves one of them becomes an unbeliever and his blood may legally be spilled. [The acts are:] Testifying that there is no God except Allah, the obligatory prayers, and the fast of Ramadan."...."
fiqhussunnah/#3.110

n.b.
"Whoever......becomes an unbeliever.....his blood may legally be spilled."

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 1:57pm

Phemanderac wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 10:56am:

freediver wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 8:27am:

Quote:

What a wormy statement...
Demonstrate where I "compel you to publish my tripe...." I defy you to. You won't, you can't as such, you lied!

If freedom of speech really meant that I could not restrict what you lot posted here, that would be the same as you being able to compel me to publish whatever you submitted. This is the only meaning I can attach to your accusation of hypocrisy. If you meant something a little less stupid, now would be the time to explain. perhaps you meant I am a hypocrite for having a consistent set of views on the matter, but you happen to disagree with one or more of them?

Quote:

Why build strawmen, freediver? Am I not saying what you want me to say, so you want to do that for me?
I said none of those things.

And I just accused you of not saying them.

Quote:

I did not say I would/would not mock Islam from here, or anywhere.

Your actions prove this Aussie.

Quote:

I could not be bothered, and I think it is odd that people (like you) want to go out of their way to do it. To make your day a little.....I believe it is unnecessary, and indicative of an 'intellectual' superiority complex that anyone go out of their way to mock anyone, including those of any particular religious faith

And yet you regularly go out of your way to mock others.

Quote:

But.....those who mock should not whinge when a reaction comes their way.

Why not Aussie? If Muslims decided to take offense to something you want to do, and you continued despite their threats, would you be satisfied if people told you to shut up when they took revenge on you? Such a spineless position could only come from someone who does not actually value freedom of speech. Someone who actually values freedom of speech would complain on their behalf, and on behalf of their own lost freedoms, not tell them to shut up.

Quote:

I did not say anything about "principles depending on who forms the majority."

You went to some length to explain you would refrain from mocking particular religions, depending on who made up the majority.

Quote:

I also said nothing about a "popularity content."

That's what it means when you are guided by the majority opinion Aussie.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Aussie on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 1:58pm

Sorry Yadda......I don't read your long blurbs which contain religious texts. Express yourself and not a chant, and I'll read it.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Yadda on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 2:02pm

Aussie wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 1:58pm:

Sorry Yadda......I don't read your long blurbs which contain religious texts. Express yourself and not a chant, and I'll read it.

Like this ?

----->

Aussie,

Your opinion is wrong, and indefensible, to reasoned argument.

Your opinion offends reason.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Aussie on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 2:13pm

Yadda wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 2:02pm:

Aussie wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 1:58pm:

Sorry Yadda......I don't read your long blurbs which contain religious texts. Express yourself and not a chant, and I'll read it.

Like this ?

----->

Aussie,

Your opinion is wrong, and indefensible, to reasoned argument.

Your opinion offends reason.

You win.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Redneck on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 2:58pm

Aussie wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 1:58pm:

Sorry Yadda......I don't read your long blurbs which contain religious texts. Express yourself and not a chant, and I'll read it.

Me too Aussie, I open them and then close them without trying to fathom what the hell they are on about.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Phemanderac on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 3:12pm

freediver wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 1:57pm:

Phemanderac wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 10:56am:

freediver wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 8:27am:

Quote:

What a wormy statement...
Demonstrate where I "compel you to publish my tripe...." I defy you to. You won't, you can't as such, you lied!

If freedom of speech really meant that I could not restrict what you lot posted here, that would be the same as you being able to compel me to publish whatever you submitted. This is the only meaning I can attach to your accusation of hypocrisy. If you meant something a little less stupid, now would be the time to explain. perhaps you meant I am a hypocrite for having a consistent set of views on the matter, but you happen to disagree with one or more of them?

This idea has been introduced by you though... I have never suggested anything even bordering on your stupid interpretation based on your own hatred, fear and appeasing attitudes that in no way relates to anything (even remotely) I have stated.

Funnily enough, you had a great opportunity here to articulate your specific interpretation of what Freedom of Speech actually means, yet you invest your time into accusing me of comments I have not made, and then arguing vociferously as though I had made them. Demonstrates your real agenda pretty clearly to be honest.

By all means, let me know when you want to have an adult discussion about the things I actually say. When you can aspire at least to that level of honesty we might be able to have a debate. This garbage you spew forth from your key board though is simply petulant smashing stuff ideas, with no connection to my commentary.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Aussie on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 3:21pm

Quote:

Funnily enough, you had a great opportunity here to articulate your specific interpretation of what Freedom of Speech actually means, yet you invest your time into accusing me of comments I have not made, and then arguing vociferously as though I had made them. Demonstrates your real agenda pretty clearly to be honest.

I, too, have made exactly the same point. We are not following freediver's preconceived notions or scripts if you like, so he throws up strawmen, and proceeds as if you and I (and why would he restrict that to just us two...he probably makes a habit of it at large) have said things/proposed points we simply have not said or proposed.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 4:13pm

Quote:

Funnily enough, you had a great opportunity here to articulate your specific interpretation of what Freedom of Speech actually means

The right to say something you might not like. As I recall, it was you, cods, pansi etc offering an 'alternative' definition that none of you could actually put into words.

Aussie there is no strawman. I am accusing you of posting spineless gibberish like this:

Quote:

But.....those who mock should not whinge when a reaction comes their way.

I have responded this comment already. Insterad of responding in turn, you took the easy option and accused me of posting strawmen.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Aussie on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 4:19pm

freediver wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 4:13pm:

Quote:

Funnily enough, you had a great opportunity here to articulate your specific interpretation of what Freedom of Speech actually means

The right to say something you might not like. As I recall, it was you, cods, pansi etc offering an 'alternative' definition that none of you could actually put into words.

I don't believe there is any such thing as Freedom of Speech, and your dog's breakfast responses make it plain you have no idea what you seem to say it means.

You seem to be saying that I have the right to say something you may not like..................but, not, of course, in your back yard. That is where you are coming apart freediver, and cods has quite readily dismantled your piety on the issue.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 4:22pm

Yes Aussie. You have the right to say things, but not to be in my back yard. Nor does saying offensive things while you rob someone excuse you robbing them. They are two separate issues Aussie. Freedom of speech does not give you the right to compel anything from anyone.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Aussie on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 4:23pm

freediver wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 4:13pm:

Quote:

Funnily enough, you had a great opportunity here to articulate your specific interpretation of what Freedom of Speech actually means

I have responded this comment already. Insterad of responding in turn, you took the easy option and accused me of posting strawmen.[/quote]

freediver, how many times now have you been called out to prove where someone said something you falsely alleged they said? Just read the last couple of pages here for obvious examples. That, freediver, is what you do........manufacture strawmen arguments.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Aussie on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 4:28pm

freediver wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 4:22pm:

Unravelling at a zillion miles an hour.....and you are not even making sense now. Freediver, just give it up. You are trying to defend something which does not exist ~ freedom of speech ~ and when you attempt a definition, you are easily blown out of the water as is just demonstrated. Whenever the expression freedom is followed by the word but...............there is no freedom. 'Freedom but...' is an oxymoron.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 4:29pm

Quote me making one of these false allegations Aussie. Just because you disagree with my description of what you say as spineless appeasement does not mean I have falsely attributed anything to you. The last few pages of this thread demonstrate only that I have quoted what you and others post before responding to it.

Quote:

Unravelling at a zillion miles an hour.....

OK Aussie, I will dumb it down even more for you. Freedom of speech gives you the right to say things. It does not give you the right to post them on someone else's website. That is a privilege, not a right. Making it a right would turn your freedom into a right to compel things from other people.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by red baron on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 4:31pm

Freedom of speech is in full flight on this site Aussie. It is just you who has his own 'lawyerised', convoluted view on things.

Just because you believe it to be so, doesn't make it so. I don't see legion of supporters flocking to your peculiar point of view.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Aussie on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 4:38pm

Quote:

Quote me making one of these false allegations Aussie.

Okay.....see Posts numbered 371, 375, 380, 382, 383 and 391 of the last couple of pages.

You are right to say you are entitled to control what goes on in your back yard. That is exactly just one example of how there is no such thing as freedom of speech. It is like the sky fairies ~ it simply does not exist.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 4:41pm

Quote:

Okay.....see Posts numbered 371, 375, 380, 382, 383 and 391 of the last couple of pages.

Yet more examples of me quoting more spineless apologetics and calling it spineless apologetics. What is your problem with that Aussie?

Quote:

You are right to say you are entitled to control what goes on in your back yard. That is exactly just one example of how there is no such thing as freedom of speech.

No it is not Aussie. It is an example of your complete inability to comprehend the concept. Your blindness to the world does not in any way negate the world's existence.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Aussie on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 4:44pm

There ya go, right on cue. More false allegation.

Quote:

Your blindness to the world does not in any way negate the world's existence.

Show me where I said the World does not exist?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by red baron on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 4:48pm

You see that last post from Aussie? That's what I'm talking about. That is classic Aussie. :D

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 5:36pm

Aussie wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 4:44pm:

There ya go, right on cue. More false allegation.

Quote:

Your blindness to the world does not in any way negate the world's existence.

Show me where I said the World does not exist?

No problem. Right after you quote me saying that you said the world does not exist. Again Aussie, this is demonstrating nothing more than your misunderstanding.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by it_is_the_light on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 5:39pm

freediver wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 5:36pm:

Aussie wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 4:44pm:

There ya go, right on cue. More false allegation.

Quote:

Your blindness to the world does not in any way negate the world's existence.

Show me where I said the World does not exist?

No problem. Right after you quote me saying that you said the world does not exist. Again Aussie, this is demonstrating nothing more than your misunderstanding.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Olbr3v1f_XA

Misunderstanding / Chop Bush! By: D.Y.C.R.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Aussie on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 5:49pm

freediver wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 5:36pm:

Aussie wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 4:44pm:

There ya go, right on cue. More false allegation.

Quote:

Your blindness to the world does not in any way negate the world's existence.

Show me where I said the World does not exist?

No problem. Right after you quote me saying that you said the world does not exist. Again Aussie, this is demonstrating nothing more than your misunderstanding.

Let's finally cut to the chase, freediver. Post now, your concise definition of 'freedom of speech" and include all the 'buts' you think are necessary. Over to you.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 6:09pm

Are you asking me for the complete concise definition, or the concise complete definition?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Aussie on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 6:16pm

freediver wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 6:09pm:

Are you asking me for the complete concise definition, or the concise complete definition?

Take your pick. You choose. It is time (well beyond time) you were called out to actually say something positive, instead of what is always just questions.....like your post under this reply.

Come on freediver, show us what you have. "Blind us with your intellect."

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 6:41pm

red baron wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 4:31pm:

have you tried calling someone the M word by any chance?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Lisa Jones on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 6:59pm

Aussie wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 6:16pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 6:09pm:

Are you asking me for the complete concise definition, or the concise complete definition?

Well... it looks like he couldn't. He ran away instead.

Now can you see why I started the "Ozpol Communication Issues" topic down in your forum?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Setanta on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 7:31pm

freediver wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 4:29pm:

I'm not on your side of politics, I think the cartoons sucked and were pretty unnecessary, and I also think the word filter is a bit silly... but you are correct on this FD.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Setanta on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 7:36pm

cods wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 6:41pm:

red baron wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 4:31pm:

have you tried calling someone the M word by any chance?

So the point didn't get through last time. This site is private property, think of it like a pub, there is no FoS on private property beyond what the owner gives you. You may not like it but that's the facts of the matter. Just because FD believes in FoS does not mean that he has to let you publish here. You are welcome to publish that FD is a nice person anywhere else you like, why does he have to let you onto his property to do it? Your FoS does not give you property rights over FD's property.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Aussie on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 7:44pm

Setanta wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 7:36pm:

cods wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 6:41pm:

red baron wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 4:31pm:

have you tried calling someone the M word by any chance?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 8:05pm

Aussie wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 6:16pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 6:09pm:

Are you asking me for the complete concise definition, or the concise complete definition?

You've got me cornered here Aussie. There is no way I could come up with a definition that is both complete, concise, and impervious to your powers of misunderstanding.

What is wrong with "the right to say something you might not like"? Too concise?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Aussie on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 8:16pm

You could 'build a bridge' and see how you go with common sense. That ought to work. Further, I'm quite sure there are many, many Members here who would not have the malaise, the blight I have....of always misunderstanding you. They too would be pleased to see you actually produce something worth debating......you know.............."Freedom of Speech, as defined by freediver."

Don't ask that goldfish again. This time......you tell ....... not me, cos I'll misunderstand as you say..............the rest of your Forum. "Blind them with your amazing intellect."

By the way, it's 'nice to see you back. We missed you.'

Over to you freediver.

Edit.....I'm gonna have to start quoting you to catch what I am replying to. You added.....

"What is wrong with "the right to say something you might not like"? Too concise? ' Nasty that, freediver.

We've already dealt with that one.....and you added a 'but' to it. We are after a definition for Freedom of Speech which does not include the word....'but.'

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Setanta on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 8:17pm

Aussie wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 7:44pm:

Setanta wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 7:36pm:

cods wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 6:41pm:

red baron wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 4:31pm:

have you tried calling someone the M word by any chance?

Yeah, that was to Cods, she thinks FD should allow her to call FD a M.or.on here and that the filter is an abridgement of her FoS. Maybe you could have a word with her about it.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 9:11pm

Quote:

We've already dealt with that one.....and you added a 'but' to it. We are after a definition for Freedom of Speech which does not include the word....'but.'

You initially asked for all the buts. Now you want no buts? And it has to be both concise and complete?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 9:12pm

Setanta wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 8:17pm:

I 'get' that Setanta. No problem. All I am asking is that freediver define this thing ~ freedom of speech ~ he has been defending. On the last occasion he made a trivial attempt.....there was a 'but.'

Yeah, that was to Cods, she thinks FD should allow her to call FD a M.or.on here and that the filter is an abridgement of her FoS. Maybe you could have a word with her about i

not quiet.... I was suggesting to R.B.. in reply to his comment

[quote author red baron Freedom of speech is in full flight on this site Aussie. It is just you who has his own 'lawyerised', convoluted view on things.[/quote]

why dont you try reading everything... then you wouldnt look like you are waiting to pounce.on anything and everything.

] how is the crawling to fd going???.... ::) ::)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 9:16pm

You are wrong to use the word "thinks". Cods does not know what to think yet. She only posts, over and over again.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Aussie on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 9:20pm

freediver wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 9:11pm:

Quote:

Funny thing is, they haven't asked. Or at least, some did originally ask, but fell silent once a dedicated thread was started. Maybe everyone does know what freedom of speech means. Except you of course. I accept that you don't know.

[quote]We've already dealt with that one.....and you added a 'but' to it. We are after a definition for Freedom of Speech which does not include the word....'but.'

You initially asked for all the buts. Now you want no buts? And it has to be both concise and complete?

[/quote]

Just post your definition, and if it is challenged, please......no 'buts.'

And is it okay if I ask why you are free to abuse cods, contrary to your own Rules here? Is that part of your definition of 'Freedom of Speech?'

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 9:24pm

Quote:

Just post your definition, and if it is challenged, please......no 'buts.'

The right to say something you might not like.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Setanta on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 9:30pm

cods wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 9:12pm:

Setanta wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 8:17pm:

not quiet.... I was suggesting to R.B.. in reply to his comment

[quote author=red baron] Freedom of speech is in full flight on this site Aussie. It is just you who has his own 'lawyerised', convoluted view on things.

why dont you try reading everything... then you wouldnt look like you are waiting to pounce.on anything and everything.

how is the crawling to fd going???.... ::) ::)

[/quote]

I don't know cods, you did respond to that but your reply was "have you tried calling someone the M word by any chance?" It doesn't matter, if FD doesn't want the word used here on his property, well... Tough titties. I can assure you I'm calling it like I see it. I have no reason to crawl, there is nothing I want from him. Perhaps you have something in mind? Spit it out.

edit: Perhaps you think I want to mod or something? Not on your life. Perhaps not get banned? I've never even been warned on any forum I've been on in 20 years.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Aussie on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 9:51pm

freediver wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 9:24pm:

Quote:

Just post your definition, and if it is challenged, please......no 'buts.'

The right to say something you might not like.

Okay.

Step 1. By 'Aussie.'

Can I say what you might not like here?

Step 2. By freediver.

No, that is not part of 'freedom of speech.' You can only say here what I allow.

Step 3. By 'Aussie.'

How jolly. There we have an exception to your notion (one I accept) which is clearly no longer one of 'freedom of speech.' So.....let's have your definition which takes into account those three 'steps.'

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 10:34pm

You asked for a definition without the buts Aussie. Make up your mind.

It is not an exception by the way. Being able to say something in no way implies the right to demand others publish it for you, except in the minds of those who are desperate to deny the existence of freedom of speech.

Again Aussie, you merely demonstrate your own inability to comprehend.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Aussie on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 10:38pm

Aussie wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 9:51pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 9:24pm:

Quote:

Just post your definition, and if it is challenged, please......no 'buts.'

The right to say something you might not like.

Cease with the very obvious evasion and 'dazzle us with your blinding intellect,' freediver.

Let's have your definition which takes into account those three 'steps.'

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Setanta on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 10:48pm

Aussie wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 10:38pm:

Aussie wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 9:51pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 9:24pm:

Quote:

Just post your definition, and if it is challenged, please......no 'buts.'

The right to say something you might not like.

Cease with the very obvious evasion and 'dazzle us with you blinding intellect,' freediver.

Let's have your definition which takes into account those three 'steps.'

Isn't 3 a non sequitur? Both 1 and 2 are related to property rights and 3 does not follow because, well it has nothing to do with property but a subjective view on FoS and how it relates to the first two? Which it doesn't.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 10:49pm

The original definition does. But if it helps, I concede defeat, for I cannot define something in a way that overcomes your skill at misunderstanding basic concepts.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Aussie on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 11:00pm

freediver wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 10:49pm:

The original definition does. But if it helps, I concede defeat, for I cannot define something in a way that overcomes your skill at misunderstanding basic concepts.

I'll mark that down....not as a win...........instead ~ I'll regard that as an example of how very shallow your views are, and how dismissively you deal with anyone who challenges your narrow views which are pretty obsessive. You are good at the questions, and bloody lousy at the answers.

Let the record show that freediver was unable to define Freedom of Speech which included allowance for his capacity to curtail it in his back yard, here.

I can totally understand why. He seems not to.

There is no such absolute thing as Freedom of Speech.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 7:53am

Setanta wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 9:30pm:

cods wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 9:12pm:

Setanta wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 8:17pm:

why dont you try reading everything... then you wouldnt look like you are waiting to pounce.on anything and everything.

how is the crawling to fd going???.... ::) ::)

I don't know cods, you did respond to that but your reply was "have you tried calling someone the M word by any chance?" It doesn't matter, if FD doesn't want the word used here on his property, well... Tough titties. I can assure you I'm calling it like I see it. I have no reason to crawl, there is nothing I want from him. Perhaps you have something in mind? Spit it out.

edit: Perhaps you think I want to mod or something? Not on your life. Perhaps not get banned? I've never even been warned on any forum I've been on in 20 years.
[/quote]

well you see not everyone sees this FREEDOM OF SPEECH in the same context you and fd do...

I say there is no such thing as fos...because where ever you go it has strings attached as you have pointed out in your own home we all have those strings we can apply..

yet some seem to think THEY WOULD RATHER LIKE TO DIE FOR IT....whatever it is they think they have... ::) ::)

it all come down to interpretation..just like the Bible...to each his own...

I am all for STRINGS..I cant imagine a world without them to be honest......I would like to think some strings dont have to be spelt out...

like bullying someone with nasty unkind names making their life full of pain...

what ever happened to

common decency???..

"do unto others as you would have them do unto you"

where did that all go????>...

I have just been banned set so watch it??..a first for me...so dont press your luck.. lol...I was being mean when I lumped you with fd...I will probably get my second ban now.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 7:54am

Aussie wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 11:00pm:

There is no such absolute thing as Freedom of Speech.

oh god isnt that what I have been saying all along????

arggggggggggggggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Dame Pansi on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 8:22am

cods wrote on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 7:54am:

Aussie wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 11:00pm:

There is no such absolute thing as Freedom of Speech.

oh god isnt that what I have been saying all along????

arggggggggggggggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Exactly, everything has its limits. Every action has a reaction.

We are yet to get freedom of speech, without consequences.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 8:29am

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 8:22am:

cods wrote on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 7:54am:

Aussie wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 11:00pm:

There is no such absolute thing as Freedom of Speech.

oh god isnt that what I have been saying all along????

arggggggggggggggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Exactly, everything has its limits. Every action has a reaction.

We are yet to get freedom of speech, without consequences.

in the case of Charlie its the consequence that abhor us isnt it??....so futile why was it so hard to avoid??..

if we never saw another ugly cartoon .. aka pickerings....would it really make a huge difference to anyones life?????......

some seem to think it would....I feel sorry for them

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Gnads on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 9:01am

Any chance of you getting RSI in your fingers/hands? ::)

I know if this was a Skype type forum there would be prayers for a case of lock jaw. ;D

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 9:08am

cods wrote on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 8:29am:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 8:22am:

cods wrote on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 7:54am:

Aussie wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 11:00pm:

There is no such absolute thing as Freedom of Speech.

oh god isnt that what I have been saying all along????

arggggggggggggggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Exactly, everything has its limits. Every action has a reaction.

We are yet to get freedom of speech, without consequences.

Cods you have been asked many times to suggest the likely consequences of us adopting your strategy of spineless appeasement. Your only response has been that you are incapable of putting any thought into it. I guarantee you it would be a step backwards, which is precisely why the civilised world is rallying behind Charlie Hebdo. Your suggestion is no less stupid than standing by while Nazis drag the Jews away and assuming it will all be peace and flowers once that is sorted.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 10:29am

Appeasing Islam, bad move ................ a very, very bad move!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9dXGJ2rYdA

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 10:30am

What he said ........ caving in to Islam, again, again, & yet again will be the death knell to the Freedom of Speech, & just about everything else we hold sacred as well.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 10:47am

A man who won't die for something is not fit to live. - Martin Luther King

how interesting...

a man who wont DIE for something......wow.....

do you think martin luther king had a cartoon in mind when he said that???>........

I dont really think he did..... bu it has been a while since I have seen insulting cartoons of American Negroes....so what would I know?

maybe they were around before he was SHOT...

oh thats right he died for FREEDOM OF SPEECH didnt he?...

insulting American Negroes is fine...keep going.

what a shame the extremists dont see How M.L.King saw the world..

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 10:49am

Panther wrote on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 10:30am:

What he said ........ caving in to Islam, again, again, & yet again will be the death knell to the Freedom of Speech, & just about everything else we hold sacred as well.

that what I see fd looking like......full of fear...and guess what even more HATE than the extremists...

it is all about HATE you know...I hate you more than you hate me. :P :P :P

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Gnads on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 10:53am

Rubbish ::)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 11:22am

Cods is simply incapable of maintaining, or even starting, a discussion about the likely consequences of adopting her spineless appeasement of terrorists. The best she can do is repeat herself. Appease terrorists, no dead cartoonists, stop thinking now.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 11:59am

cods wrote on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 10:47am:

When MLK said 'something', I believe his meaning was it could be 'simply anything' anyone, through their own freedom of will & choice, it could be anything anyone so chooses to be worth enough to oneself to die for.

If that be a 'cartoon' or even a 'woman', & they freely chooses that, so be their will.....their choice.

Anything more you need to know of the probable mindset of MLK, hunt up a clairvoyant, &
have a chat to the guy himself.......yourself. ;)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by longweekend58 on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 12:15pm

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 8:22am:

cods wrote on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 7:54am:

Aussie wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 11:00pm:

There is no such absolute thing as Freedom of Speech.

oh god isnt that what I have been saying all along????

arggggggggggggggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Exactly, everything has its limits. Every action has a reaction.

We are yet to get freedom of speech, without consequences.

because such a thing is not possible. Freedom to speak does not imply there are no consequences in the natural world.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by longweekend58 on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 12:18pm

freediver wrote on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 11:22am:

Its a lost cause. People with principles and pride and even a moderate spine, understand the Charlie Hedbo reaction perfectly and it needs no explanation. Cowards and those without principles will not and can not understand it and never will. Luckily for all, the former are having sway.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Soren on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 12:21pm

freediver wrote on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 11:22am:

We talked about the Charlie Hebdo massacre and free speech more generally, and I said to Jerry that the reason I'm so forthright about this issue is that I sincerely have no wish to live in the world these guys are building for us. And by "these guys" I mean not just the "Allahu Akbar!" crazies but a western left that thinks it can mediate relations between Islam and free societies if the rest of us just agree to let our liberties be a little more constrained. Nuts to that.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by ian on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 12:28pm

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 12:18pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 11:22am:

cowards, lol. You dont understand cowardice nor bravery.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 12:41pm

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 12:15pm:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 8:22am:

cods wrote on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 7:54am:

Aussie wrote on Jan 25^th, 2015 at 11:00pm:

There is no such absolute thing as Freedom of Speech.

oh god isnt that what I have been saying all along????

arggggggggggggggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Exactly, everything has its limits. Every action has a reaction.

We are yet to get freedom of speech, without consequences.

because such a thing is not possible. Freedom to speak does not imply there are no consequences in the natural world.

Strange, I use it all the time, & I know people everywhere that do the same, without 'consequence' of any kind.

It's just when some irrational, over zealous, gutless mobsters & cowards, decide in their infinite wisdom -- molded by a book of Satanic Verses, that in their mind being insulted, or even the perception of being insulted, requires irrational action on their part, requires them to kill the supposed aforementioned insulters, while all known legitimate rational is forced to stand on it's head!

Appease that?

Never!

That scum isn't worthy of licking Charlie Hebdo's sweaty balls!

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by longweekend58 on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 12:54pm

ian wrote on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 12:28pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 12:18pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 11:22am:

cowards, lol. You dont understand cowardice nor bravery.

I suspect you have no idea of either term.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by nasus on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 2:53pm

I don't see what Martin Luther King has to do with the bearing on this topic, his quote is just words used by someone with a very large political agenda. King in my humble opinion had no idea what freedom of speech was all about, all he used his speech for was to challenge the establishment and incite his followers, all 2 of them to do his biding. There are better examples of freedom of speech figure heads, with a much more worthy cause.
I am wondering having returned from my 3 day "into the wilderness time" that is someone 50 years from now read this forum post, if they would have any clue what the hell we wrote about. Back and fro, many losing the plot and cowards cower in the corner, who miss the whole plot, if there ever was one. 8-)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by ian on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 2:56pm

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 12:54pm:

ian wrote on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 12:28pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 12:18pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 11:22am:

cowards, lol. You dont understand cowardice nor bravery.

I suspect you have no idea of either term.

you are an academic, the closest you have ever come to physical confrontation like most of the blow hards on this forum was getting spanked by your parents decades ago yet you lecture others on cowardice.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by longweekend58 on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 4:00pm

ian wrote on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 2:56pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 12:54pm:

ian wrote on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 12:28pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 12:18pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 11:22am:

cowards, lol. You dont understand cowardice nor bravery.

I suspect you have no idea of either term.

you still don't define the term, do you? So until youa re willing to do so, just pretend you are a worlds expert on some other topic other than the three you already have claimed.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 4:35pm

Panther wrote on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 11:59am:

cods wrote on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 10:47am:

you dont know it.. but you have SAID IT ALL..

......................I BELIEVE................................

each and everyone opf us has a different BELIEF...do you know we even see colour differently....

some as we know can see NO COLOUR

some as we know CAN SEE NO OTHER POINT OF VIEW BUT THEIR OWN..

its the way things are??..

if questions are never asked.........???????????...

if you daughter or son never said WHY daddy..

wouldnt you think there was something wrong with them??>....

so I asked a question....

you dont know any more about what MLKING had in his mind than I do...its our kind of FOS to make up our own minds......

all I am asking is... did MLK have horrible insulting anti American Negro cartoons to deal with.???...

you put a lot into what he thought by using him in your sig.. at least thats what I thought.....

if you place him in the shoes of the extremists at the time of his speech.....he may have been more explicit ::) ::)

MLK was talking for more than just himself....you see he had walked in the shoes of every black person in AMerica...

he felt Black Equality was worth dying for in those years...me being white....and not American I really have no idea what he endured I can only guess.

these extremists are talking for many Muslims who find the insults.. more than insulting...
like a lot of American Negroes the see red when they hear the N word....I am not sure if there is a law against it...but there surely is a common decency law against it....

unless of course people are a FOS freak.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 4:42pm

Cods what do you think would be the likely consequence if we all adopted your strategy of spineless appeasement of terrorists? Have you put any thought into it, beyond 'no dead cartoonists'?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 4:43pm

nasus wrote on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 2:53pm:

you do know he was a BLACK AMERICAN who lived through Americas own version of apartheid dont you?...

I bet the hell he did know what FOS was..... and what he didnt have.....

btw d.ryder uses it in his sig....very apt for this topic a person who was belittled and degraded through out his life...who watched as his fellow man was insulted day in day out.. by a special group who happened to be WHITE in colour.....therefore superior.....

why are you concerned for those 50 years from now.... ::) ::) ::)

you obviously havent a clue what was said..52 years ago.didnt make any impression on you whatever

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 4:44pm

ian wrote on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 2:56pm:

you are an academic

news to me.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by nasus on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 4:50pm

cods wrote on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 4:35pm:

Panther wrote on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 11:59am:

[quote author=cods link=1421614428/437#437 date=1422233271]
A man who won't die for something is not fit to live. - Martin Luther King
[/i][/font][/size]

you dont know it.. but you have SAID IT ALL..

......................I BELIEVE................................
each and everyone opf us has a different BELIEF...do you know we even see colour differently....
some as we know can see NO COLOUR
some as we know CAN SEE NO OTHER POINT OF VIEW BUT THEIR OWN..
its the way things are??..
if questions are never asked.........???????????...
if you daughter or son never said WHY daddy..
wouldnt you think there was something wrong with them??>....
so I asked a question....
you dont know any more about what MLKING had in his mind than I do...its our kind of FOS to make up our own minds......
all I am asking is... did MLK have horrible insulting anti American Negro cartoons to deal with.???...
you put a lot into what he thought by using him in your sig.. at least thats what I thought.....
if you place him in the shoes of the extremists at the time of his speech.....he may have been more explicit ::) ::)
MLK was talking for more than just himself....you see he had walked in the shoes of every black person in AMerica...
he felt Black Equality was worth dying for in those years...me being white....and not American I really have no idea what he endured I can only guess.
these extremists are talking for many Muslims who find the insults.. more than insulting...
like a lot of American Negroes the see red when they hear the N word....I am not sure if there is a law against it...but there surely is a common decency law against it....
unless of course people are a FOS freak.

-------------------------

WRONG: You are now looking to weasel out of your position.
A coward is a coward, no matter what colour he or she thinks red is.
Anyone can in this free country believe whatever they like, that is why some people needed to die to ensure that right of future generation to stand tall and proud.
Some people are so wishy washy that they change their point of view depending on what is being said.
Some people get angry because they are inferior, stand for nothing, bitch and moan about we are the minority and the down trodden. We don't actually want to work or share in the responsibilities, but we want equality, as lone as someone else will fight and die for it.
Talking about the American Negro, the black, they want a free lunch, tell them to go out and work for it, as so many brave Negros have done before them. It's not about colour, it's about who you are and what your belief is.
Some even find it insulting, or objectionable that someone actually does not agree with them.
People need to know where another stands, not now, but always. They need to know they are rock solid, their beliefs are not Negotiable.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 4:59pm

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 5:00pm

freediver wrote on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 4:42pm:

Cods what do you think would be the likely consequence if we all adopted your strategy of spineless appeasement of terrorists? Have you put any thought into it, beyond 'no dead cartoonists'?

cods wrote on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 4:59pm:

That's the extent of it, eh?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by nasus on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 5:01pm

cods wrote on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 4:43pm:

nasus wrote on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 2:53pm:

___________________
you do know he was a BLACK AMERICAN who lived through Americas own version of apartheid dont you?...
I bet the hell he did know what FOS was..... and what he didnt have.....
btw d.ryder uses it in his sig....very apt for this topic a person who was belittled and degraded through out his life...who watched as his fellow man was insulted day in day out.. by a special group who happened to be WHITE in colour.....therefore superior.....
why are you concerned for those 50 years from now.... ::) ::) ::)
you obviously havent a clue what was said..52 years ago.didnt make any impression on you whatever

______________________
Martin Luther King was an American, I know who he was. He agitated, he was full of hatred, he cared not for America, he cared for himself. "I have a dream", what twaddle, self serving.
Some blacks, though I would not use that term, thought of themselves as, "oh my, oh dear, we are the minority who feel as though the evil whites are exploiting us" . The American negro as the Australian Aborigine have the same opportunities as everyone else, they just needed to get off their collective backsides to show that. The current President of the United State scan attest to that.
I have a very good understanding of what was said years ago, by what they wrote, and what they felt. I was there 52 years ago, and still try to find meaning in what was said then and now. Don't judge me by your standards, thanks.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 5:02pm

nasus wrote on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 4:50pm:

cods wrote on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 4:35pm:

Panther wrote on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 11:59am:

[quote author=cods link=1421614428/437#437 date=1422233271]
A man who won't die for something is not fit to live. - Martin Luther King
[/i][/font][/size]

you dont know it.. but you have SAID IT ALL..

......................I BELIEVE................................
each and everyone opf us has a different BELIEF...do you know we even see colour differently....
some as we know can see NO COLOUR
some as we know CAN SEE NO OTHER POINT OF VIEW BUT THEIR OWN..
its the way things are??..
if questions are never asked.........???????????...
if you daughter or son never said WHY daddy..
wouldnt you think there was something wrong with them??>....
so I asked a question....
you dont know any more about what MLKING had in his mind than I do...its our kind of FOS to make up our own minds......
all I am asking is... did MLK have horrible insulting anti American Negro cartoons to deal with.???...
you put a lot into what he thought by using him in your sig.. at least thats what I thought.....
if you place him in the shoes of the extremists at the time of his speech.....he may have been more explicit ::) ::)
MLK was talking for more than just himself....you see he had walked in the shoes of every black person in AMerica...
he felt Black Equality was worth dying for in those years...me being white....and not American I really have no idea what he endured I can only guess.
these extremists are talking for many Muslims who find the insults.. more than insulting...
like a lot of American Negroes the see red when they hear the N word....I am not sure if there is a law against it...but there surely is a common decency law against it....
unless of course people are a FOS freak.

-------------------------

WRONG: You are now looking to weasel out of your position.
A coward is a coward, no matter what colour he or she thinks red is.
Anyone can in this free country believe whatever they like, that is why some people needed to die to ensure that right of future generation to stand tall and proud.
Some people are so wishy washy that they change their point of view depending on what is being said.
Some people get angry because they are inferior, stand for nothing, bitch and moan about we are the minority and the down trodden. We don't actually want to work or share in the responsibilities, but we want equality, as lone as someone else will fight and die for it.
Talking about the American Negro, the black, they want a free lunch, tell them to go out and work for it, as so many brave Negros have done before them. It's not about colour, i's about who you are and what your belief is.
Some even find it insulting, or objectionable that someone actually does not agree with them.

really< what ever makes you think that?
People need to know where another stands, not now, but always. They need to know they are rock solid, their beliefs are not Negotiable.

well now I know why you got 3 days...your freedom of speech isnt quite the same level as FDs I guess...

maybe a week coming your way. ::) ::)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by nasus on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 5:11pm

cods wrote on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 5:02pm:

nasus wrote on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 4:50pm:

[quote author=cods link=1421614428/451#451 date=1422254119][quote author=DreamRyderX link=1421614428/441#441 date=1422237563][quote author=cods link=1421614428/437#437 date=1422233271]
A man who won't die for something is not fit to live. - Martin Luther King
[/i][/font][/size]

------------------------

well now I know why you got 3 days...your freedom of speech isnt quite the same level as FDs I guess...

maybe a week coming your way. ::) ::)

GOT you, you now need a new person to focus your crap on. You have used up all you silly lives on arguing with all the other members, they gave up on you, called you whatever names they did, now you see fresh pickings. I stupidly tried to explain what freedom of speech was when I come along, NOW it's me you want to pick a fight with. Give it up, I concur with all other posts directed at yourself, live well. THE END
"A coward dies many times, the valiant only tasted death but once."

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by longweekend58 on Jan 27^th, 2015 at 7:54am

nasus wrote on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 5:01pm:

cods wrote on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 4:43pm:

nasus wrote on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 2:53pm:

that just makes you sound like an idiot... and a racist one at that.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by nasus on Jan 27^th, 2015 at 8:04am

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 27^th, 2015 at 7:54am:

nasus wrote on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 5:01pm:

cods wrote on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 4:43pm:

nasus wrote on Jan 26^th, 2015 at 2:53pm:

that just makes you sound like an idiot... and a racist one at that.

Well we have another intellectual giant. WE also have here another person who is unable to read, failed in comprehending even simple text.
All the person can come up with as he has no argument is to call someone a racist, and pass some simplistic remark calling the other person an idiot.
Back to school for you my friend, and next time read what is actually written, then express your thoughts and give argument if you disagree, don't call someone else an idiot, when it is you who failed to read what was on the post.
Guess after calling someone an idiot, you must feel superior, keep up the good work. School starts again today, off you go. :) :)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Jan 31^st, 2015 at 8:59am

Off-Topic replies have been moved to this Topic.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 8:41am

thank you FD for trying to save this topic...

talking of Freedom of Speech..

it is very good news to here Peter Grest will be coming home...when so called govts have the power to Jail someone because they dare to tell the truth about the govt... that is my idea of gross interference with FoS..

but stopping an insulting cartoon does not and never will impact on my idea of FoS....

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Redneck on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 8:49am

Thanks cods, this seems OK,

I was sure I was seeing new posts under both topics today, now seems OK.

Weird, maybe I need new glasses. No I havent had a drink!

;) ;)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Happy Lucky on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 8:52am

So you don't think he deserved to be executed, cods.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 8:54am

cods wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 8:41am:

With all due respect cods, that's why is is, & will always only be, 'your idea of FoS'

Don't get me wrong, you have the absolute right to your own opinions, but reality starts where all personal opinion gently falls to the wayside.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 8:55am

Happy Lucky wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 8:52am:

So you don't think he deserved to be executed, cods.

you talking about FD I think thats a bit extreme!!!!!

red.. you might have got confused by imsparticus.. he seemed to be double posting all over the place.. mayheb its him thats been drinking...

anyway I now look forward to your contribution....or were you interested in the gun thread?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 8:58am

Panther wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 8:54am:

cods wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 8:41am:

With all due respect cods, that's why is is, & will always only be, 'your idea fo FoS'

Don't get me wrong, you have the absolute right to your own opinions, but reality starts where all personal opinion gently falls to the wayside.

well thank you.... but if you take the time to read some of the abuse I have had.,.

you would know that NO I DONT HAVE THE RIGHT TO MY OPINION....on thsi forum anyway.. I have even been banned for the first time ever.... ::) ::) ::) ::)

its a fine line I guess.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 9:26am

cods wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 8:58am:

Panther wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 8:54am:

cods wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 8:41am:

It can be, but I ask you to consider this.

Just like it may have taken a long time to develop & nurture an opinion, one should never be dissuaded from that opinion if after all things considered one knows they're absolutely right.......

Absent that absolute conviction, always be open to consider another point of view, until it's proven itself incorrect......

BTW.......being banned once can be a shock at first, but it's not until after 5 or 6 times do you get used to it..... Been there, done that.....

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Happy Lucky on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 10:26am

Sorry, you must be a different cods. I was reaching out to the cods that believes it's justified for muslims to kill journalists/westerners/christians/jews/other muslims/snowmen etc when their widdle feelings get hurt.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 10:41am

Panther wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 9:26am:

cods wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 8:58am:

Panther wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 8:54am:

cods wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 8:41am:

with age comes wisdom one knows the difference in giving in..and abdicating....

you will find...that when you have counselling to solve a problem......doesnt matter what it is......

there is always two sides..

and both sides have to give just a little......to solve the problem...

its never ever down to one side giving up all.. and the other side winning all....

I wasnt so miffed at being banned... as I didnt understand what it was about....I was having a run in with longweekend... [ who doesnt]...but he was attacking myself.. so I hit back...wrong ok.. but a warning would have been nice as I understand a lot of people get warnings....however...I can only put it down to longweekend and I might be being unfair so who knows..

I do think just about everything has at least two points of view....like /dislike if you like.. ::)

and unless you can discuss them without the abuse....how can you ever persuade someone to your way of thinking????

when you see the way some folks can vote... you know how they can be persuaded for better or worse....at the drop of a hat......

so we mustnt stifle Fos by being rude and objectionable...a lot of people have been driven away from forums like this.. because some do not respect their rights to speak up.... yet claim terrorists are interfering with THEIR FOS>.

make sense to you?.. doesnt to me.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 10:51am

Happy Lucky wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 10:26am:

you didnt say that I mentioned Peter Greste to m y knowledge he wasnt threatened with DEATH..

would help if you said what you mean and not expect someone to read your mind.. I dont do that before lunch time...

who said its justified for terrorists..

there by goes my argument

you are twisting something to fit in with your perceived threat to your fos...

if only stopping a cartoon was that simple.....

if we knew that standing up to these terrorists would stop the killing....

did printing the cartoon save those journos???

nope.....did drawing the cartoons kill those journos nope as far as I know it had not a thing to do with it....

I know maybe you dont..

that we are dealing with fanatics.. people who will die for their cause...no matter how stupid it looks to the outside they dont care......

now this ISIL group are fighting for the world to become Muslim..... they are not fighting per se.. to stop cartoons.......that is another group....of fanatics....

ISIL must by now be running out of money... this is what they want for the journos...although I am sure most of us know they will never be released no matter what is paid....and no we dont pay ransoms and no I would never think thats was the right way to go either.

I do not put a ransom on the same page as being asked not to draw insulting cartoons....

I will leave that for you..

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Happy Lucky on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 1:32pm

okay, it's the same cods.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 4:29pm

Happy Lucky wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 1:32pm:

okay, it's the same cods.

pity we cannot say the same about you how many handles have you had.. are you game to put them up..I think its creepy when people keep changing their ID without saying Y... must have a reason I always think...

at least you can count on me.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Happy Lucky on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 5:15pm

Can count on you to bitch, moan, cry, tattle-tale and generally carry on like a good sort in front of the mods.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Soren on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 5:58pm

These days, pretty much every story is really the same story:

In Galway, at the National University of Ireland, a speaker who attempts to argue against the BDS (Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions) programme against Israel is shouted down with cries of ‘smacking Zionist, smacking pricks… Get the bugger off our campus.’
In California, Mozilla’s chief executive is forced to resign because he once made a political donation in support of the pre-revisionist definition of marriage.
At Westminster, the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee declares that the BBC should seek ‘special clearance’ before it interviews climate sceptics, such as fringe wacko extremists like former Chancellor Nigel Lawson.
In Massachusetts, Brandeis University withdraws its offer of an honorary degree to a black feminist atheist human rights campaigner from Somalia.
In London, a multitude of liberal journalists and artists responsible for everything from Monty Python to Downton Abbey sign an open letter in favour of the first state restraints on the British press in three and a quarter centuries.
And in Canberra the government is planning to repeal Section 18C — whoa, don’t worry, not all of it, just three or four adjectives; or maybe only two, or whatever it’s down to by now, after what Gay Alcorn in the Age described as the ongoing debate about ‘where to strike the balance between free speech in a democracy and protection against racial abuse in a multicultural society’.
I heard a lot of that kind of talk during my battles with the Canadian ‘human rights’ commissions a few years ago: of course, we all believe in free speech, but it’s a question of how you ‘strike the balance’, where you ‘draw the line’… which all sounds terribly reasonable and Canadian, and apparently Australian, too. But in reality the point of free speech is for the stuff that’s over the line, and strikingly unbalanced. If free speech is only for polite persons of mild temperament within government-policed parameters, it isn’t free at all. So screw that.

But I don’t really think that many people these days are genuinely interested in ‘striking the balance’; they’ve drawn the line and they’re increasingly unashamed about which side of it they stand. What all the above stories have in common, whether nominally about Israel, gay marriage, climate change, Islam, or even freedom of the press, is that one side has cheerfully swapped that apocryphal Voltaire quote about disagreeing with what you say but defending to the death your right to say it for the pithier Ring Lardner line: ‘“Shut up,” he explained.’

A generation ago, progressive opinion at least felt obliged to pay lip service to the Voltaire shtick. These days, nobody’s asking you to defend yourself to the death: a mildly supportive retweet would do. But even that’s further than most of those in the academy, the arts, the media are prepared to go. As Erin Ching, a student at 60-grand-a-year Swarthmore College in Pennsylvania, put it in her college newspaper the other day: ‘What really bothered me is the whole idea that at a liberal arts college we need to be hearing a diversity of opinion.’ Yeah, who needs that? There speaks the voice of a generation: celebrate diversity by enforcing conformity.
...

At Brandeis University, we are learning the hierarchy of the new multiculti caste system. In theory, Ayaan Hirsi Ali is everything the identity-group fetishists dig: female, atheist, black, immigrant. If conservative white males were to silence a secular women’s rights campaigner from Somalia, it would be proof of the Republican party’s ‘war on women’, or the encroaching Christian fundamentalist theocracy, or just plain old Andrew Boltian racism breaking free of its redoubt at the Herald Sun to rampage as far as the eye can see. But when the snivelling white male who purports to be president of Brandeis (one Frederick Lawrence) does it out of deference to Islam, Miss Hirsi Ali’s blackness washes off her like a bad dye job on a telly news anchor. White feminist Germaine Greer can speak at Brandeis because, in one of the more whimsical ideological evolutions even by dear old Germaine’s standards, Ms Greer feels that clitoridectomies add to the rich tapestry of ‘cultural identity’: ‘One man’s beautification is another man’s mutilation,’ as she puts it. But black feminist Hirsi Ali, who was on the receiving end of ‘one man’s mutilation’ and lives under death threats because she was boorish enough to complain about it, is too ‘hateful’ to be permitted to speak. In the internal contradictions of multiculturalism, Islam trumps all: race, gender, secularism, everything. So, in the interests of multiculti sensitivity, pampered upper-middle-class trusty-fundychildren of entitlement are pronouncing a Somali refugee beyond the pale and signing up to Islamic strictures on the role of women.

That’s another reason why Gay Alcorn’s fretting over ‘striking the balance’ is so irrelevant. No matter where you strike it, the last unread nonagenarian white supremacist Xeroxing flyers in a shack off the Tanami Track will be way over the line, while, say, Sheikh Sharif Hussein’s lively sermon to an enthusiastic crowd at the Islamic Da’wah Centre of South Australia, calling on Allah to kill every last Buddhist and Hindu, will be safely inside it. One man’s decapitation is another man’s cultural validation, as Germaine would say.
[url]http://www.spectator.co.uk/australia/australia-features/9187741/the-slow-death-of-free-spee

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 11:05pm

Happy Lucky wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 5:15pm:

Can count on you to bitch, moan, cry, tattle-tale and generally carry on like a good sort in front of the mods.

and what do you call yourself DOING>. how about your real id.. come on dare you what you got to be ashamed of???>.. at least poor old moaning me doesnt need to hide..

have you thought of that??.... ;D ;D ;D

I feel sorry for, people like you...you think telling lies about people makes you a BIG MAN.. personally it makes you look very lacking indeed..... very lacking,

being rude to others is the usual sign of someone with an inferiority complex of some kind. ;D ;D

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 11:06pm

Soren if this forum alone is anything to go by... this so called FoS will only get worse..look at the mental state of those shouting my FoS down... ::) ::)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Happy Lucky on Feb 3^rd, 2015 at 5:53am

Slandering Christine Milne by inferring that she's a lesbian is really kind and courteous, cods. Let's not forget brave. BTW, i've never whinged to a mod irrespective of whatever sock i'm wearing. If you can't take it, don't dish it dearie.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 3^rd, 2015 at 6:13am

Happy Lucky wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2015 at 5:53am:

you have got it all wrong POLLIES are anyones game''

from now on I will refer to all left leaning pollies as maggots...for a long time lefties on here have referred to Libs pollies as maggots amongst other things....and havent seen you whinge about that......

this is not the SAME THING AS BEING PERSONAL ON HERE>DUCKIE...

dont you ever get anything right??????>..

slandering Milne.. the maggot how does that do it for you??? ;D ;D ;D ;D

I have got a few others as well.. filthy scum is another./......oooo I am going to enjoy this..

milnes your hero is she.. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Happy Lucky on Feb 3^rd, 2015 at 8:33am

I think Milne is one of the poorest excuses for a public official i've ever laid eyes on; that's not the point. I think if your the sort of person who trades in personal insults (and i try to fit into that category) you shouldn't then turn around and cry to the mods because the boys are playing too rough. That thread just illustrated that you're no angel cods, yet at the same time you like to fiddle the 'woe is me tune' whenever someone gives you a bit back. BTW, so what if Milne's a public official? What has her appearance or sexual orientation have to do with her total lack of competence?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 3^rd, 2015 at 1:48pm

Happy Lucky wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2015 at 8:33am:

where did I cry to the mods......would you like to take a look at the first few pages of this thread alone.. and see what I was called... ::) ::) ::).. I mean would you do that?.. I did not report one of those comments...NOT ONE....and I got pages of it....

as I said Politicians are open season.. dont you know that.

how come you dont complain about what is said about Abbott.. what about the disgusting picture of him fd seems fit ????

how come you are not complaining about that???..

give me the LINK you are referring to.....that would help....me to understand ..

is it ok then if I call her a maggot another fine example of what lefties call Abbott again I have never seen a complain t from yourself...

you sound very much like you have one set of rules for yourself.. and one set for others....

show me the complains you are whingeing about.....

as for Milne I will say what ever I like just like you are able too...... >:(

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 3^rd, 2015 at 1:48pm

this is about FREEDOM OF SPEECH in case you have lost yourself.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Happy Lucky on Feb 3^rd, 2015 at 2:06pm

I'm a liberal voter cods. I'm not judging you by my shoddy standards; i'm judging you by your lofty ones. If i call Shorten a rapist can i then get too upset with Abbott being called a woman basher? Pollies are fair game, eh? What if a pollie was a poster on OP? Would it then be o.k to call them lesbians? What if a relative was a poster on OP; would you still say they deserved what they got? The poor little old lady routine's looking a little worn.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 3^rd, 2015 at 2:20pm

Happy Lucky wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2015 at 2:06pm:

oh go away...... whats the point of getting upset... its you thats upset about milne..do you think I can stop them calling Libs maggot or filthy scum....and the filthy scum is what the lib voters get called....your ok with that?????....

its got nothing to do with anything... pollies are fair game always have been on a forum...you were complaining about milne......in case you didnt watch closely which seems to be one of your problems....greenwin started a thread called ABBOTT RESIGNS....a total LIE...

so I started a sarcastic thread on his queen Milne....simple as that.. you being slow wouldnt pick that up of course....

but I am one of thses folks who thinks.. whats sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander....

you know that other well known saying of course

if the kitchens too hot... then get out of it.

dont like what I say dont read.. very easy....

you are the one complaining about me... ::) ::) ::) ::)

but thats ok I guess.

where the links????????... I am truly interested to see what you are COMPLAINING about.

not the milne one I know that and thats my right....

sorry you dont agree.

but when I see you complain about the abuse of other pollies.. then I will say hallelujah

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Happy Lucky on Feb 3^rd, 2015 at 3:28pm

I'm absolutely incredulous. I've read posts where you describe how abuse from posters has you at the end of your tether. Have you really forgotton the sobs stories you've spun to mods about how they pick on poor old cods? Suffer from mood swings much?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 3^rd, 2015 at 4:16pm

Happy Lucky wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2015 at 3:28pm:

come on show them to me... or I mwill report you for abuse I dont like liars and I especially dont like lies about myself...

so here it is put up or shut up.

or from now on you will be known as LYING UNLUCKY.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Feb 3^rd, 2015 at 7:00pm

cods wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2015 at 4:16pm:

Happy Lucky wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2015 at 3:28pm:

Balls in your court fella, she got a point.

If they're easy to find, & so numerous, you'd have no problem linking to them, or cut & pasting them.

My 6 year old niece does that. ;)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Happy Lucky on Feb 4^th, 2015 at 3:23am

I'm not a liar, cods. Start from page one of 'rules for banning' and rediscover the classic symptoms of hysteria from a self-pitying old tattle-tale. Perhaps it's time to hang up the typing gloves and give everyone a break.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by it_is_the_light on Feb 4^th, 2015 at 3:28am

Happy Lucky wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2015 at 2:06pm:

many blessings

its best not to judge , one may suggest

as one such as I am observes

with forgiveness

namaste

- : ) =

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by The Grappler Hebdo (je suis) on Feb 4^th, 2015 at 4:50am

Perhaps it's time for everyone to get nose to grindstone and start working on the issues and not the personalities here.... what is this? Federal Parliament?

We here are seeking the real answers to the problems of government of the day - it would help if the bickering would die down for a day or so.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Happy Lucky on Feb 4^th, 2015 at 6:31am

I like the bickering.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Soren on Feb 4^th, 2015 at 7:33pm

cods wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 11:06pm:

Soren if this forum alone is anything to go by... this so called FoS will only get worse..look at the mental state of those shouting my FoS down... ::) ::)

FoS does not mean that others have to agree with you or that they cannot vehemently oppose and ridicule your view.

Progressives and Muslims want you to shut up or they will shut you up, one way (PC) or another (bullets).
http://www.spiked-online.com/freespeechnow/fsn_article/oxford-abortion-and-the-closing-of-the-western-mind

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Svengali on Feb 4^th, 2015 at 10:52pm

Soren wrote on Feb 4^th, 2015 at 7:33pm:

cods wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 11:06pm:

Soren if this forum alone is anything to go by... this so called FoS will only get worse..look at the mental state of those shouting my FoS down... ::) ::)

Soren is the complete hypocrite.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Phemanderac on Feb 5^th, 2015 at 6:21am

Here is an interesting analysis.

http://www.polecom.org/index.php/polecom/article/view/40/237

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Phemanderac on Feb 5^th, 2015 at 6:24am

The upside to that article, it highlights the contradictions from BOTH sides of the debate, but not just about Freedom of Speech (and/or the perceived need for responsible speech), but it also touches on Freedom of the Press and Freedom of Expression.

The practical upshot, there is no simple one size fits all solution, hell, it isn't even an all or nothing argument.

Perhaps one day our species will mature and this will all make sense...

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Feb 5^th, 2015 at 7:35am

Soren wrote on Feb 4^th, 2015 at 7:33pm:

cods wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 11:06pm:

Soren if this forum alone is anything to go by... this so called FoS will only get worse..look at the mental state of those shouting my FoS down... ::) ::)

FoS does not mean that others have to agree with you or that they cannot vehemently oppose and ridicule your view.

+1

Vehemently opposing and ridiculing a point of view doesn't negate the FoS of the one who originally expressed a point of view.

They actually exercised their FoS by expressing that point of view in the first place.

The one who vehemently opposes and ridicules it does so as well.

FoS expressions do not have to be accepted in order to be valid, nor does the content of those expressions have to be deemed acceptable.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Happy Lucky on Feb 5^th, 2015 at 8:28am

The swear filter serves as an analogy of the problems and limitations of the politically correct approach to language moderation. I can call someone a spasticated cess pool of abortive human garbage but just try and call someone a f&!k
wit. Ultimately, any effort to suppress the natural person's expression just winds up looking priggish and futile. What is the answer? I know for certain it isn't putting up childish safety barriers.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Feb 5^th, 2015 at 8:36am

Happy Lucky wrote on Feb 5^th, 2015 at 8:28am:

Come on......be creative, you can't tell me you don't have the mental capability to think outside the box, & to present a phrase without typing.

Get the picture?

See the image in your mind yet? ::)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Feb 6^th, 2015 at 8:47am

Phemanderac wrote on Feb 5^th, 2015 at 6:24am:

Should we all be subject to a different set of rules and laws? Is this just another way of avoiding taking a principled stance?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Phemanderac on Feb 6^th, 2015 at 10:52am

freediver wrote on Feb 6^th, 2015 at 8:47am:

Phemanderac wrote on Feb 5^th, 2015 at 6:24am:

Should we all be subject to a different set of rules and laws? Is this just another way of avoiding taking a principled stance?

I would think if you had read the article the first question would almost answer itself, in short, we ALL already are subject to different sets of rules and laws. However, even more, we are also subject to a myriad of different interpretations on top. It would seem as such, quite rightly, consistency is a bit of an issue.

As to the second question, to my mind it is irrelevant. Not agreeing with your positions for example is not necessarily not taking a principled stance. In my experience I would with all due respect suggest that appears frequently to be the way you frame your arguments though.

My stance on the matter is that;

a) Concepts like freedom (be it speech, expression, markets or even action) will always have limitations imposed externally by someone. It will all depend on their interpretation and their capacity to exercise power and control. The dictionary definition of freedom would seem to be irrelevant.

b) To fully support a concept like free speech takes a thick skin and immeasurable courage, because, there will ALWAYS be those who will test your personal boundaries seeking the moment you try to limit their freedom...

c) An individuals freedom ends where it impinges on another individuals freedom or personal safety...I reckon we ALL share responsibility for that idea to.

Now on point C, I have considered this at length and I have this idea that this is actually the crux of the majority of the arguments in this thread. Contrary to that which you have on more than a few occasions indicated directly about me (to your credit you have ceased to include me though), do not support appeasement.

Take the cartoon murderers for example. The people pulling the triggers are the ones fully responsible for the murders...

The cartoonists, to be fair, are fully responsible for the offense they may cause. I do recognise and acknowledge on point that Cods makes, offending nut jobs is a high risk activity - before you get all jumpy on that though, I don't agree that this means we should step back from satire, commentary or making observations about that which we do not agree with, find offensive and/or anti social.

However, none of that detracts from the observations made in the linked article I posted. In short, both the left and the right have jumped on this to somehow use it (very cynically in my opinion) as some kind of tool for their position, no more no less. Yet both the left and the right demonstrably have ignored, trampled on, or impeded the very same principals they claim "Je Suis Charley" is all about.

The points made about this board, your rules and the application of said rules bare out the idea that we all have different sets of rules to go by already...

That does not mean you should or could be bullied into publishing my rubbish by the way, it is merely an observation. I do not dispute that, by ownership, you have every right to control freedom of speech as it is presented on your board...(yeah, I called it you little sandpit previously, to some degree, that still applies).

Bottom line, your principled position is just a different one to mine.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Svengali on Feb 7^th, 2015 at 1:46pm

UK government bans rabid US anti-islamists on the grounds of threat to public order. These 2 are lightning rods for opposing forces.

http://www.libertynewsonline.com/article_330_36873.php

Quote:

A British court has affirmed a governmental decision to ban American conservative and pro-Israel activists Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller from visiting the United Kingdom.

The two wrote that the decision reflects the nation’s “descent into authoritarianism” and a “suicidal path of appeasement of Islamic jihadists and supremacists.”

Spencer, who directs Jihad Watch, and Geller, who blogs at Atlas Shrugs, both advocate for Israel and American support for Israel. They write regularly on Islamic terrorism and had been invited to speak at a freedom protest in the U.K.

However, the British government, utilizing a letter from an unidentified official in its Foreign and Commonwealth Office that cited the pair’s “pro-Israeli views,” banned them even before they had decided whether to attend the event.

The British government had been advised by an investigator assigned to the case that, among other things, “Pamela Geller’s outspoken support for Israel may also attract pro-Palestinian groups to attend, further complicating the policing operation on the ground and making it harder to keep opposing groups apart.”

In an article Thursday co-authored by Geller and Spencer, they said the British Court of Appeal has affirmed their ban.

“The key element of its decision is its emphasis on the fact that ‘this was a public order case where the police had advised that significant public disorder and serious violence might ensue from the proposed visit,’” they explained.

“In writing that judgment, Lord Justice Tomlinson (with whom Lord Justice Patten and Lord Justice Floyd agree) has only made it clear that the British government has decided to set aside established law and the freedom of speech in order to appease violent Muslims,” they wrote.

Pamela Geller’s commitment to freedom from jihad and Shariah shines forth in her books – featured at the WND Superstore

Authorities infringing on speech rights in fear of a negative reaction has been called a “heckler’s veto” in the U.S.

A case is pending before the U.S. Supreme Court regarding students at a California high school who were ordered to remove images of the American flag on a Mexican holiday. In another case that more directly relates to the U.K. ban, Christian activists at an Arab festival near Detroit were told to leave public areas because Muslims at the festival might react to them with violence.

Regarding the ban, Spencer and Geller wrote: “Will the British government now ban Jews from the country so as to ‘prevent public disorder,’ since the presence of Jews has been shown all too often to upset some Muslims and cause them to riot? The judgment permits such a Nazi approach.”

They continued: “This dismissal of our appeal sets the precedent that those whose speech is unpopular with the British government can be banned from the country. It strikes what could be a fatal blow to the very heart of the doctrine of the freedom of speech: that speech that is unpopular, and may even be offensive to some must be protected, as a safeguard against tyranny. Offensive speech is permissible even in British law, which the British Court of Appeal ignored in order to appease the government.

“Our appeal never had a chance of being considered fairly on its merits. Rather than rule on our case on the basis of established British laws in a fair manner, Judges Tomlinson, Patten and Floyd moved the goalposts and disregarded core British principles in order to uphold our exclusion,” the two wrote.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 7^th, 2015 at 2:28pm

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 7^th, 2015 at 2:39pm

Svengali wrote on Feb 7^th, 2015 at 1:46pm:

UK government bans rabid US anti-islamists on the grounds of threat to public order. These 2 are lightning rods for opposing forces.

http://www.libertynewsonline.com/article_330_36873.php

Quote:

never having heard of them so its a guess... but I presume they are spreading some kind of HATE.

[quote]The two wrote that the decision reflects the nation’s “descent into authoritarianism” and a “suicidal path of appeasement of Islamic jihadists and supremacists.”

rings a bell somehow. ::) ::)

but what are they doing??... are they not spreading the HATE for another group....if they were spreading peace between two groups.. I would think yes it is against FREEDOM OF SPEECH..

but if thats what this is called.. where do you draw a line???

will it be alright next week if a group of Muslims wish to bring in a couple of guys from Gaza and talk the talk about Jews?????......

everything has a line drawn. somewhere

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Svengali on Feb 7^th, 2015 at 2:58pm

Unfortunately there is no such intrinsic freedom of speech. FoS is what the government and the police say it is.

Certainly actions that cause incitement come under the classificaiton of being prohibited because no society wants chaos and disorder that could result from true FoS that results in groups battling each other in the streets.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Feb 8^th, 2015 at 1:09pm

cods wrote on Feb 7^th, 2015 at 2:39pm:

“The key element of its decision is its emphasis on the fact that ‘this was a public order case where the police had advised that significant public disorder and serious violence might ensue from the proposed visit,’” they explained.

Noam Chomsky said it perfectly:

"If you don't believe in free speech for people you despise, you don't believe in it at all"

The UK has vacillated, to the point of fearing violence in any form rather than protecting Liberty, a cornerstone feature of all Freedom, which is balanced precariously upon Free Speech, but balanced nevertheless.

All Liberty is in the crosshairs of the PC Crowd.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 8^th, 2015 at 1:14pm

Panther wrote on Feb 8^th, 2015 at 1:09pm:

cods wrote on Feb 7^th, 2015 at 2:39pm:

Noam Chomsky said it perfectly:

"If you don't believe in free speech for people [highlight]you despise, you don't believe in it at all"[/highlight]

The UK has vacillated, to the point of fearing violence in any form rather than protecting Liberty, a cornerstone feature of all Freedom, which is balanced precariously upon Free Speech, but balanced nevertheless.

All Liberty is in the crosshairs of the PC Crowd.

did she say how she feels when people march through her town with placards demands head off for infidels???...

for every person you despise there might be two who despise you.. :D

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Feb 8^th, 2015 at 1:28pm

Those banned speak about Islam, but they don't directly threaten violence upon Islam, or directly incite others by their statements to commit acts of violence upon Islam.. You (anyone, not just you) may not agree with what they have to say, whether what they say is true or factual, or not, but the Freedom of Speech is not & should not be hindered or restricted by what is 'considered' true or false, so long as violence is not directly called for by what they say.

They are being banned simply because there are some that don't like their message, & because they threaten to overreact to what the two 'might' say violently, rather than debating them openly in a legitimate context & forum.

Hate Speech?

I think not, watch this video, listen to the content, Mr. Spencer is providing information, not calling for any violence. The UK has their collective heads up their asses in this matter of banning in the fear of violence by those who find his message inconvenient, & who don't like him for it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nWMU3eKQB7g

More information Mr. Spencer speaks about, but nowhere can violence be found. You may not agree with him, but he doesn't call for violence.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NH3mFX2-tFI

His provisioning of information isn't exactly appreciated by those that want you to think otherwise, but is what he says so violently inspiring, so to ban his message?

Strongly Anti-Islamist -- Opposed to the messages of Islam, most definitely, but rabid.......not. ::)

Now, Pamela Geller's messages. Are they hate speech?

Here she actually defers her judgment pending more information.

Is that rash of her? Sound violent? Rushing to judgment?

I think not, again she provides information, that some in Islam think they could better do without, so they threaten violence if she is permitted to speak her mind, exercise her Freedom of Speech --- to provide information.

Biased maybe, but most probably more factual than those in the UK can handle, & no incitement to violence is evident, if there is I don't see any?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vWxxfyXuKGg

Today, the way the Politically Correct Media plays with words, virtually any form of disagreement can be labeled 'Hate Speech'.........it's like screaming racist, & playing into the Race Card....Unfounded, but it's obviously intended to stop debate.

“Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin
by subduing the freeness of speech.” Benjamin Franklin

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Article 19.

Quote:
Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Happy Lucky on Feb 8^th, 2015 at 5:21pm

Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from the repurcussions of that speech.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Feb 8^th, 2015 at 10:28pm

cods wrote on Feb 8^th, 2015 at 1:14pm:

Panther wrote on Feb 8^th, 2015 at 1:09pm:

cods wrote on Feb 7^th, 2015 at 2:39pm:

did she say how she feels when people march through her town with placards demands head off for infidels???...

for every person you despise there might be two who despise you.. :D

Noam was a 'He', what his sexual preferences were you can research that if you wish. ::)

"The threat or fear of violence should not become an excuse or justification for restricting freedom of speech" ..... Alan Dershowitz

Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/search_results.html#lgzAEl7yTtFGi07z.99

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Feb 8^th, 2015 at 10:36pm

Happy Lucky wrote on Feb 8^th, 2015 at 5:21pm:

Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from the repurcussions of that speech.

But, as long as you are willing to accept the repercussions, if any, you are free to speak as you wish.

No matter where you live though, under whatever government on earth, you have absolute Freedom of Speech.....well, at least to speak once.......to say anything you wish about anything, or anyone.

Thereafter, you may not live to do it again, but you were able to do it at least once.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Svengali on Feb 8^th, 2015 at 10:56pm

There is no such thing as freedom of speech. It is an illusion; a figment; a machination to allow oppression of the masses when the establishment declares something outside the bounds of that freedom.

All the government or police has to do is to declare an issue, speakers or event a threat to public order and they can suppress FoS. Unfortunately they are quite right to do so because total freedom of speech corresponds to total anarchy.

True freedom of speech would leave people fighting in the streets.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 5:38am

Svengali wrote on Feb 8^th, 2015 at 10:56pm:

Wow, you gotta get out more often. :o

Your life, wherever that might be, or might have been at one time, must have been under some heavy duty repressive totalitarian system for you to make those harsh statements. :-/

That's very depressing. :-?

I thank my God that I have always lived in places where a man, all men, had the right to be free, & life affected by conditions & statements like yours are totally unacceptable & non-existent.

http://imgur.com/zp6yWWP.jpg

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Dame Pansi on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 5:46am

Society needs rules if it is going to operate without chaos.

I don't think it's necessary to have a free for all opportunity to slander and insult certain groups or individuals.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Dame Pansi on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 5:52am

Panther wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 5:38am:

I thank my God that I have always lived in places where a man, all men, had the right to be free, & life affected by conditions & statements like yours are totally unacceptable & non-existent.

You live in a place where there's no rules?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Happy Lucky on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 5:55am

I hate any regime that looks to supress speech for supressions sake (take Labor for instance). Offending people should not in itself be grounds for supression of speech nor should it be grounds to punish the speaker. If i encourage violent acts against Jews for example, than i should reasonably expect repurcussions for that coersion. On the other hand, if i criticise Judaism or the cultual practices and governmetal policies of Israel i don't see a problem.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 5:57am

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 5:46am:

Society needs rules if it is going to operate without chaos.

I don't think it's necessary to have a free for all opportunity to slander and insult certain groups or individuals.

Glad I don't live on your planet, because on mine those so thin skinned are doomed to shrivel up & die hard!

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 6:00am

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 5:52am:

Panther wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 5:38am:

I thank my God that I have always lived in places where a man, all men, had the right to be free, & life affected by conditions & statements like yours are totally unacceptable & non-existent.

You live in a place where there's no rules?

No, I've lived in places where the rules were made by wise men, men who understand that Freedom & Liberty is far, far, more important than being offended by trivial issues & words.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 6:04am

Happy Lucky wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 5:55am:

I hate any regime that looks to supress speech for supressions sake (take Labor for instance). Offending people should not in itself be grounds for supression of speech nor should it be grounds to punish the speaker.

If i encourage violent acts against Jews for example, than i should reasonably expect repurcussions for that coersion. On the other hand, if i criticise Judaism or the cultual practices and governmetal policies of Israel i don't see a problem.

+1 +1 +1

Exactly!!!

In short, that is exactly what free speech is all about.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 8:10am

Panther wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 6:00am:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 5:52am:

Panther wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 5:38am:

I thank my God that I have always lived in places where a man, all men, had the right to be free, & life affected by conditions & statements like yours are totally unacceptable & non-existent.

You live in a place where there's no rules?

No, I've lived in places where the rules were made by wise men, men who understand that Freedom & Liberty is far, far, more important than being offended by trivial issues & words.

so if people call your children ugly cows...

you will fight to the death for their FREEDOM to say that?....

I would like to see that!!!! ::)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 8:19am

Panther wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 5:57am:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 5:46am:

Society needs rules if it is going to operate without chaos.

I don't think it's necessary to have a free for all opportunity to slander and insult certain groups or individuals.

Glad I don't live on your planet, because on mine those so thin skinned are doomed to shrivel up & die hard!

it is interesting.. I am not allowed to call you the M word on here.....well I could spell it.m.o.r.o.n.

some thin skinned people on here get others BANNED..

isnt that also an attack on our FREEDOM OF SPEECH.

do you really think its ok for neighbours to shout obscenities at each other???...

can you imagine the forum if we all used sub language ? ::) ::)

you refer to thin skinned.... ::)

when in reality it is society..

its how we expect people to treat us...

to expect respect

first we have to dish it out..

every society has rules......we take most of them for granted...

sadly over time a lot of decent rules have disappeared..now you are saying its ok for one group to abuse another via bad language... under the guise of FoS....sorry I dont buy that....ignorance doesnt do it for me.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Happy Lucky on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 8:25am

You implied to the parents of the slain French journalists that they deserved to die. I think being called ugly cows pales in comparison.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 8:34am

Happy Lucky wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 8:25am:

You implied to the parents of the slain French journalists that they deserved to die. I think being called ugly cows pales in comparison.

I presume you are referring that remark to myself...

if so I would like you to link me with that remark..

I dont like liars....so I presume the comment I made that said THEY DESERVED to die is on this thread.....thank you.. >:(

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 9:08am

cods wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 8:10am:

Panther wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 6:00am:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 5:52am:

Panther wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 5:38am:

I thank my God that I have always lived in places where a man, all men, had the right to be free, & life affected by conditions & statements like yours are totally unacceptable & non-existent.

You live in a place where there's no rules?

No, I've lived in places where the rules were made by wise men, men who understand that Freedom & Liberty is far, far, more important than being offended by trivial issues & words.

so if people call your children ugly cows...

you will fight to the death for their FREEDOM to say that?....

I would like to see that!!!! ::)

Not their Freedom to say that, their Right to say that. There's a difference.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 9:09am

cods wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 8:10am:

Panther wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 6:00am:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 5:52am:

Panther wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 5:38am:

I thank my God that I have always lived in places where a man, all men, had the right to be free, & life affected by conditions & statements like yours are totally unacceptable & non-existent.

You live in a place where there's no rules?

No, I've lived in places where the rules were made by wise men, men who understand that Freedom & Liberty is far, far, more important than being offended by trivial issues & words.

so if people call your children ugly cows...

you will fight to the death for their FREEDOM to say that?....

I would like to see that!!!! ::)

Not their Freedom to say that, their Right to say that. There's a difference.

They are free to say whatever they want about my kids, but as stipulated to before, they must be willing to accept the consequences to their expressions.

Hmmmm, I could choose a good old fashioned bitch slappin', one at a time. ;D

Nahhhhh.

That is unless they are ugly cows, then I might just leave them to fend for themselves, they're quite capable....I've taught them well.

Never know, I might just ignore it, & they might just do the same......

Freedom is grand, ain't it! ;)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Happy Lucky on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 9:11am

Suffer dementia much, dearie. Remember the 'prodding the tiger' remarks that you repeated probably half a dozen times. I don't lie Cods, I can however, perceive the true meaning that lies under people's words.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 9:16am

Happy Lucky wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 9:11am:

no I didnt prod the tiger that was someone else.. I used the angry bees.....

and I have never ever said THEY DESERVED TO DIE...

ever you are not a nice person to twist what someone says...I said that was the consequences.. of their actions..

like most people we all think it wont happen to us...it only happens to others....these people were no different...

what bothered me was they had a CHOICE....

you are they one that says FOS was worth dying for...

NOT I. >:( >:(

and I find your comment despicable.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 9:20am

Panther wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 9:08am:

Not their Freedom to say that, their Right to say that. There's a difference

well... now we twist another word....this is a FREEDOM OF SPEECH THREAD.

perhaps you need to start your own on RIGHT TO SPEAK thread....... weird.

suddenly you are now talking consequences??..hilarious..

when I pointed out the consequences of the cartoons I was shouted down... ::) ::)..we did try to point out everything has consequences.... we cannot pick and choose the ones that suit us.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 9:32am

cods wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 9:20am:

Panther wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 9:08am:

Not their Freedom to say that, their Right to say that. There's a difference

One has the Right to Free Speech, that is what many would die defending if the chips fell that way.....their Right to the Speech.

I can't help it if you need things so cut & dry, so black & white, but if you are wanting to discuss with people you need to grey out a lil -- loosen yer belt a bit.

I don't speak for anyone but myself.

I told you you had the right to your opinions, & you are free to speak your mind a while back, & you were thankful then......remember?

So, I'd appreciat it if you extend to me the same right, as you wish others to extend to you.

Fair? :)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 9:42am

Panther wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 9:32am:

sted by: DreamRyderX Posted on: Today at 9:32am
cods wrote Today at 9:20am:
DreamRyderX wrote Today at 9:08am:
Not their Freedom to say that, their Right to say that. There's a difference

well... now we twist another word....this is a FREEDOM OF SPEECH THREAD.

perhaps you need to start your own on RIGHT TO SPEAK thread....... weird.

suddenly you are now talking consequences??..hilarious..

when I pointed out the consequences of the cartoons I was shouted down... ..we did try to point out everything has consequences.... we cannot pick and choose the ones that suit us.

One has the Right to Free Speech, that is what many would die defending if the chips fell that way.....their Right to the Speech.

I can't help it if you need things so cut & dry, so black & white, but if you are wanting to discuss with people you need to grey out a lil -- loosen yer belt a bit.

I don't speak for anyone but myself.

I told you you had the right to your opinions, & you are free to speak your mind a while back, & you were thankful then......remember?

So, I'd appreciat it if you extend to me the same right, as you wish others to extend to you.

Fair?

absolutely....over and out..

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 10:00am

cods wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 9:42am:

Panther wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 9:32am:

absolutely....over and out..

Great!

Just for the record, I'd like to reiterate here my stance......what I said...my position:

Panther wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 9:00am:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2015 at 7:16am:

+1

As I've always said, I may vehemently disagree with what you've said or done, & argued to all ends of this earth, but I will defend your Right to say or do what you do (Freedom of Speech/Expression) with my last drop of blood, with my very life, so help me God.

I've stood side by side with many brave men who have done exactly that.

They laid down their lives so we can exercise our freedom to say what we say, & do what we do.

To that I am eternally grateful.

May they rest in peace.

EDIT: Highlighted & Underlined for emphasis

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Happy Lucky on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 10:27am

I absolutely think freedom of speech is worth dying for. I just find it hilarious when an old crochet hat wearing bingo addict defends the actions of terrorists.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Happy Lucky on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 10:34am

You really are an intellectual cripple, aren't you Cods. The freedom relates to the FREEDOM of people being able to SPEAK their views. Censorship, black bans, postal bans, restricting travel movements,imprisonment are just examples of the steps governments take to stop people from even SPEAKING. That's right, governments all around the world clamour to stop people from even SPEAKING. Tony Abbott got Pauline Hanson jailed just because she had the nerve to TALK about Australia's immigration policy. David Irving can't even travel to Australia. Cod's, I really think you don't have a clue.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by A.G on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 12:16pm

Happy Lucky wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 10:34am:

You really are an intellectual cripple, aren't you
. The freedom relates to the FREEDOM of people being able to SPEAK their views. Censorship, black bans, postal bans, restricting travel movements,imprisonment are just examples of the steps governments take to stop people from even SPEAKING. That's right, governments all around the world clamour to stop people from even SPEAKING. Tony Abbott got Pauline Hanson jailed just because she had the nerve to TALK about Australia's immigration policy. David Irving can't even travel to Australia. Cod's, I really think you don't have a clue.

Coming from Lucky! :D

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Happy Lucky on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 12:21pm

Oh touche, spastic.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 12:28pm

Happy Lucky wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 12:21pm:

Oh touche, spastic.

if the boot fits.. >:(

..I am not sure your language is suitable for this thread.....perhaps you could go somewhere like the mens shed where it might be appreciated....

this is MY thread and I dont care for your type...

you cannot talk without the abuse then .. go somewhere else please.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by PZ547 on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 1:03pm

Happy Lucky wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 10:34am:

This is true as far as I can see

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Happy Lucky on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 1:44pm

You thoroughly deserve it you nasty old crone.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by A.G on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 2:02pm

Happy Lucky wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 1:44pm:

You thoroughly deserve it you nasty old crone.

This is personal insult Lucky.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by A.G on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 2:02pm

Happy Lucky wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 1:44pm:

You thoroughly deserve it you nasty old crone.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Happy Lucky on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 2:06pm

Oh you are good, A.G! Where did you get your degree? (Don't worry about Cods, she's moaning to the mods as we speak)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 4:10pm

Happy Lucky wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 2:06pm:

Oh you are good, A.G! Where did you get your degree? (Don't worry about Cods, she's moaning to the mods as we speak)

absolutely.. from now on I report everything....

alls fair as they say.....

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Redneck on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 4:34pm

cods wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 12:28pm:

Happy Lucky wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 12:21pm:

Oh touche, spastic.

REPORTED!!!

>:(

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by A.G on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 5:39pm

cods wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 4:10pm:

Happy Lucky wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 2:06pm:

Oh you are good, A.G! Where did you get your degree? (Don't worry about Cods, she's moaning to the mods as we speak)

absolutely.. from now on I report everything....

alls fair as they say.....

Good on you Cods..and looks like you and Red have an issue..?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 5:47pm

Redmond Neck wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 4:34pm:

cods wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 12:28pm:

Happy Lucky wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 12:21pm:

Oh touche, spastic.

REPORTED!!!

>:(

why so angry I would have though bad language was ok amongst you blokes....some talk about thin skins on here... I expected you bikie types to think it was ..

well blokey?..

now you have reported me...I am already in the poo...thanks for that.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 5:50pm

The Mole wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 5:39pm:

cods wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 4:10pm:

Happy Lucky wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 2:06pm:

Oh you are good, A.G! Where did you get your degree? (Don't worry about Cods, she's moaning to the mods as we speak)

absolutely.. from now on I report everything....

alls fair as they say.....

Good on you Cods..and looks like you and Red have an issue..?

well I am glad one of us know about the issue... because I am sure I dont...I wasnt reporting red....he is reporting me...talk about confused....maybe its time to do a Mr light and just talk to myself.. I seem to be the only one I dont upset these days.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Happy Lucky on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 6:32pm

The squeakiest wheel gets the most grease. AKA, you whinge you win.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Tap on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 6:46pm

Happy Lucky wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 6:32pm:

The squeakiest wheel gets the most grease. AKA, you whinge you win.

People, People, People, belly up & skull a couple of icy cold schooners on me before you all implode! ;) ::) :-X

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by aquascoot on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 7:00pm

its un australian to be a dobber.

even Cindy Brady was chastised in the Brady Bunch for being a Tattle Tale.

i would never report anyone, ever, period.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 4:57am

aquascoot wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 7:00pm:

its un australian to be a dobber.

even Cindy Brady was chastised in the Brady Bunch for being a Tattle Tale.

i would never report anyone, ever, period.

You are required by law to report Child Abuse, so are you saying you would ignore Child Abuse in order to keep your precious non-dobber status intact, & protect the abuser.......effectively condoning the act(s)??

Is reporting a Child Abuse crime Un-Australian?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Dame Pansi on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 6:03am

cods wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 5:47pm:

Redmond Neck wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 4:34pm:

cods wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 12:28pm:

Happy Lucky wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 12:21pm:

Oh touche, spastic.

REPORTED!!!

>:(

Happy lucky calls Cods a spastic, Cods advises him to go to the men's shed with his abuse, Cods get's reported.......I'll never understand this place.

Can anyone work that one out?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Dame Pansi on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 6:07am

aquascoot wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 7:00pm:

its un australian to be a dobber.

even Cindy Brady was chastised in the Brady Bunch for being a Tattle Tale.

i would never report anyone, ever, period.

You don't have to, there's plenty of other poster's that report abuse, it's the right thing to do, otherwise the forum would close down due to chaos. Every society needs rules, even the inter web forum society.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by it_is_the_light on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 6:30am

Happy Lucky wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 1:44pm:

You thoroughly deserve it you nasty old crone.

many blessings

this dear one happy lucky is addicted to poker machines

this entity loves to come on here after a good stretch at the pokies and major losses

then happy lucky comes here and attacks lovely refined ladies

this pitiful one is observed with forgiveness

as the id happy lucky is in torment and must

get a reaction from others so as to make them feel the negative emotions and he is hoping

you send back this hatred, this torment

so the demon possessing him may have nourishment

and as such

I do send love and light into the belly of the beast

in which is exposed and is being extracted

like poison from a wound ,

so be at peace

namaste

- : ) =

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Happy Lucky on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 7:09am

I really resent that. I didn't call Cods a spastic... I called A.G a spastic. In fact I called Cods a nasty old crone, a crochet hat wearing bingo addict and an intellectual cripple. If you're going to snitch about my abusive behaviour, can you at least get the facts straight?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 7:14am

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 6:07am:

aquascoot wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 7:00pm:

its un australian to be a dobber.

even Cindy Brady was chastised in the Brady Bunch for being a Tattle Tale.

i would never report anyone, ever, period.

There's some truth in what you say, but I see those (governments, banks, labour unions, politicians) that need to control people -- for their 'own good' , but in reality, so many things can work quite a bit better when there are no basic rules, no central planning.

Via peoples natural order of 'community', they seem to function extremely well through "Spontaneous Order" & the outcomes are quite remarkable.

Spontaneous Order (link text)

Order from Chaos -- No Plan, No Problem (link text & video)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hhjIiRW6fzU

Freedom is great.........ain't it!

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Happy Lucky on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 7:14am

Many blessings and may the force be with you.
Master Light is a solicitor who charges desperate people $200 an hour. To expunge his guilt he pretends to be a druid priest on an internet forum. There are many masks to choose from, Master Counsel chose the one that allows him to look down on the largest amount of people.
This is the typical behaviour of leftard hypocrites.
Namaste, (tolerated but not forgiven).

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 7:28am

aquascoot wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 7:00pm:

its un australian to be a dobber.

even Cindy Brady was chastised in the Brady Bunch for being a Tattle Tale.

i would never report anyone, ever, period.

very noble of you of course and like freedom of speech it is your right....

however people like myself believe in supporting those who we feel are being bullied....bullies are people who will stoop to any level to win what they consider is their right.. but its not someone elses... ::) ::)

if I stooped to others level and just posted abuse/name calling...what do you think that would resolve???..

tit for tat never did do it for me... all it does is make me angrier.. and thats not what I come on here for.

as pansi has pointed out someone feels its important to report me for suggesting someone spends time in the m.s......better not mention it again... ::) ::)

yet you think its ok for someone to call others spastic/old crone/ intellectual cripple.. amongst other things...at least no comment..... which basically says the same thing.. ::) ::)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by aquascoot on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 8:59am

Panther wrote on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 4:57am:

aquascoot wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 7:00pm:

its un australian to be a dobber.

even Cindy Brady was chastised in the Brady Bunch for being a Tattle Tale.

i would never report anyone, ever, period.

I'd report it to Bobby and he would "hang them high" ;)

point taken, but a bit of interweb banter counts for nought. its just a bit of harmless fun and games

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by aquascoot on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 9:03am

cods wrote on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 7:28am:

aquascoot wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 7:00pm:

its un australian to be a dobber.

even Cindy Brady was chastised in the Brady Bunch for being a Tattle Tale.

i would never report anyone, ever, period.

no one can make someone angry. that is something we do to ourselves and an issue we have to work on ourselves.
if someone makes you angry, look at it as a growing and learning experience.
i'm sure master light agrees.
(he does seem quite angry about freemasons though)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 9:15am

aquascoot wrote on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 8:59am:

Panther wrote on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 4:57am:

aquascoot wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 7:00pm:

its un australian to be a dobber.

even Cindy Brady was chastised in the Brady Bunch for being a Tattle Tale.

i would never report anyone, ever, period.

I'd report it to Bobby and he would "hang them high" ;)

point taken, but a bit of interweb banter counts for nought. its just a bit of harmless fun and games

you would report horse abuse though I am sure.. ;) ;)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 9:19am

aquascoot wrote on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 9:03am:

cods wrote on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 7:28am:

aquascoot wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 7:00pm:

its un australian to be a dobber.

even Cindy Brady was chastised in the Brady Bunch for being a Tattle Tale.

i would never report anyone, ever, period.

what I meant was it makes me do or say things I wouldnt normally do.....I believe we all have good and bad in us.. its up to each one of us to decide which side we will nurture

I think if you look at the behavior of members here alone.. you will see which side of their personality they have cultivated.... ::) ::).. all some do is abuse..they have nothing else to offer....well I find some can push buttons that make me want to respond in a way I wouldnt normally do...maybe they are trying to get me banned...its worth a thought.. but I dont like it when people change who I am......irritated would have been a better word maybe.. ;)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by aquascoot on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 10:34am

cods wrote on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 9:19am:

aquascoot wrote on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 9:03am:

cods wrote on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 7:28am:

aquascoot wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 7:00pm:

its un australian to be a dobber.

even Cindy Brady was chastised in the Brady Bunch for being a Tattle Tale.

i would never report anyone, ever, period.

Oh , I get it Cods,
the way you think is the way most people think.

"don't push my buttons"

and of course, there are plenty of button pushers .
now some call them "trolls" which really means they have recognised you have a button and so they push it.
I suppose an easier way to look at it is
"they are baiting me"

But once you make the decision (and it is a decision) not to allow others to "define your behaviour", you will move to a place of better mental health and better equilibrium.

This is where the interweb can serve a useful purpose.
by exposing yourself to people who are trying to "bait " you and not taking the "bait", you get a great opportunity for growth and building a better sense of who YOU, CODS are.

this is great for your mental health and self esteem.

You now have the upper hand and when others cant touch you, you truly will have arrived.

try it and see.

all the trolling I do on here (and I admit I do a bit) is done to hopefully cause a bit of humour and to get people to look at themselves.

but that's part of my Buddhist philosophy.
Hold nothing with white knuckle fervour Cods,
hold everything gently , especially your opinions.

And a political forum is a great place to practice.
in a way, master light is quite a good teacher (though he/she is quite mad)

wishing you all the best

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Happy Lucky on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 10:40am

Cods, if i had someone banned for evey time i've been called dumb, stupid, ignorant, m.o.r.o.n, bogan, box tosser, red neck, hill billy, toilet cleaner or westie, there would hardly be anyone left on OP. This is why attacking free speech is impossible. These labels all mean the same thing; i'm better than you therefore you're not deserving of my respect. I've seen you DEMAND the right to use the word m.o.r.o.n. Is that any better than being called a spastic or an emotional cripple? (NB: I may be abusive but i'm not a stalker-i'm not interested in using those terms to anyone that's posting about their geraniums-at the same time i'm amused by the double standard of posters that insult people while hiding behind their vocabulary). I think its nobler and healthier to say what you think without the hypocritical thinking that says "i'm not nasty or abusive-that's the OTHERS".

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 10:40am

aquascoot wrote on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 10:34am:

d by: aquascoot Posted on: Today at 10:34am
cods wrote Today at 9:19am:
aquascoot wrote Today at 9:03am:
cods wrote Today at 7:28am:
aquascoot wrote Yesterday at 7:00pm:
its un australian to be a dobber.

even Cindy Brady was chastised in the Brady Bunch for being a Tattle Tale.

i would never report anyone, ever, period.

very noble of you of course and like freedom of speech it is your right....

however people like myself believe in supporting those who we feel are being bullied....bullies are people who will stoop to any level to win what they consider is their right.. but its not someone elses...

if I stooped to others level and just posted abuse/name calling...what do you think that would resolve???..

tit for tat never did do it for me... all it does is make me angrier.. and thats not what I come on here for.

as pansi has pointed out someone feels its important to report me for suggesting someone spends time in the m.s......better not mention it again...

yet you think its ok for someone to call others spastic/old crone/ intellectual cripple.. amongst other things...at least no comment..... which basically says the same thing..

no one can make someone angry. that is something we do to ourselves and an issue we have to work on ourselves.
if someone makes you angry, look at it as a growing and learning experience.
i'm sure master light agrees.
(he does seem quite angry about freemasons though)

what I meant was it makes me do or say things I wouldnt normally do.....I believe we all have good and bad in us.. its up to each one of us to decide which side we will nurture

I think if you look at the behavior of members here alone.. you will see which side of their personality they have cultivated.... .. all some do is abuse..they have nothing else to offer....well I find some can push buttons that make me want to respond in a way I wouldnt normally do...maybe they are trying to get me banned...its worth a thought.. but I dont like it when people change who I am......irritated would have been a better word maybe..

Oh , I get it Cods,
the way you think is the way most people think.

"don't push my buttons"

and of course, there are plenty of button pushers .
now some call them "trolls" which really means they have recognised you have a button and so they push it.
I suppose an easier way to look at it is
"they are baiting me"

But once you make the decision (and it is a decision) not to allow others to "define your behaviour", you will move to a place of better mental health and better equilibrium.

This is where the interweb can serve a useful purpose.
by exposing yourself to people who are trying to "bait " you and not taking the "bait", you get a great opportunity for growth and building a better sense of who YOU, CODS are.

this is great for your mental health and self esteem.

You now have the upper hand and when others cant touch you, you truly will have arrived.

try it and see.

all the trolling I do on here (and I admit I do a bit) is done to hopefully cause a bit of humour and to get people to look at themselves.

but that's part of my Buddhist philosophy.
Hold nothing with white knuckle fervour Cods,
hold everything gently , especially your opinions.

And a political forum is a great place to practice.
in a way, master light is quite a good teacher (though he/she is quite mad)

wishing you all the best

oh I agree.... I did go through a bad spell.. even went to bed with it all rattling around in my head...I backed away from the forum.. then bobby said to forgive them which I do now when they start ..ha.ha.. why bother with ignorance I say.. if they cannot have a decent argument/disagreement without the abuse.. then I feel sorry for them...to me its no different than in real life hitting someone b ecause they disagree with you.... its rude and uncalled for..

I agree about Mr light.. a bit too much over the top...ha.ha.. but the world is full of oddities... ::) ::)

I know some think I am one... ;D ;D

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Happy Lucky on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 10:42am

The sheer brilliance of your post Scoot, is almost enough for me to tone it down. That's until Greggory shows another picture of the Australian flag being burnt. Then all bets are off.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 10:44am

Happy Lucky wrote on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 10:40am:

I am sorry but I dont buy the

two wrongs make a right argument....

and just because you do not mind being abused... which by that statement I gather you dont...

you cannot expect others to feel the same...

and besides.. since when have I called you any of those names????>.

so what gives you the right to call me nasty names???..

how can you possibly claim its nobler to call someone you dont even know ugly nasty hurtful names...

I dont understand that logic at all.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Happy Lucky on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 10:45am

Sorry cods, i really have to call you on this. Is insulting someone the same as gunning them down with automatic rifles? Do i deserve to be slain because i called you a spastic? I don't think you've ever really addressed your double standard on this issue.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Happy Lucky on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 10:47am

You really have a poor memory cods. Even in your last post you referred to dealing with ignorance. If someone gives you a blast is that merely the result of a lack of intelligence, or could it be YOU have provoked that response?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Gnads on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 10:55am

cods wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 9:16am:

Happy Lucky wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 9:11am:

I believe you may have used both & sleeping bear ::)

btw this isn't "your" post ... as you put it ... & as such you own it per se ... & can tell people to leave

by posting the initial title & putting it on a public forum your inviting others in to give their opinions .... which obviously don't all agree with your stance

how they respond is not yours to censure albeit foul abuse.

My question now is why is it still going after 39 pages?

Cods do you have two black eyes? ;D

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by aquascoot on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 11:00am

Happy Lucky wrote on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 10:42am:

The sheer brilliance of your post Scoot, is almost enough for me to tone it down. That's until Greggory shows another picture of the Australian flag being burnt. Then all bets are off.

Greg is like a mosquito buzzing around your ear.
yes, quite annoying.
Buddhist monks when meditating concentrate on the mosquito and think about how they are sharing their blood, their life energy with another sentient being.
Suddenly the mosquito does not bother them so much.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 12:05pm

aquascoot wrote on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 8:59am:

Panther wrote on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 4:57am:

aquascoot wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 7:00pm:

its un australian to be a dobber.

even Cindy Brady was chastised in the Brady Bunch for being a Tattle Tale.

i would never report anyone, ever, period.

I'd report it to Bobby and he would "hang them high" ;)

point taken, but a bit of interweb banter counts for nought. its just a bit of harmless fun and games

I agree, but hey, what's more fun than pokin' yourself in the eye with a pointed stick???

Pokin' someone else in theirs first.. 8-)

Good ta meet ya..........Names Bobby BTW ;)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 12:26pm

cods wrote on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 10:44am:

...........and besides.. since when have I called you any of those names????>.

so what gives you the right to call me nasty names???................

Pssssssst ..................................... it's called something like ............

"Freedom of Speech"

It's been around for thousands of years ;)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 3:08pm

Gnads wrote on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 10:55am:

cods wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 9:16am:

Happy Lucky wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 9:11am:

I believe you may have used both & sleeping bear ::)

then you believe wrong

btw this isn't "your" post ... as you put it ... & as such you own it per se ... & can tell people to leave

its thread not a post

by posting the initial title & putting it on a public forum your inviting others in to give their opinions .... which obviously don't all agree with your stance

how they respond is not yours to censure albeit foul abuse.

My question now is why is it still going after 39 pages?

because people are interested... there is one on Stephen Fry getting married..you could be interested in......there is no rule that says you MUST join in this one.

Cods do you have two black eyes? ;D

my eyes are grey,.. whats it too you?..

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 3:10pm

Panther wrote on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 12:26pm:

cods wrote on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 10:44am:

...........and besides.. since when have I called you any of those names????>.

so what gives you the right to call me nasty names???................

Pssssssst ..................................... it's called something like ............

"Freedom of Speech"

It's been around for thousands of years ;)

maybe you and your mate havent read FDs RULES..

I can put them up for you... or just press RULES at the top of the page..

I think you may find its not on FDs FOS radar.

thats if you can read rules that is. someone people have trouble with them

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Rhino on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 3:14pm

Panther wrote on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 4:57am:

aquascoot wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 7:00pm:

its un australian to be a dobber.

even Cindy Brady was chastised in the Brady Bunch for being a Tattle Tale.

i would never report anyone, ever, period.

Show this law.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 6:04pm

rhino wrote on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 3:14pm:

Panther wrote on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 4:57am:

aquascoot wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 7:00pm:

its un australian to be a dobber.

even Cindy Brady was chastised in the Brady Bunch for being a Tattle Tale.

i would never report anyone, ever, period.

Show this law.

You're a lazy bugger aren't ya.

I won't do your legwork for ya, but because I feel sorry for ya, I'll do ya a favor but just once.....

I'll get ya started, but the rest is up to you.

Now, grab yer little mouse (not that one, the computer one) & click this if you can find the strength. ::) ::) ::)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Soren on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 6:22pm

Western terror labs have finally produced a weapon so horrific that it has shaken Islamic world to the core, making over a billion people from Morocco to Indonesia fear for the survival of their freedoms, morals, beliefs, cultures, governments, and the very life itself.

The new weapon of terror, the so-called "Cartoon," is capable of delivering an equivalent of one million Hiroshima bombs, resulting in a horrendous mass destruction like none seen on Earth before.

Ahmed Jihad of the Qatar-funded charity Make Bombs, Not Cartoons sadly stated that "This is the end of a tenuous peace between Muslims and Infidels, with only the occasional beheading, open market suicide bomb, or fiery suicide plane mission."

"I see no way to combat this horrific infidel weapon other than by balanced, fair, and rational hostage-taking, bomb-throwing, and embassy-burning, based on strict Islamic law and mutual understanding of our common goal, which is the Islamization of Earth," Mr. Jihad added. "These methods have proven efficient in dealing with the West in the past."

http://thepeoplescube.com/peoples-blog/islam-s-struggle-against-cartoon-terrorism-t521.html

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 6:27pm

Soren wrote on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 6:22pm:

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Yadda on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 6:28pm

post #578

LOL

<------- short post by Yadda

enjoy.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 9:50pm

so strange to see people thinking other people dying is funny...

my goodness my sense of humor must have really gone by the board......

it must make you feel really good that you were not caught up in the Lindt Cafe seige to have an insight into what being held by a terrorist could be like...

how lucky you can sit and be so smug knowing the likely hood of you ever coming face to face with any of these monsters is well basically 1000 to 1....so you are all right jack... keep smirking and feeling really safe..

does pulling the wings off butterflies do it for you???>.

I guess it must do..

the cartoon didnt kill anyone.....17 people were killed because of the material in the cartoon..

there is a basic difference.. but keep sneering...

I am sure you will know exactly what to do if one of them comes looking for you. >:(

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Rhino on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 9:53pm

Panther wrote on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 6:04pm:

rhino wrote on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 3:14pm:

Panther wrote on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 4:57am:

aquascoot wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 7:00pm:

its un australian to be a dobber.

even Cindy Brady was chastised in the Brady Bunch for being a Tattle Tale.

i would never report anyone, ever, period.

Show this law.

so you lied, (again) there is no such law. See what happens when you just make stuff up? You look even more stupid than usual. Maybe you should stick to your video games. ;)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 7:01am

cods wrote on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 3:10pm:

Panther wrote on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 12:26pm:

cods wrote on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 10:44am:

...........and besides.. since when have I called you any of those names????>.

so what gives you the right to call me nasty names???................

Pssssssst ..................................... it's called something like ............

"Freedom of Speech"

It's been around for thousands of years ;)

Well, I've been there, done that.

But, you still have FoS, rules or none.

I'll say it once again......it obviously needs repeating. :)

You can always exercise your Right, providing you are willing to accept any penalty connected to you exercising your Right.

Rules can't stop you exercising your Right (like I explained about being creative with cus words earlier).

The penalty imposed on you, if any, will only be placed on you AFTER you've already exercised your Right, not before.

If you are banned for exercising your Right to Free Speech, then the penalty does not negate your Right, merely the Freedom to express your Free Speech .................... again. ;)

I hope this explanation reads ok.

It's nor the Right that's in jeopardy, it's the Freedom to exercise it repeatedly as you wish.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 7:23am

rhino wrote on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 9:53pm:

Panther wrote on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 6:04pm:

rhino wrote on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 3:14pm:

Panther wrote on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 4:57am:

aquascoot wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 7:00pm:

its un australian to be a dobber.

even Cindy Brady was chastised in the Brady Bunch for being a Tattle Tale.

i would never report anyone, ever, period.

Show this law.

so you lied, (again) there is no such law.

None is so blind than those that refuse to see.

I can drag a donkey to water, but I can't make it drink.

Not my problem, not my care.

Means absolutely nothing to me. http://imgur.com/0Ox0lEy.gif

Calling me a liar won't change the facts, it only exposes your propensity for ignorance.

Hitting a man with meaningless insult won't cure your lack of knowledge, or gain the high-ground. :)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Happy Lucky on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 8:02am

Sorry cods, wrong again. The material in the cartoons DID NOT kill anyone. Two crackpot brother practitioners of a violent backward religion took it upon themselves because of an elevated sense of rage to shoot up a building full of newspaper workers. You might get it one of these days.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Yadda on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 8:25am

cods wrote on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 9:50pm:

the cartoon didnt kill anyone.....17 people were killed because of the material in the cartoon..

cods,

The cartoon didn't kill anyone.....       .....but 17 people - IN FRANCE - were killed because the cartoons of Charlie Hebdo - IN FRANCE - satirised ISLAM and Mohammed.

It should be poignant and instructive for us to reflect, that the act [of satirising ISLAM and Mohammed] is not a crime in France.

Though the act of satirising ISLAM and Mohammed is a capital crime in almost every moslem majority jurisdiction.

Moslems in France today do not make the laws of France concerning the satirising of ISLAM and Mohammed.

But when [some day] the moslems in France DO make the laws of France concerning the satirising of ISLAM and Mohammed, then they [the moslems] can change the laws of France, and make such behaviour a capital crime.

But until they [the moslems] are able to do so,    .....it will only be the moslems of France who are revealing themselves to be the criminals and murderers.

NOT, THE CARTOONISTS.

Dictionary;
satire = =
1 the use of humour, irony, exaggeration, or ridicule to expose and criticize people’s stupidity or vices.
2 a play, novel, etc. using satire.    a literary miscellany, especially a poem ridiculing prevalent vices or follies.

Dictionary;
art = =
1 the expression or application of creative skill and imagination, especially through a visual medium such as painting or sculpture.
2 the various branches of creative activity, such as painting, music, literature, and dance.
3 subjects of study primarily concerned with human creativity and social life (as contrasted with scientific or technical subjects).
4 a skill at doing a specified thing.

p.s.
You will never see a cartoon satirising Mohammed being displayed in The National Art Gallery of Saudi Arabia.    [does Saudi Arabia even have National Art Gallery ?]

And i say; Let them [the Saudis] live in their barren desert of thought - imposed upon them, by ISLAM.

But [i say to the Saudis, and to other moslems] do not dare to think that we will allow you vicious, barbaric, intolerant wanna-be-murderers [by our law], to bring your cultural desert to our lands.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 8:43am

Panther wrote on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 7:01am:

cods wrote on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 3:10pm:

Panther wrote on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 12:26pm:

cods wrote on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 10:44am:

...........and besides.. since when have I called you any of those names????>.

so what gives you the right to call me nasty names???................

Pssssssst ..................................... it's called something like ............

"Freedom of Speech"

It's been around for thousands of years ;)

this is what I have been saying all along...

only i call it CONSEQUENCES.. maybe you need to look that word up..seeing as how you are an expert at google..

me and pansi in particular said all along..

draw the cartoon at your PERIL...

same on here swear like at trooper at your PERIAL.

that is why we say.. there is no such thing as FoS.. only in your mind of course....

no one can stop anyone else from thinking bad things...but they can stop it going out into the MARKET PLACE....

like fd exercises his power on the forum......

still think that had CHarlie Hebdo stopped drawing the cartoon that upset the mad terrorists

maybe 17 people would still be alive????...

some still insist the cartoon didnt upset anyone... ::) ::)

I say it did.....why would they threaten death if they were not upset?...

I am a believe that it takes two to make a war..if each give a little and try to meet in the middle

who knows it could cause peace... isnt it worth a try?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 8:50am

goodness me the politically correct police.....

so if the carftoon didnt kill 17 people..

what was the reason the mad terrorist used??..

I know it was guns....but why Charlie Hebdo??....

what did he do to antagonise. and cause them to kill 12 of his staff??????....

if you are going to be dumb and split hairs why 17 people died.. I cant be bothered with you....

people dying isnt about you winning a point...

I DO KNOW THE CARTOON DIDNT JUMP OFF THE TABLE AND FIRE AN AK47..

everything has a reason....EVERYTHING...

there is usually a reason behind you getting up every morning....I bet even you wish you hadnt bothered getting up some days... ::) ::)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Happy Lucky on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 10:32am

How many ways can a person say, 'they deserved what they got'? I'm exasperated but i'll endevour to keep the insult pistol in the holster.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 2:51pm

cods wrote on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 8:50am:

Damn cartoons..........

They should shut-up & keep their opinions to themselves!

http://imgur.com/x6JciVa.jpg
http://imgur.com/qercrto.jpg

http://imgur.com/n0Ea3F9.gif

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 2:58pm

you probably dont get it.... ::)

but to date its only MAD TERRORIST that threaten to kill..

people who draw cartoons they dont like..

its a bit hard for the slow to absorb I understand that..

but as far as I know.. the Jews and Christians turn the other cheek....most muslims do also.

but as of now we have a mad group of fanatics that go to extremes....

can I guess you mock their silly head lopping videos and chant...

you dont scare me... ::) ::)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 3:04pm

Cods what do you think would be the likely consequences of adopting your policy of spineless appeasement? So far all you have offered is no dead cartoonists. Do you think the consequences might be a bit broader?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 3:16pm

cods wrote on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 2:58pm:

Quote:

Question:

Are Muslims permitted to lie?

Summary Answer:

Muslim scholars teach that Muslims should generally be truthful to each other, unless the purpose of lying is to "smooth over differences."

There are two forms of lying to non-believers that are permitted under certain circumstances, taqiyya and kitman. These circumstances are typically those that advance the cause of Islam - in some cases by gaining the trust of non-believers in order to draw out their vulnerability and defeat them.

The Qur'an:

Qur'an (16:106) - Establishes that there are circumstances that can "compel" a Muslim to tell a lie.

Qur'an (3:28) - This verse tells Muslims not to take those outside the faith as friends, unless it is to "guard themselves."

Qur'an (9:3) - "...Allah and His Messenger are free from liability to the idolaters..." The dissolution of oaths with the pagans who remained at Mecca following its capture. They did nothing wrong, but were evicted anyway.

Qur'an (40:28) - A man is introduced as a believer, but one who must "hide his faith" among those who are not believers.

Qur'an (2:225) - "Allah will not call you to account for thoughtlessness in your oaths, but for the intention in your hearts" The context of this remark is marriage, which explains why Sharia allows spouses to lie to each other for the greater good.

Qur'an (66:2) - "Allah has already ordained for you, (O men), the dissolution of your oaths"

Qur'an (3:54) - "And they (the disbelievers) schemed, and Allah schemed (against them): and Allah is the best of schemers." The Arabic word used here for scheme (or plot) is makara, which literally means 'deceit'. If Allah is supremely deceitful toward unbelievers, then there is little basis for denying that Muslims are allowed to do the same. (See also 8:30 and 10:21)

Taken collectively these verses are interpreted to mean that there are circumstances when a Muslim may be "compelled" to deceive others for a greater purpose.

From the Hadith:

Bukhari (52:269) - "The Prophet said, 'War is deceit.'" The context of this is thought to be the murder of Usayr ibn Zarim and his thirty unarmed men by Muhammad's men after he "guaranteed" them safe passage (see Additional Notes below).

Bukhari (49:857) - "He who makes peace between the people by inventing good information or saying good things, is not a liar." Lying is permitted when the end justifies the means.

Bukhari (84:64-65) - Speaking from a position of power at the time, Ali confirms that lying is permissible in order to deceive an "enemy."

Muslim (32:6303) - "...he did not hear that exemption was granted in anything what the people speak as lie but in three cases: in battle, for bringing reconciliation amongst persons and the narration of the words of the husband to his wife, and the narration of the words of a wife to her husband (in a twisted form in order to bring reconciliation between them)."

Bukhari (50:369) - Recounts the murder of a poet, Ka'b bin al-Ashraf, at Muhammad's insistence. The men who volunteered for the assassination used dishonesty to gain Ka'b's trust, pretending that they had turned against Muhammad. This drew the victim out of his fortress, whereupon he was brutally slaughtered despite putting up a ferocious struggle for his life.

From Islamic Law:

Reliance of the Traveler (p. 746 - 8.2) - "Speaking is a means to achieve objectives. If a praiseworthy aim is attainable through both telling the truth and lying, it is unlawful to accomplish through lying because there is no need for it. When it is possible to achieve such an aim by lying but not by telling the truth, it is permissible to lie if attaining the goal is permissible (N:i.e. when the purpose of lying is to circumvent someone who is preventing one from doing something permissible), and obligatory to lie if the goal is obligatory... it is religiously precautionary in all cases to employ words that give a misleading impression...

"One should compare the bad consequences entailed by lying to those entailed by telling the truth, and if the consequences of telling the truth are more damaging, one is entitled to lie.

Additional Notes:

Muslims are allowed to lie to unbelievers in order to defeat them. The two forms are:

Taqiyya - Saying something that isn't true.

Kitman - Lying by omission. An example would be when Muslim apologists quote only a fragment of verse 5:32 (that if anyone kills "it shall be as if he had killed all mankind") while neglecting to mention that the rest of the verse (and the next) mandate murder in undefined cases of "corruption" & "mischief." ..
Continued

Still believe what Muslims say?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Rhino on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 3:22pm

Panther wrote on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 7:23am:

rhino wrote on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 9:53pm:

Panther wrote on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 6:04pm:

rhino wrote on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 3:14pm:

Panther wrote on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 4:57am:

aquascoot wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 7:00pm:

its un australian to be a dobber.

even Cindy Brady was chastised in the Brady Bunch for being a Tattle Tale.

i would never report anyone, ever, period.

Show this law.

so you lied, (again) there is no such law.

Lol, its easy enough, show the law or continue to be called a liar. Not a meaningless insult, a fact, because you made that up to suit your arguement. ;D

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Rhino on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 3:24pm

Panther wrote on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 3:16pm:

[

Additional Notes:

Muslims are allowed to lie to unbelievers in order to defeat them. The two forms are:

Taqiyya - Saying something that isn't true.

Kitman - Lying by omission. An example would be when Muslim apologists quote only a fragment of verse 5:32 (that if anyone kills "it shall be as if he had killed all mankind") while neglecting to mention that the rest of the verse (and the next) mandate murder in undefined cases of "corruption" & "mischief." ..
Continued

You must be a Muslim then based on your propensity for lies.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 4:14pm

freediver wrote on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 3:04pm:

well you could ask the two guys the Police have just arrested in Sydney... looks like they have caught the London disease and were planning on randomly chopping off a head.....maybe yours... who knows... as you are the one that wishes to DIG DEEP into the psyche of a mad fanatic...I am sure they will fill you in on how far they are prepared to go....

we know you are not spineless so go on have a go.

tell them to their faces how you will deal with their miserable objections to a funny cartoon.. ::) ::)

you are the one that has it all worked out your life will fall apart if they stop printing the cartoons......

I do know mine wont.......

however the cartoons are still being printed so I guess your FoS is safe for now... not sure about your head though... ::) ::)

I am sure the cartoons have not a thing to do with head lopping though.. let us know for sure when you find out.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Happy Lucky on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 4:19pm

In other words, hide under the bed and pray the problem goes away. Gotcha.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 4:26pm

Well done cods. The consequence of not appeasing terrorists is you get to keep your freedom of speech. Now, what do you think the likely consequences of your appeasement would be?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 4:33pm

freediver wrote on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 4:26pm:

Well done cods. The consequence of not appeasing terrorists is you get to keep your freedom of speech. Now, what do you think the likely consequences of your appeasement would be?

well I cant think of anything worse than having ones head chopped off in main street can you??..

and as the cartoons are still going and the mocking....you must be proud to stand up to these guys...

like I said fd when you find the answer to your irritating question.. [ i dont have a crystal ball].. letsus all in on it I am sure ASIO will be interested as well.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 4:37pm

freediver wrote on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 4:26pm:

Well done cods. The consequence of not appeasing terrorists is you get to keep your freedom of speech. Now, what do you think the likely consequences of your appeasement would be?

what makes you think I have my FREEDOM OF SPEECH............

I cant use it on this forum.... whats free about that??

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Phemanderac on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 4:58pm

aquascoot wrote on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 9:03am:

cods wrote on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 7:28am:

aquascoot wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 7:00pm:

its un australian to be a dobber.

even Cindy Brady was chastised in the Brady Bunch for being a Tattle Tale.

i would never report anyone, ever, period.

I don't agree with that to be honest.

Anyone can make us angry, getting angry is an emotional response caused if someone does something that upsets (or angers us....), there is not always a lot of choice in that, granted some, but only on occasion. Where we exercise choice ALWAYS is how we choose to respond to our emotions.

At least, in my humble opinion.

To be completely in touch with our feelings means we have to take full responsibility for how we decide to respond behaviourally. It seems that it is often only the strong "negative" (for want of a better description) emotions that most want to deal with.

In fact, the cartoon argument is a brilliant example of this. It is ok really for Muslims to FEEL completely offended if their religious icon is mocked - just like it would be for Christians and Jews in a similar circumstance. However, choosing to exact bloody murder in response to feeling offended is completely unacceptable, inappropriate and, clearly, ineffective. In short, Cartoons, Satire and, mocking idiocy has not gone away - nor should it.

It is not nice to mock, I think we all get that, but, at the end of the day, mocking or satirical commentary is (historically) often the only way for the "common" man (as it were) to get a clear point across to the establishment (which ever establishment is being ridiculous). Sad but seems true.

It is inherently dangerous to do this, those with some misguided idea of power and control generally do not take too kindly to being mocked. They are the misguided ones though.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Rhino on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 4:59pm

cods wrote on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 4:37pm:

freediver wrote on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 4:26pm:

Well done cods. The consequence of not appeasing terrorists is you get to keep your freedom of speech. Now, what do you think the likely consequences of your appeasement would be?

what makes you think I have my FREEDOM OF SPEECH............

I cant use it on this forum.... whats free about that??

Good point Cods, very good point.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Phemanderac on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 5:01pm

I guess another aspect to the concept of "freedom" is that it is simply just an idea. It is not necessarily measurable.

After all, people have been deprived of a range of freedoms for decades and, yet, they have a mindset of being free people. That is in some ways true freedom, i.e. you can do what you want to me, but I will always be free.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 5:50pm

Phemanderac wrote on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 4:58pm:

aquascoot wrote on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 9:03am:

cods wrote on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 7:28am:

aquascoot wrote on Feb 9^th, 2015 at 7:00pm:

its un australian to be a dobber.

even Cindy Brady was chastised in the Brady Bunch for being a Tattle Tale.

i would never report anyone, ever, period.

this is what we keep saying...

and no one agrees that murder is a good way to solve it..

BUT...

who are we to argue with fanatical terrorist who stoop to the lowest form of human behavior,.,.

this is the point...this is where we are at.

you cannot tell them to suck it up like you can the Pope or the Head of the Jewish Church...[Syn]

those people actually live by the book they believe in...and turn the other cheek..

the murdering fanatics pick and chose what they believe......if you were in the same room as a fanatical terrorist would you make a joke about Muhammad???.. ::) ::)

if stopping the cartoon would make these guys put their AK47s down... even for a short while.. then I am all for it..I do believe these people would be alive today had they stopped printing the offending cartoons.... of course we will never really know...

do you think carrying on and sticking our finger up at them will make them go away????>.

good luck with that

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 5:51pm

rhino wrote on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 4:59pm:

cods wrote on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 4:37pm:

freediver wrote on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 4:26pm:

Well done cods. The consequence of not appeasing terrorists is you get to keep your freedom of speech. Now, what do you think the likely consequences of your appeasement would be?

what makes you think I have my FREEDOM OF SPEECH............

I cant use it on this forum.... whats free about that??

Good point Cods, very good point.

I have asked him several times about that and he insists we have all of our FoS on here......

we just cant print it... :D :D :D

it makes sense to him

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Happy Lucky on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 5:58pm

Deporting them makes them go away.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Rhino on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 6:10pm

cods wrote on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 5:51pm:

rhino wrote on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 4:59pm:

cods wrote on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 4:37pm:

freediver wrote on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 4:26pm:

Well done cods. The consequence of not appeasing terrorists is you get to keep your freedom of speech. Now, what do you think the likely consequences of your appeasement would be?

what makes you think I have my FREEDOM OF SPEECH............

I cant use it on this forum.... whats free about that??

Good point Cods, very good point.

I have asked him several times about that and he insists we have all of our FoS on here......

we just cant print it... :D :D :D

it makes sense to him

notice how he ran away from your question yet continually tries to make out he occupies the moral high ground.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 6:20pm

Happy Lucky wrote on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 5:58pm:

Deporting them makes them go away.

Or when they come back from fighting for ISIS in Syria & Iraq:

1. Why let them back in?
2. If they are allowed back in, why can't they be arrested on spot?

Then again, we wouldn't want to anger or offend them.

After all, they'll eventually become a value to Australian Society, a loving asset,
& simply just blend back in to the Australian Fabric, never to be heard from again. :D :D :D :D :D :D :o :o :D :D :D :D

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Yadda on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 6:22pm

cods wrote on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 8:43am:

me and pansi in particular said all along..

draw the cartoon at your PERIL...

....
....

[i cods] still think that had CHarlie Hebdo stopped drawing the cartoon that upset the mad terrorists

maybe 17 people would still be alive????...

But would those 17 people still be Frenchmen ?

And would they be still enjoying the liberty and freedoms which Frenchmen assume to be theirs by right of French law ???

e.g.
The freedom to express their [political] opinions ?

So cods, my right ~~as not a moslem~~ as a Frenchman, ...is to be able to freely publish a cartoon which uses truth combined with ridicule, to satirise corrupt and foolish men, is a right which is NOT, NOT curtailed by ISLAMIC law, if i am a French man/woman.

But cods is stating [above] that cods is of the opinion [as a free thinker!], ....that moslems also have THEIR right [as ISLAMIC law gives a right, to 'the moslem'] - IN FRANCE - to threaten a Frenchman with destruction, if a Frenchman draws a cartoon of Mohammed.

Well cods, in response i say this;

Almost everyone in the world today, must know that 'the moslem' is offended, by the drawing of cartoons [which satirise aspects of ISLAM].

Well again, i say this;
If 'the moslem' threatens a man with destruction, because a man chooses to do a certain thing/action which may offend a moslem, but which is a certain thing/action which the 2nd man [not a moslem] feels is not offensive to himself [to that man who is not a moslem], then it is 'the moslem' [because of the threats he makes against the person, of the 2nd man] who is is putting himself [i.e. 'the moslem'] in a state of war with that [2nd] man.

AGAIN; Make no mistake, it is 'the moslem' [and not the 2nd man] who is imposing a state of war, upon that 2nd man.

Quote:

"16. The state of war is a state of enmity and destruction; and therefore declaring by word or action, not a passionate and hasty, but sedate, settled design upon another man's life puts him in a state of war with him against whom he has declared such an intention, and so has exposed his life to the other's power to be taken away by him, or any one that joins with him in his defence, and espouses his quarrel; it being reasonable and just I should have a right to destroy that which threatens me with destruction; for by the fundamental law of Nature, man being to be preserved as much as possible, when all cannot be preserved, the safety of the innocent is to be preferred, and one may destroy a man who makes war upon him, or has discovered an enmity to his being, for the same reason that he may kill a wolf or a lion, because they are not under the ties of the common law of reason, have no other rule but that of force and violence, and so may be treated as a beast of prey, those dangerous and noxious creatures that will be sure to destroy him whenever he falls into their power.
17. And hence it is that he who attempts to get another man into his absolute power does thereby put himself into a state of war with him; it being to be understood as a declaration of a design upon his life. For I have reason to conclude that he who would get me into his power without my consent would use me as he pleased when he had got me there, and destroy me too when he had a fancy to it; for nobody can desire to have me in his absolute power unless it be to compel me by force to that which is against the right of my freedom- i.e. make me a slave..."

Of the State of War

John Locke (1632-1704)

In the circumstance of the Charlie Hebdo atrocity, it is 'the moslem', who is [by virtue of his natural 'right' and his natural 'superiority' - imagined] seeks to bring the life of that [2nd] man, under the power of 'the moslem'.

+++

THE KORAN
"Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued. "
Koran 9.29

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 6:35pm

Yadda wrote on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 6:22pm:

cods wrote on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 8:43am:

Wow!

Powerful, & spot on! http://i.imgur.com/IAMjnkA.png http://i.imgur.com/OjyhKXZ.png

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 6:47pm

Muslim Faithful in France Told: 'You Have 4 Million Targets'

Quote:

Buoyed by the Islamist terror attack on satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo, ISIS has continued a slick campaign with the twisted theme, "What are you waiting for?" and featuring fresh-faced jihadists urging radicals in French-speaking countries to stay put and kill innocents.

In one video released online last week, titled, “Blow Up France 2,” a masked jihadist bearing an assault weapon exhorts Muslims to continue terror attacks in that country.

“Don’t give up and particularly don’t lower your weapons, don’t surrender -- kill. Today, it’s our darwa -- kill them. You now have more than 4 million targets,” the jihadist said in French..... continued

Geeeeez,

Hey cods, did you know there were so many (4 million) cartoon artists in France?

Why else would they be targeted?

Certainly not for just being Non-Muslim, would they?!

It's all about the cartoons, right?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Happy Lucky on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 8:31pm

Yadda you'll have to stop posting. Your comments are just too logical.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Soren on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 9:14pm

cods wrote on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 9:50pm:

I am sure you will know exactly what to do if one of them comes looking for you. >:(

Yes. Not surrender to him. If ALL stopped surrendering to various monsters' sensitivities, we could defeat them. But your instinct is precisely to give in to the guys who threaten and carry out violence and murder. You are actually incentivising, encouraging violence because you cave into it, no matter who wrong it is. YOU MAKE VIOLENCE EFFECTIVE.

You are a classic collaborator. You will submit to any evil as long as it is violent.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 9:39pm

Soren wrote on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 9:14pm:

cods wrote on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 9:50pm:

I am sure you will know exactly what to do if one of them comes looking for you. >:(

::) ::)

you sound so bwave sitting in your nice computer room.....or have you taken yourself down to the Police station where the poor cops now have the two "terrorists" who were planning on chopping a head off in Sydney....I would think the cops would like nothing better than a big bwave body like you down there so they can go home to their wives and families...

off you go.. I do not believe for one moment you would stand up to evil...and stare it down.....

at least not until I read about you in the morning paper...

off you go.... words on here dont quite do it for me...

off you go it was very noticeable that during the :Lindt Cafe seige it was the men that ran for their lives first..

very noticeable...... but give me some faith in our manhood... and get yourself down there and deal with these terrorists as you claim you would... ;D ;D

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Mohammed on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 9:43pm

So much for women's lib and equality. Only when it suits them. ;D:D

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Mohammed on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 9:43pm

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Yadda on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 10:40pm

Happy Lucky wrote on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 8:31pm:

Yadda you'll have to stop posting.

Your comments are just too logical.

'That does not compute.'

;)

Yadda, ...bot, automaton.

;D

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 7:53am

rhino wrote on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 4:59pm:

cods wrote on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 4:37pm:

freediver wrote on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 4:26pm:

Well done cods. The consequence of not appeasing terrorists is you get to keep your freedom of speech. Now, what do you think the likely consequences of your appeasement would be?

what makes you think I have my FREEDOM OF SPEECH............

I cant use it on this forum.... whats free about that??

Good point Cods, very good point.

did you notice fd never came back..to justify him taking away our fos on his forum?..I mean we are talking about a guy who will KILL for his own FoS...yet deprives others of theirs when it suits him.. ::) ::)

I keep telling him there is no such thing as FoS...but he wont have it. ::) ::)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Soren on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 8:19am

cods wrote on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 9:39pm:

Soren wrote on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 9:14pm:

cods wrote on Feb 10^th, 2015 at 9:50pm:

I am sure you will know exactly what to do if one of them comes looking for you. >:(

On the other hand, in your case, not even your words are brave.

If everyone spoke out against them and their ideology and aims, if everyone printed the cartoons and books and critical articles, if everyone ridiculed them, if everyone stood by their hard-won Western liberties and values, the monsters would have no chance.

But a lot of people like you give in to them as an opening gambit and take it from there.
Shame.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 8:45am

Soren wrote on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 8:19am:

you dont know that.. thats the point....so if people do what you claim they should do... and the shop next door to you sold said cartoons and infuriated these mad people into saying they will blow your whole street up......

you would still fight for the their right to print and sell these cartoons...
because that is what you are saying... or are you only saying it when it doesnt involve you directly???.....

you are saying you will fight to the death even if it means only YOUR death for FoS..

and you will rest in your grave knowing you have made a difference to the world of FoS... ::) ::)

is the world a better safer place since those 17 people gave their lives for FoS??...

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 9:30am

cods wrote on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 8:45am:

Soren wrote on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 8:19am:

........is the world a better safer place since those 17 people gave their lives for FoS??...

No, not safer ...... yet ................. but definitely more aware because of FoS, more aware of the true Agendas of Islam.

Knowledge becomes power, & with that power civilization can overcome Islam's designed destruction of mankind.

Only then will the world be safer. :)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Rhino on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 10:40am

cods wrote on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 7:53am:

rhino wrote on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 4:59pm:

cods wrote on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 4:37pm:

freediver wrote on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 4:26pm:

Well done cods. The consequence of not appeasing terrorists is you get to keep your freedom of speech. Now, what do you think the likely consequences of your appeasement would be?

what makes you think I have my FREEDOM OF SPEECH............

I cant use it on this forum.... whats free about that??

Good point Cods, very good point.

yes, who does that remind us of.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Soren on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 6:37pm

cods wrote on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 8:45am:

and you will rest in your grave knowing you have made a difference to the world of FoS... ::) ::)

Absolutely. When the hour comes you can die like coward or as a hero, like Fabrizio Quattrocchi.

Quattrocchi's Islamist kidnappers forced him to dig his own grave and kneel beside it wearing a hood as they prepared to film his death, but he defied them by pulling off the hood and shouting "Vi faccio vedere come muore un Italiano!" - "I'll show you how an Italian dies!" He was then shot in the back of the neck.

The passengers on the plane that crashed in Virginia on 11 September 2001 also defied the hijackers. Their last words were "Let's roll." They prevented the plain from flying into the White House or whatever its gruesome target was.

You simply cannot, must not allow the bloody bullies to set the agenda. I am completely at a loss about your apparent argument for ceding the field and the initiative to them just because they are unacceptably violent. This strikes me as a morally reprehensible stance.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Soren on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 6:39pm

rhino wrote on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 10:40am:

cods wrote on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 7:53am:

rhino wrote on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 4:59pm:

cods wrote on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 4:37pm:

freediver wrote on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 4:26pm:

Well done cods. The consequence of not appeasing terrorists is you get to keep your freedom of speech. Now, what do you think the likely consequences of your appeasement would be?

what makes you think I have my FREEDOM OF SPEECH............

I cant use it on this forum.... whats free about that??

Good point Cods, very good point.

yes, who does that remind us of.

Er... Muslims??

Commies?

Fascists??

Other sworn enemies of free speech?

Tell us.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 7:10pm

Soren wrote on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 6:37pm:

cods wrote on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 8:45am:

and you will rest in your grave knowing you have made a difference to the world of FoS... ::) ::)

and can you tell me how many other lives they have saved by this heroism???..

you do realise these people had no chance to live dont you...they werent given a choice.. like the CHarlie Hebdo people were...

some people face death very nobly and I say well done to them....did you think the men running out of the Lindt cafe looked brave???....after spending hours with a madman they left women and girls behind.. ::) ::)

can you tell me where some brave aussie has gone into terrorist territory and rescued those next in line for decapitation???>.

there was only one gunman in the Lindt cafe.....of course no one knew if he had a bomb attached to his body...but by the way you think.. that should not have stopped anyone..from being brav e

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Soren on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 7:50pm

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Soren on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 7:57pm

cods wrote on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 7:10pm:

Soren wrote on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 6:37pm:

cods wrote on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 8:45am:

and you will rest in your grave knowing you have made a difference to the world of FoS... ::) ::)

I do not quite understand what you are saying. You seem to be saying al sorts of mushy thing without actually saying anything practical.

Life is about action while you are in it.

You seem to be on the side of action that is limited to basket weaving and kumbaya singing.

Are standing for anything else? I am not detecting anything from you but advocacy for unconditional surrender to violent bullies.

Too many evasive ' .... 's, too many one hand-other hand evasions, too much 'yeah but no but yeah but'.

Do you want to accommodate the Muslim bullies or do you want to stand up to them until they are made to cower and give up their bullying ways??

Are you woman or are you mouse?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Setanta on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 8:34pm

Soren wrote on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 7:57pm:

Yes cods thinks if we never stood up to violent bullies, all would be good, no-one would die.

Men like this WW2 Aussie were just regretful occurrences that would never have had to happen if we didn't stand up to those that would visit violence upon us.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 9:02pm

cods wrote on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 4:33pm:

freediver wrote on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 4:26pm:

Well done cods. The consequence of not appeasing terrorists is you get to keep your freedom of speech. Now, what do you think the likely consequences of your appeasement would be?

I know the answer cods. Everyone knows the answer. We have spent dozens of pages patiently explaining it to you. I was just wondering if any of this had sunk in or if you were capable of thinking more than one step ahead. Even if you don't agree with us, at least let us know whether you have any thoughts on it. All you seem capable of is repeating your idiotic mantra that if these cartoonists had kept their mouth shut they would still be alive. Are you trying to argue that this is the extent of the consequences, or is this literally the extent of your train of thought? It's like you are being enticed into the gas chambers with a trail of lollies while everyone is frantically trying to get your attention to let you know what is going on. You listen to what they say, then see another lolly and take another step, then tell them that all you did is pick up a lolly. Repeat 100 times.

In case you have forgotten already, the question is, what do you think would be the likely consequences of us adopting your strategy of spineless appeasement?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Mohammed on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 9:18pm

is cods short for cods wallop ? ;D

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 9:44pm

SweetLambo wrote on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 9:18pm:

is cods short for cods wallop ? ;D

yes actually... hehehehehe ::)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Setanta on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 9:49pm

SweetLambo wrote on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 9:18pm:

is cods short for cods wallop ? ;D

I think testicles, cods are so sensitive, if they are kicked, prodded or shown any malice, they make you curl up into a ball to protect themselves from harm and shout inanities.
Or fish, short memory.
But that's just me.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 9:55pm

freediver wrote on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 9:02pm:

cods wrote on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 4:33pm:

freediver wrote on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 4:26pm:

Well done cods. The consequence of not appeasing terrorists is you get to keep your freedom of speech. Now, what do you think the likely consequences of your appeasement would be?

you are far too rude for me...and pendantic..boring is another word.....I dont do hypotheticals I leave them for people like you who think they KNOW everything about everything even the stuff that hasnt happened yet... ::) ::) ::)

spineless appeasement...lovely word you keep bashing them down dont you... whilst pointing the finger at others... ho hum...so dreary deary.

Quote:

The definition of pedantic is someone who has a very narrow focus on a subject and tends to overly show off their knowledge by getting caught up in small details or ...

yeah appeasement... something as far as i know hasnt been tried???????.... so we can never tell can we?..

oops thats right SPINELESS....oh dear...

we have found out what happens when someone sticks their finger up......at hate... yep a few heads roll... a cafe gets turned into a coffin....and now we have two more in jail for threatening to cut off a head or two in the CBD....oh well we do have super.f.d. and robin soren so save us all... ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

what would happen lets see maybe they would not have killed those 17 people. that you dont give a poo about....and who knows... maybe mad monis may have taken a different stance on things....

like your dream of showing everyone how bwave you are not just on a computer.........we will never know will we..does this mean another ban coming.....we know you dont do freedom of speech on your forum...

thats for other mugs.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 9:55pm

Setanta wrote on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 9:49pm:

SweetLambo wrote on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 9:18pm:

is cods short for cods wallop ? ;D

hehehehehehehehehehheheheheheheheh..

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Setanta on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 10:14pm

cods wrote on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 9:55pm:

Setanta wrote on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 9:49pm:

SweetLambo wrote on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 9:18pm:

is cods short for cods wallop ? ;D

hehehehehehehehehehheheheheheheheh..

;)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgukduYJZ44

A Cod's oil is supposed to be good for memory.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Yadda on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 10:20pm

freediver wrote on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 9:02pm:

cods wrote on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 4:33pm:

freediver wrote on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 4:26pm:

Well done cods. The consequence of not appeasing terrorists is you get to keep your freedom of speech. Now, what do you think the likely consequences of your appeasement would be?

FD,

cods is the type of women who prolly would have opted for cesarean section at every birth, so as to avoid the pain of childbirth.

Yadda .....has lived a life.

Quote:

Do not go gentle into that good night, Old age should burn and rave at close of day; Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Though wise men at their end know dark is right, Because their words had forked no lightning they Do not go gentle into that good night.

Good men, the last wave by, crying how bright Their frail deeds might have danced in a green bay, Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Wild men who caught and sang the sun in flight, And learn, too late, they grieved it on its way, Do not go gentle into that good night.

Grave men, near death, who see with blinding sight Blind eyes could blaze like meteors and be gay, Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

And you, my father, there on the sad height, Curse, bless, me now with your fierce tears, I pray. Do not go gentle into that good night. Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

- Dylan Thomas

.

".....Rage, rage against the dying of the light."

No need.

When i close my eyes each night, the ambient light comes to me.

- Yadda

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 10:20pm

not sure what your posts are about I dont think FREEDOM OF SPEECH is the main debating point..

maybe fd needs to start a lets poke fun at certain members board just for you lads who have trouble doing anything else..

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Setanta on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 10:40pm

cods wrote on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 10:20pm:

Although I don't agree with your stance... Yadda is in a different place, not quite the same one as Master Light but almost. I doubt anyone takes the one who commits abominations seriously. He's eminently a candidate for a roll of the eyes and a "wtf did you take the whole f'in page?"

See It's not just you cods. There are a heap of strange people here, you're one of them, bask in the attention we give you. Your significance would disappear if you didn't get a rise. You like the attention.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Yadda on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 10:57pm

Setanta wrote on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 10:40pm:

cods wrote on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 10:20pm:

Although I don't agree with your stance...

Yadda is in a different place, not quite the same one as Master Light but almost.

I doubt anyone takes the one who commits abominations seriously. He's eminently a candidate for a roll of the eyes and a "wtf did you take the whole f'in page?"

See It's not just you cods. There are a heap of strange people here, you're one of them, bask in the attention we give you. Your significance would disappear if you didn't get a rise. You like the attention.

That is fair.

LOL

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Setanta on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 11:31pm

Yadda wrote on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 10:57pm:

Setanta wrote on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 10:40pm:

cods wrote on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 10:20pm:

Although I don't agree with your stance...

Yadda is in a different place, not quite the same one as Master Light but almost.

I doubt anyone takes the one who commits abominations seriously. He's eminently a candidate for a roll of the eyes and a "wtf did you take the whole f'in page?"

See It's not just you cods. There are a heap of strange people here, you're one of them, bask in the attention we give you. Your significance would disappear if you didn't get a rise. You like the attention.

That is fair.

LOL

I'm waiting for many broken paragraphs in the case of your last three letters with additions of variations of .>/???,<. as punctuation.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 13^th, 2015 at 5:21am

Setanta wrote on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 10:40pm:

cods wrote on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 10:20pm:

another mind reader... amazing stuff.. I prefer to chat about the topic.. that must have escaped you...

me thinks the boot is on the other foot its you that like the attention.. ::) ::).. says so much when it all comes down to petty personal stuff.... there you go talking about yadda..seems to me its all you have...but you have a need to be on here...... and being seen...... ::) ::)..

if I am so insignificant why do you read my posts.??????.. why do you reply????????..

I dont do that with those I find insignificant..I give them a huge miss...... you probably havent noticed I rarely reply to you unless you use my ID... a bit of a HINT there for you.. ;D

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Feb 13^th, 2015 at 5:41am

Freedom of Speech, ya gotta love it! :)

Islam Banned for Blasphemy?

➜➜➜ Source: http://bit.ly/1A14YOx ★★★

Quote:
Soon after Muslim gunmen killed 12 people at Charlie Hebdo offices, which published satirical caricatures of Muslim prophet Muhammad, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC)—the “collective voice of the Muslim world” and second largest inter-governmental organization after the United Nations—is again renewing calls for the United Nations to criminalize “blasphemy” against Islam, or what it more ecumenically calls, the “defamation of religions.”

Yet the OIC seems to miss one grand irony: if international laws would ban cartoons, books, and films on the basis that they defame Islam, they would also, by logical extension, have to ban the entire religion of Islam itself—the only religion whose core texts actively and unequivocally defame other religions, including by name.

To understand this, consider what “defamation” means. Typical dictionary-definitions include “to blacken another’s reputation” and “false or unjustified injury of the good reputation of another, as by slander or libel.” In Muslim usage, defamation simply means anything that insults or offends Islamic sensibilities.

However, to gain traction among the international community, the OIC cynically maintains that such laws should protect all religions from defamation, not just Islam (even as Muslim governments ban churches, destroy crucifixes, and burn Bibles). Disingenuous or not, the OIC’s wording suggests that any expression that “slanders” the religious sentiments of others should be banned.

What, then, do we do with Islam’s core religious texts—beginning with the Koran itself— which slanders, denigrates and blackens the reputation of other religions? Consider Christianity alone: Koran 5:73 declares that “Infidels are they who say God is one of three,” a reference to the Christian Trinity; Koran 5:72 says “Infidels are they who say God is the Christ, [Jesus] son of Mary”; and Koran 9:30 complains that “the Christians say the Christ is the son of God … may God’s curse be upon them!”..... continued(link)

http://i.imgur.com/2vFAaZo.jpg http://imgur.com/WbRX5mO.gif

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 13^th, 2015 at 6:19am

fd will fight that tooth and nail....it wont happen

btw its the mocking of Islam that they complain about...

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Feb 13^th, 2015 at 6:53am

cods wrote on Feb 13^th, 2015 at 6:19am:

fd will fight that tooth and nail....it wont happen

btw its the mocking of Islam that they complain about...

Cold Blooded Murder isn't complaining, it's Cold Blooded Murder.

What the 2 in Sydney intended to do was Cold Blooded Murder in the name of Islam.

Why, because they hate everyone that isn't one of them.

If you read the text of the video they made, it seems they were going to execute blondes only, in Cold Blood, in the name of their Peace Be On Him Prophet, & Allah.

Blondes are offensive to Islam.

Blondes mock Allah & the Prophet.

So, by the logic I've read here, you would suggest all blondes to dye their hair black, so not to offend, & avoid the slaughter?

Still think they will leave you alone because you don't subscribe to cartoons? :-/

Do you honestly think it ever had anything to do with cartoons, or being blonde?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 13^th, 2015 at 7:43am

Panther wrote on Feb 13^th, 2015 at 6:53am:

osted by: DreamRyderX Posted on: Today at 6:53am
cods wrote Today at 6:19am:
fd will fight that tooth and nail....it wont happen

btw its the mocking of Islam that they complain about...

Cold Blooded Murder isn't complaining, it's Cold Blooded Murder.

What the 2 in Sydney intended to do was Cold Blooded Murder in the name of Islam.

Why, because they hate everyone that isn't one of them.

If you read the text of the video they made, it seems they were going to execute blondes only, in Cold Blood, in the name of their Peace Be On Him Prophet, & Allah.

Blondes are offensive to Islam.

Blondes mock Allah & the Prophet.

So, by the logic I've read here, you would suggest all blondes to dye their hair black, so not to offend, & avoid the slaughter?

Still think they will leave you alone because you don't subscribe to cartoons?

Do you honestly think it ever had anything to do with cartoons, or being blonde?

it doesnt matter what I think...

its what THEY think that matters...

if they feel insulted and threaten lives because of it..should we ignore that??...I dont think so..

who knows what makes a fanatic??...if I had the answer I would make a fortune...you may as well ask why does a bull get mad at the sight of red..

does it matter WHY... he will kill you if he can...so why tempt him..

to me its commonsense dont antagonise someone who will kill you at the drop of a hat...

some dont even need a reason....

no I dont think I would expect any kind of protection if I dont read the cartoons..

.but I would expect if I paraded around wearing an anti Islam t/shirt in a high terrorist district I would be putting myself at risk.... ::)

if I walked through a mainly black township in New York wearing a t/.shirt with the N word on it...I could also expect to attract attention of the wrong kind....

to me the N word isnt offensive but to some it is...

is it for me because I feel superior [being white and blonde]to tell them to suck it UP.?...

just because it doesnt bother you doesnt mean it isnt insulting... and if you think calling a black American the N word wont encourage him to kill you....I suggest you dont try to test that..

no body is claiming murder is the right way.. but guess what I havent threatened anyone with death.

its the mad fanatics that do that.. you wish to believe they will listen to you...

good luck with that. ::)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Peter Panner on Feb 13^th, 2015 at 8:21am

I thought Cods was short for 'coddled'. The type of thinking that comes from deferring the responsibility of thinking to others.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Feb 13^th, 2015 at 9:16am

cods wrote on Feb 13^th, 2015 at 7:43am:

Panther wrote on Feb 13^th, 2015 at 6:53am:

Been there, done that.

He was an ugly (in his words) MF'n Prince of Darkness.

We talked for a while, he was a gang-banger, & I was lost in his neighborhood & up to my ass in trouble. I thought I was history. So I said what the hell. I asked him how does it feel bein' called an ugly black Neegra, & he said with a menacingly big smile...great, how it feel bein' a punk white ass MF, & I said great, but just as long as ya don't cap my lilly white MF ass no time soon. He looked at me, grinned broadly, started laughin' & said I was a crazy ass MF, offered his hand, we shook, & he said boy, yer ahhrite. Long story short, we would still be friends till this day if he didn't get his black ass killed in an initiation drive-by 8 years later in 1977.

True as true....Just thought you'd enjoy that one.......btw, that was in Bed-Sty, Brooklyn at the handball courts on the corner of Myrtle & Nostrand Aves.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 13^th, 2015 at 10:25am

Panther wrote on Feb 13^th, 2015 at 9:16am:

by: DreamRyderX Posted on: Today at 9:16am
cods wrote Today at 7:43am:
DreamRyderX wrote Today at 6:53am:
osted by: DreamRyderX Posted on: Today at 6:53am
cods wrote Today at 6:19am:
fd will fight that tooth and nail....it wont happen

btw its the mocking of Islam that they complain about...

Cold Blooded Murder isn't complaining, it's Cold Blooded Murder.

What the 2 in Sydney intended to do was Cold Blooded Murder in the name of Islam.

Why, because they hate everyone that isn't one of them.

If you read the text of the video they made, it seems they were going to execute blondes only, in Cold Blood, in the name of their Peace Be On Him Prophet, & Allah.

Blondes are offensive to Islam.

Blondes mock Allah & the Prophet.

So, by the logic I've read here, you would suggest all blondes to dye their hair black, so not to offend, & avoid the slaughter?

Still think they will leave you alone because you don't subscribe to cartoons?

Do you honestly think it ever had anything to do with cartoons, or being blonde?

it doesnt matter what I think...

its what THEY think that matters...

if they feel insulted and threaten lives because of it..should we ignore that??...I dont think so..

who knows what makes a fanatic??...if I had the answer I would make a fortune...you may as well ask why does a bull get mad at the sight of red..

does it matter WHY... he will kill you if he can...so why tempt him..

to me its commonsense dont antagonise someone who will kill you at the drop of a hat...

some dont even need a reason....

no I dont think I would expect any kind of protection if I dont read the cartoons..

.but I would expect if I paraded around wearing an anti Islam t/shirt in a high terrorist district I would be putting myself at risk....

if I walked through a mainly black township in New York wearing a t/.shirt with the N word on it...I could also expect to attract attention of the wrong kind....

to me the N word isnt offensive but to some it is...

is it for me because I feel superior [being white and blonde]to tell them to suck it UP.?...

just because it doesnt bother you doesnt mean it isnt insulting... and if you think calling a black American the N word wont encourage him to kill you....I suggest you dont try to test that..

no body is claiming murder is the right way.. but guess what I havent threatened anyone with death.

its the mad fanatics that do that.. you wish to believe they will listen to you...

good luck with that.

Been there, done that.

He was an ugly (in his words) MF'n Prince of Darkness.

We talked for a while, he was a gang-banger, & I was lost in his neighborhood & up to my ass in trouble. I thought I was history. So I said what the hell. I asked him how does it feel bein' called an ugly black Neegra, & he said with a menacingly big smile...great, how it feel bein' a punk white ass MF, & I said great, but just as long as ya don't cap my lilly white MF ass no time soon. He looked at me, grinned broadly, started laughin' & said I was a crazy ass MF, offered his hand, we shook, & he said boy, yer ahhrite. Long story short, we would still be friends till this day if he didn't get his black ass killed in an initiation drive-by 8 years later in 1977.

True as true....Just thought you'd enjoy that one.......btw, that was in Bed-Sty, Brooklyn at the handball courts on the corner of Myrtle & Nostrand Aves

I would believe that if I was in the mood.. but I guess I aint...but carry on I am all for arrogant whites telling others what they should and shouldnt like.. ::)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Feb 13^th, 2015 at 1:02pm

cods wrote on Feb 13^th, 2015 at 10:25am:

I would believe that if I was in the mood.. but I guess I aint...but carry on I am all for arrogant whites telling others what they should and shouldnt like.. ::)

That's fine, it was never a matter needing to be believed, it was just a simple story I thought I'd share....

Oh well, life's grand regardless.

No harm, no foul.

I have absolutely nothing to complain about today, & wouldn't even if I did..

Freedom of Speech.......ya gotta love it! :)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Svengali on Feb 13^th, 2015 at 1:25pm

Panther wrote on Feb 13^th, 2015 at 1:02pm:

cods wrote on Feb 13^th, 2015 at 10:25am:

I would believe that if I was in the mood.. but I guess I aint...but carry on I am all for arrogant whites telling others what they should and shouldnt like.. ::)

That's fine, it was never a matter needing belief, it was just a story I thought I'd share....

Oh well, life's grand regardless.

Can't complain.

Your posts are total fanatasy bullshit and just exemplify your pathetic cry for pschiatric help.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Feb 13^th, 2015 at 1:29pm

Svengali wrote on Feb 13^th, 2015 at 1:25pm:

Panther wrote on Feb 13^th, 2015 at 1:02pm:

cods wrote on Feb 13^th, 2015 at 10:25am:

I would believe that if I was in the mood.. but I guess I aint...but carry on I am all for arrogant whites telling others what they should and shouldnt like.. ::)

That's fine, it was never a matter needing belief, it was just a story I thought I'd share....

Oh well, life's grand regardless.

Can't complain.

Your posts are total fanatasy bullshit and just exemplify your pathetic cry for pschiatric help.

Try a spell checker Sweetie for words you don't know or understand...... http://i.imgur.com/ZGrDram.png

Thank you......I love you too :-*

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Feb 13^th, 2015 at 7:31pm

cods wrote on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 9:55pm:

freediver wrote on Feb 12^th, 2015 at 9:02pm:

cods wrote on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 4:33pm:

freediver wrote on Feb 11^th, 2015 at 4:26pm:

Well done cods. The consequence of not appeasing terrorists is you get to keep your freedom of speech. Now, what do you think the likely consequences of your appeasement would be?

The definition of pedantic is someone who has a very narrow focus on a subject and tends to overly show off their knowledge by getting caught up in small details or ...

So caring about whether we appease terrorists and give up our freedom of speech is pedantic? And asking someone to think about the consequences of what they promote is hypothetical? Basically you are refusing to think about what you post.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 13^th, 2015 at 10:05pm

freediver wrote on Feb 13^th, 2015 at 7:31pm:

havent seen you in the headlines yet...basically you dont believe in showing us a few actions instead of just a few repetitive words from your comfy chair in front of your comfy computer.... for someone who doesnt believe in FOS on his very own forum... and hasnt the guts to show us how he would march through the streets and face a head lopping maniac wearing a copy of Charlie Hebdo on his t/shirt....just all talk.. and no action man....hilarious...lets hope if there are anymore terrorists that came in thanks to you lefites...they are all in Qld...where we know you will deal with them.... ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

one of the reasons you dont have to worry about appeasement sunshine...it never happened... they are still very angry...and pizzzzed off with you people..

hope you have made your freedom of speech flag to wave...so we can pick you out on the news.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Peter Panner on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 7:25am

Dream, I enjoyed the story. An ability to communicate honestly without fear of censure can be a great starting point for understanding. The story seems familiar, though.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 8:39am

Quote:

and pizzzzed off with you people

What people?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 8:51am

freediver wrote on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 8:39am:

Quote:

and pizzzzed off with you people

What people?

the people that insist on insulting their god....by making fun of him...and or people who think its ok to do that.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 8:53am

Most people think it is OK cods. Most people think we should defend that right.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by stryder on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 8:57am

cods wrote on Feb 13^th, 2015 at 10:05pm:

freediver wrote on Feb 13^th, 2015 at 7:31pm:

Cods is clearly promoting cowardice and submission to the globalised radical muslim mafia.

because they have guns and a will to kill people who refer to their beloved mohammend in any way, particularly drawing him up in any form.

you are still are disgusting preacher of cowardice to ISLAM, ;D ;D ;D

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 9:19am

freediver wrote on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 8:53am:

Most people think it is OK cods. Most people think we should defend that right.

so you have done a survey have you?? ummm I am wondering about the families of the 17 killed do you think they feel the same.. after they saw their loved ones scraped off the ceiling...

I am sure you are right.... ::) ::) the authorities on here on whats right for everyone is quite amazing....

and even though I do express my FREEDOM OF SPEECH

as you can see by stryders nasty little post...
he for one would rather I didnt express my FOS....and you will allow him to express his at all cost......I get it I really do..

if you are for it... you can say what you like.. if your agin it I will do everything in my power to shut you down....

you do not answer questions its very noticeable....

however I will ask anyway..

whats you take on people who do not follow..

whats laughingly called main stream thinking....

and they get called all sorts for daring to be different...or dare I say it..

think different... ::) ::)..

you seem to prefer sheep who all look alike and think alike move alike b aaaaaaaa alike..

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 9:27am

Quote:

whats you take on people who do not follow..
whats laughingly called main stream thinking....

Do you mean the terrorists who want to scare people into abandoning freedom of speech, or those who want to spinelessly appease them? There are a lot of ways that people can think differently cods. This is a bit different from not thinking at all. Hence the question, what do you think would be the likely consequences of adopting your approach of spineless appeasement?

When you said you would walk away, you did not mean you would stop posting, did you?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 9:29am

freediver wrote on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 9:27am:

Quote:

whats you take on people who do not follow..
whats laughingly called main stream thinking....

do you thinks its alright for people to say bad things about people who do not follow mainstream blindmans bluff.....its my way or no way...very aggressive >:(

do you think its all right to do that?????

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Phemanderac on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 9:30am

So, when all is said and done, many of you here totally support Cods right to express her opinions about this issue?

Of course you do, otherwise you would not be supporting freedom of speech...

Now, for my part, while I do not agree with much of what Cods has said, or rather perhaps, the way she has expressed it, I see no valid reason or argument to make the attack quite so personal. Of course, given we are rabidly defending this fluid concept of freedom, obviously how you choose to go about expressing your defense of course is up to you.

It just seems to the casual observer, more than a little bit like the chosen method of expression to disagree with Cods position is to bully her into submission, as it were. As such, that is hardly being respectful of the very concept of free speech.

Bottom line is, I don't agree with much of how Cods has framed her position, however, I see no value in either attacking her (on a personal level), or for that matter, counter arguing, I think if Cods is to reconsider, reflect on this perspective, or even go as far as changing it, that will be up to her and in her own time. To be frank, going on the attack seems to be further cementing Cods into her position and, quite honestly, I cannot blame her for that. But then I am betting at least a few of you have already considered that - which gives some insight into your real position on freedom of speech.

Appeasement does not work. That has been demonstrated throughout history.

There is some irony here too.

To stop drawing cartoons would be to appease those who use an affront to their perverse view of their religion to commit acts of violence (or at the very least threat), yet conversely, we have the current situation with two blokes on death row in Indonesia, yet we shouldn't say anything or do anything about that because,

a) That is Indonesia's law...
b) They have a big military...

Now that is appeasement in spades. Of course, I realise it is much safer to attack the Cods of the world because their expressed opinion is somehow a greater threat to our well being, or you simply don't like it.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by stryder on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 9:34am

cods wrote on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 9:29am:

freediver wrote on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 9:27am:

Quote:

whats you take on people who do not follow..
whats laughingly called main stream thinking....

I wonder Cods.

Did you feel that same way when people kicked christianity, when people like madonna, martin scorcesee or the monty python gang ALL WHO MOCKED, CRITICISED OR JUST WANTED TO SHOW ANOTHER VERSION OF CHRIST.

DID YOU HAVE ANY ISSUE WITH THAT CODS, why dont you be fair for once ????????

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 9:36am

Quote:

It just seems to the casual observer, more than a little bit like the chosen method of expression to disagree with Cods position is to bully her into submission, as it were. As such, that is hardly being respectful of the very concept of free speech.

Freedom of speech is not freedom from criticism for the stupid things you say.

Quote:

Bottom line is, I don't agree with much of how Cods has framed her position, however, I see no value in either attacking her (on a personal level), or for that matter, counter arguing, I think if Cods is to reconsider, reflect on this perspective, or even go as far as changing it, that will be up to her and in her own time.

Cods has already rejected this "thinking" nonsense as hypothetical pedantry. She prefers to post her thoughts rather than think about them.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by stryder on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 9:38am

Phemanderac wrote on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 9:30am:

We are argueing against Cods position, not telling her to stop saying what she wants to say about it.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Gnads on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 9:50am

stryder wrote on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 9:38am:

Phemanderac wrote on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 9:30am:

We are argueing against Cods position, not telling her to stop saying what she wants to say about it.

Yes & after 45 pages of going around in circles isn't it time the light bulb popped on in your head & said "I'm/we're wasting our time"?

There's only so many ways you can re-frame your position in telling Cods hers is one of appeasement & cowardice.

Seems in this case you should take a leaf out of her book & give it away .....

sadly it's been a monumental waste of reasoning.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Phemanderac on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 9:52am

freediver wrote on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 9:36am:

Quote:

Freedom of speech is not freedom from criticism for the stupid things you say.

Nor have I suggested otherwise, particularly in that which you chose to quote.

As such, clearly the stupid thing you said is worthy of criticism, however, I would respectfully suggest you take note of the difference in how I criticise what you said, rather than simply attack you as an individual... that was, in effect, the actual point I made, which somehow you misinterpreted. I suppose that means I did not express it clearly enough.

freediver wrote on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 9:36am:

Quote:

Cods has already rejected this "thinking" nonsense as hypothetical pedantry. She prefers to post her thoughts rather than think about them.

Not at all, what it appears that Cods has rejected, is the methodology used to criticise her, on the basis of her stated position.

Posting her thoughts would be, afterall, exercising her freedom of speech, whether or not she has actually put thought into them (her thoughts that is, yeah doesn't it look kind of strange, no thought into her thoughts....) is merely speculation on your part. I make not comment as to whether or not it is valid speculation, but the fact is, it is just speculation. Once again, this merely attacks Cods and does not address the debate.

As per Freedom of Speech, of course, you are at liberty to attack Cods, obviously, likewise, others, like myself, are at liberty to criticise your methods. In short, you can keep trying to brow beat Cods to change her mind, or, you can adopt a bit of live and let live in the hope that with time, Cods may come to see things differently in time.

I note that Cods has not really taken a backward step in this debate with you and few others, kind of makes the "appeaser" label look a wee bit silly if you look at it closely. Even despite Cods stated position being very much that of appeasment with regard specifically to nutjobs....It needs to be acknowledged she has not appeased you and others here.

Credit where it is due...

I guess the challenge is, I am not particularly disagreeing with your overall position, however, I am pointing out I don't think you are going about defending that position with any degree of credibility or integrity.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Phemanderac on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 9:53am

Gnads wrote on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 9:50am:

stryder wrote on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 9:38am:

Phemanderac wrote on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 9:30am:

We are argueing against Cods position, not telling her to stop saying what she wants to say about it.

To my mind that would be because reasoning has not been applied in very liberal doses....

A waste none the less...

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by stryder on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 9:57am

Gnads wrote on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 9:50am:

stryder wrote on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 9:38am:

Phemanderac wrote on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 9:30am:

We are argueing against Cods position, not telling her to stop saying what she wants to say about it.

That would be if you give up your belief and position.

BUT I HAVENT, I believe in what im stating here, and so do others here on this thread, and so it is not really a waste of time.

BUT IF IT IS FOR YOU ?? YOU DONT HAVE TO READ IT, ;D ;D ;D ;D

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 10:15am

Quote:

Not at all, what it appears that Cods has rejected, is the methodology used to criticise her, on the basis of her stated position.

She has squirmed every way she can think of. However when I did get through to her about whether there might be consequences to her appeasement, her response was that I was being pedantic and that such questions are hypothetical and thus not worth thinking about.

Quote:

Posting her thoughts would be, afterall, exercising her freedom of speech, whether or not she has actually put thought into them (her thoughts that is, yeah doesn't it look kind of strange, no thought into her thoughts....) is merely speculation on your part.

No, she has made several justifications for not thinking about the consequences of her position, and everything else she posts reinforces this.

Quote:

I note that Cods has not really taken a backward step in this debate with you and few others, kind of makes the "appeaser" label look a wee bit silly if you look at it closely.

The irony is not lost on us.

There are additional consequences to the discussion with cods. You for example, are being very careful to state your support for freedom of speech, in case people think you are like cods. I have not seen you do this before.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 10:36am

Peter Panner wrote on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 7:25am:

Dream, I enjoyed the story. An ability to communicate honestly without fear of censure can be a great starting point for understanding. The story seems familiar, though.

Thanks. http://i.imgur.com/AB6kV48.png

BTW ...... the fear, believe me, initially it was there, but fortunately it wasn't so obvious at the time.

Familiar ........... You have similar event(s) in your life?

I've had more than one myself, but this is the one that came to mind at the time. ;)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Gnads on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 10:38am

stryder wrote on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 9:57am:

Gnads wrote on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 9:50am:

stryder wrote on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 9:38am:

Phemanderac wrote on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 9:30am:

We are argueing against Cods position, not telling her to stop saying what she wants to say about it.

You missed my point .... but if ground hog day futility is your thing ... I'm not standing in your way.

As for reading it .... most I don't ..... I can skip 10 pages to find it the same as the initial 10 ...

I made a contribution early on ... so I check to see if there has been any resolution to the debate ...

yet 45 pages later it continues ... with nothing new to say ...standing up for belief or no belief.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQFKtI6gn9Y

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Phemanderac on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 10:39am

freediver wrote on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 10:15am:

There are additional consequences to the discussion with cods. You for example, are being very careful to state your support for freedom of speech, in case people think you are like cods. I have not seen you do this before.

With all due respect, you simply have not read what I have posted closely enough, that would be point one....

Secondly, I do not do so because of what or who people might think I am like, as you put it - that is your assumption. I do so because, posters such as you have labelled my position previously without any basis in fact, but simply by making either unfounded accusation or, assumptions, also with no sound basis.

I don't expect you to concede that point, it would be totally inconsistent with your previously stated positions and those positions you have ascribed to others. I have merely chosen to be much more specific, so you are slightly less enabled to ascribe a fallacious position to that which I actually say.

I guess that therefore, removes one of those unintended consequences to some degree, not withstanding your own position on this of course.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Peter Panner on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 11:29am

Sorry, I meant the story is familiar. I remember reading it somewhere.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 11:39am

Peter Panner wrote on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 11:29am:

Sorry, I meant the story is familiar. I remember reading it somewhere.

Impossible, but then again back in the '60's a hellava lot more common than today, so there's an outside chance something similar maybe.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 1:48pm

Phem there was no basis in fact because you were all over the place with what you were saying. Your posts were for the most part indistinguishable from cods'.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Peter Panner on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 2:50pm

Did you write that Dream? That's brilliant, fella. You should write a book.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 6:22pm

stryder wrote on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 9:34am:

you do struggle dont you???? its not me that gets upset about cartoons.. ::) ::)

stryder wrote on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 9:38am:

We are argueing against Cods position, not telling her to stop saying what she wants to say about it.

but its ok to call someone a coward/or other derogatory names...... sure is! >:(
Phemanderac wrote on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 9:52am:

I note that Cods has not really taken a backward step in this debate with you and few others, kind of makes the "appeaser" label look a wee bit silly if you look at it closely. Even despite Cods stated position being very much that of appeasment with regard specifically to nutjobs....It needs to be acknowledged she has not appeased you and others here.

Credit where it is due...

fd doesnt take kindly to that stance.. he cannot actually abuse he just ridicules cos that aint in his FoS rules.. ::) ::).. I do my best to ignore...its getting harder to find someone who can debate a topic on here..sigh!
freediver wrote on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 10:15am:

Not at all, what it appears that Cods has rejected, is the methodology used to criticise her, on the basis of her stated position.

She has squirmed every way she can think of. However when I did get through to her about whether there might be consequences to her appeasement, her response was that I was being pedantic and that such questions are hypothetical and thus not worth thinking about

in your tiny brain fd.....only in your tiny brain.. I get bored with the same quote over and over ev en when answering a question you quote you own quote....you should be banned for stuffing up the context... rrep rrrrep rrrrepeating rrrrepeating

freediver wrote on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 1:48pm:

Phem there was no basis in fact because you were all over the place with what you were saying. Your posts were for the most part indistinguishable from cods'.

in other word phem... the dill didnt understand a word you said.... ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

his dumbness is showing...thats why when he learnt the word appeasement he has to use it every time..

its newy cant be wasted.. :D :D :D :D :D

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 7:22pm

Phem is someone came on here and insisted in thread after thread that we appease neo-Nazis, would you tell us all to respect their opinion and treat them with kid gloves because that is more effective?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 7:52pm

freediver wrote on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 7:22pm:

do you stop people abusing other people on here just because they have a different take on things....ummmmmmmmmmmmm.. well do you?

how come its ok to APPEASE ABUSERS ON HERE.. but not a manic terrorist?? ::) ::) ::)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Peter Panner on Feb 15^th, 2015 at 4:13am

Being called names on an internet forum and having your head chopped off are the same according to cods.
Priceless.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Phemanderac on Feb 15^th, 2015 at 7:03am

freediver wrote on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 1:48pm:

Phem there was no basis in fact because you were all over the place with what you were saying. Your posts were for the most part indistinguishable from cods'.

Wow, seriously?

That's too funny. Speaking of jumping all over the place.

So, after putting your comment through the ACME forum waffle generator I now understand your comment above....

In short, you have no argument so, rather than concede you compare my posts to Cods presumably as some kind of insult... Oh and as a dismissal, because hey, you can't actually argue about what I wrote.

Nice way to jump all over the place there.

My post was really quite straight forward but keep up the good work.

(Edit) WRT the snide comparison, I cannot decide if you are trying to insult me or Cods... Just sayin...

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Phemanderac on Feb 15^th, 2015 at 7:11am

freediver wrote on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 7:22pm:

Why would I? That isn't what I have said previously.

It's a pretty simple concept really, I am quite surprised that a smart bloke like yourself struggles with this.

You can debate a contrary position to someone and quite clearly not need to resort to attacking them personally. Personal attacks equate to the debate being over and done with - the target of said attacks is not encouraged to expand, review or consider their thinking or thought process.

Now, as demonstrated, even with respectful debating, there are those who will hold their position with the tenacity of a pit bull. Perhaps at times, they are merely being a devils advocate and keeping the debate fires burning as it were.

There is a pretty big difference between, "respect their opinion and treat them with kid gloves because that is more effective" thinking and simply honest debating the topic with some intellectual integrity...

Do you seriously not get this? Before you answer, please note, I have noticed a pattern with your responses, whereby you re-frame that which has been said so it fits your preconceived notion - that is not intellectually honest.

So, honestly, do you seriously not get this?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 15^th, 2015 at 7:55am

Phemanderac wrote on Feb 15^th, 2015 at 7:03am:

freediver wrote on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 1:48pm:

Phem there was no basis in fact because you were all over the place with what you were saying. Your posts were for the most part indistinguishable from cods'.

he has trouble with both of us... so its not hard to guess who has the problem.. ::) ::)

its pretty sad when allw e get is people who can only debate the person and not the topic..

for instance I am not saying... the way I THINK it should have been handled is correct...I am just saying to my way of thinking it was worth a TRY..

what harm in giving it a try... ::) ::)

how ever with fd and his ilk...they would put me in jail and throw away the key..

now I am accused of claiming website abuse is as as bad as chopping off a head...

all because I deem it as letting some people have the ir FREEDOM OF SPEECH rather violently...

and in fds case.. by comparisons...[cods/phem]
on his very own forum

yet someone cannot have their FREEDOM OF SPEECH to ask that an insulting cartoon be stopped...

where was head chopping mentioned BTW? ::) ::)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Peter Panner on Feb 15^th, 2015 at 8:08am

Cods, scroll up 20cm. You'll see where you asked FD why it's ok to appease abusers but not manic terrorists? Dementia much?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 15^th, 2015 at 8:32am

Peter Panner wrote on Feb 15^th, 2015 at 8:08am:

Cods, scroll up 20cm. You'll see where you asked FD why it's ok to appease abusers but not manic terrorists? Dementia much?

oh I didnt know they chopped heads off CHarlie Hebdo employees.....

perhaps you have the link to that. >:(

I am sure you wouldnt abuse someone if you didnt have the facts at hand.... would you? >:( >:(

or are you also one of those who think people with dementia are to be abused as well.. > :o

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Feb 15^th, 2015 at 8:44am

Phemanderac wrote on Feb 15^th, 2015 at 7:11am:

freediver wrote on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 7:22pm:

Do you have a problem with me referring to cods' suggested approach as spineless appeasement? What is the politically correct term?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Feb 15^th, 2015 at 9:15am

Time to get your pompoms out cods.

freediver wrote on Feb 15^th, 2015 at 9:08am:

We have an answer:

Copenhagen free speech debate shooting: One dead

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-31472423

Denmark is on high alert after a gunman in Copenhagen killed one person and injured three others at a debate on blasphemy and free speech attended by a controversial Swedish cartoonist.

Several dozen shots were fired at the seminar and a manhunt is now under way.

Prime Minister Helle Thorning-Schmidt described it as a "politically motivated" act of terrorism.

Cartoonist Lars Vilks, who has faced death threats over his caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad, was unhurt.

Police initially believed there had been two suspects, but later said they were searching for a lone gunman.

They released a photograph showing the alleged attacker apparently wearing a purple balaclava and thick puffer jacket.

The three injured were police officers.

An audio recording, obtained exclusively by the BBC, revealed the moments leading up to the attack.

One of the speakers at the debate, which took place at a cafe and concerned the limits of free speech, is suddenly interrupted by a barrage of gunshots.

Eyewitness Niels Ivar Larsen, speaking to the Associated Press news agency, said: "I heard someone firing with an automatic weapon and someone shouting.

"Police returned fire and I hid behind the bar."

The French ambassador, Francois Zimeray, was also present during the attack.

Shortly after the shooting, a message appeared on his Twitter feed saying he was still alive.

The area around the venue is under lockdown, reports the BBC's Malcolm Brabant, and police have erected cordons as they search a nearby park.

Strict security

The debate was described on a personal website of Lars Vilks as a talk on whether any limits should be placed on artistic expression or freedom of speech.

A description of the event asked whether artists could "dare" to be blasphemous in the wake of the Charlie Hebdo terror attacks by Islamist gunmen in Paris last month.

In an indication of the threat faced by the cartoonist, a note was included on the website saying there was always "strict security" whenever he spoke in public.

An organiser of Saturday's event, Helle Merete Brix, told BBC World TV it was being guarded by armed police and security agents from the Danish intelligence service, as well as Mr Vilks' own bodyguards.

She said she clearly considered the incident an attack on Mr Vilk.

Lars Vilks stoked controversy in 2007 by drawing pictures of the Prophet Muhammad dressed as a dog.

In 2010 two brothers tried to burn down the cartoonist's house in southern Sweden and were imprisoned for attempted arson.

Satirists targeting Islam have been in the spotlight since the January attacks in France, when 17 people were killed in separate incidents over a three-day period.

French President Francois Hollande said Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve would visit the Danish capital as soon as possible.

A message from the president's official Twitter feed said Mr Hollande expressed his solidarity with Denmark's prime minister.

Cartoons depicting the Prophet Muhammad were published by a Danish newspaper in 2005, sparking deadly riots in some Muslim countries.

Lars Vilks: A controversial career

June 1946: born in Helsingborg, Sweden

2007: Stoked controversy when he drew a series of cartoons depicting the Prophet Muhammad as a dog which were published in a number of Swedish papers

Sept 2007: $100,000 bounty placed on his head by then leader of al-Qaeda in Iraq

March 2010: Seven Irish citizens arrested over separate plots to kill Vilks: US woman Colleen LaRose, aka Jihad Jane, also arrested and later jailed for 10 years for conspiracy to commit murder

May 2010: Assaulted by Muslim protesters during a lecture about free speech at Uppsala University, Sweden

Sept 2011: Three men arrested in Gothenburg, Sweden, for plotting to kill Vilks

March 2013: Placed on "most wanted" list By al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula

Feb 2015: Gunmen attack event on blasphemy, art and freedom of expression organised by Vilks at the Krudttoenden café in Copenhagen, Denmark

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Gnads on Feb 15^th, 2015 at 9:54am

cods wrote on Feb 15^th, 2015 at 8:32am:

Peter Panner wrote on Feb 15^th, 2015 at 8:08am:

Cods, scroll up 20cm. You'll see where you asked FD why it's ok to appease abusers but not manic terrorists? Dementia much?

Head off, shot with an AK47 or stabbed .... it's all murder .... & the sort of violence these Islamic terrorists use...

& it's that that you want to appease/give in to.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 15^th, 2015 at 10:24am

freediver wrote on Feb 15^th, 2015 at 9:15am:

Time to get your pompoms out cod

my god thats pretty disgusting....how dare you....

I do not applaud killing in fact its me thats trying to find ways to avoid the killing...

because you approve of the insults... in fact you add to them...this could be right up your alley you are disgusting...I would appreciate an apology but from the like sof you I know it wont happen... so bloody superior in your own mind.. btw this happened roudn the corner where my daughter and her family are living..and where I will be some time in March....

you are probably running your hands together right now...

grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.

get out of my thread.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 15^th, 2015 at 10:29am

Gnads wrote on Feb 15^th, 2015 at 9:54am:

cods wrote on Feb 15^th, 2015 at 8:32am:

Peter Panner wrote on Feb 15^th, 2015 at 8:08am:

Cods, scroll up 20cm. You'll see where you asked FD why it's ok to appease abusers but not manic terrorists? Dementia much?

Head off, shot with an AK47 or stabbed .... it's all murder .... & the sort of violence these Islamic terrorists use...

& it's that that you want to appease/give in to.

all I am saying is they were WARNED..

I have never said anywhere else.. so the journos were doing their job it was their choice to be there so they deserve getting their heads chopped off...

it has got nothing to do with giving in....it was worth trying to stop a slaughter.....

you believe a slaughter is worth paying the price for..

so called Freedom of Speech...

it kind of floors me thats all..

no where and no one has freedom of speech...

have you tried using your on this forum???????

well have you?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Feb 15^th, 2015 at 12:11pm

cods wrote on Feb 15^th, 2015 at 10:24am:

freediver wrote on Feb 15^th, 2015 at 9:15am:

Time to get your pompoms out cod

Sounds like serious business cods. I'm interested to here how you plan to do this without thinking about those "pedantic hypotheticals" you are so dismissive of. For example, do you think that rewarding terrorists for terrorism by giving them what they want will discouraging them from using terrorism to get what they want?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 15^th, 2015 at 12:14pm

freediver wrote on Feb 15^th, 2015 at 12:11pm:

I will send you over you are a pig that will fix them,.

they dont take kindly to insults and neither do I..

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Feb 15^th, 2015 at 12:18pm

See cods this is what happens when you try to "stop the killing" while refusing to put any thought into it. You end up promoting the killing.

Will you wear your pompoms while you pack me off?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 15^th, 2015 at 12:21pm

yes.. and gladly

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Feb 15^th, 2015 at 12:24pm

Do you take pride in wearing the pompoms for ISIS?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Feb 15^th, 2015 at 1:23pm

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Feb 15^th, 2015 at 4:46pm

I wonder if cods sees the ISIS terror campaign as a way of getting people to be more polite.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 16^th, 2015 at 5:34am

freediver wrote on Feb 15^th, 2015 at 4:46pm:

I wonder if cods sees the ISIS terror campaign as a way of getting people to be more polite.

oh very amusing got heaps to do with FoS..

are you turning this into a lets get CODS THREAD?...

it would seem so...must be your style... if its not gangalf its cods....

says a lot actually.

cods cant do anything right as far as some people are concerned...and your one of them.. you are joining a select few I do my bets to avoid. >:(

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by AiA on Feb 16^th, 2015 at 5:46am

cods wrote on Feb 16^th, 2015 at 5:34am:

are you turning this into a lets get CODS THREAD?...

you seem to be quite adept doing that yourself ...

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 16^th, 2015 at 5:58am

AiA wrote on Feb 16^th, 2015 at 5:46am:

cods wrote on Feb 16^th, 2015 at 5:34am:

are you turning this into a lets get CODS THREAD?...

you seem to be quite adept doing that yourself ...

well I was right after all. ::) ::)out comes another one..

.you mean I shouldnt answer people....is that what you are saying???...

this is about FoS not about me... what about havinga chat with those who insist on making it about ME.. come on have a go at FD..

it was his idea to have this thread....and ever since he has done his best to turn it into a personal vendetta...

so come on... I am all for keeping a thread on topic..

btw I have also gone a long way to ignore fds simple little comments..maybe you didnt notice.

uuummmm what were you saying about FOS???

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Phemanderac on Feb 16^th, 2015 at 6:57am

freediver wrote on Feb 15^th, 2015 at 8:44am:

Phemanderac wrote on Feb 15^th, 2015 at 7:11am:

freediver wrote on Feb 14^th, 2015 at 7:22pm:

Do you have a problem with me referring to cods' suggested approach as spineless appeasement? What is the politically correct term?

Thanks I think that answer clears a lot up for me...

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Feb 16^th, 2015 at 7:30am

Fair enough. Lets get back on topic. Cods do you think that rewarding terrorists for acts of terrorism by giving them what they want will discourage them from using terrorism to get what they want?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Phemanderac on Feb 16^th, 2015 at 8:34am

freediver wrote on Feb 16^th, 2015 at 7:30am:

Fair enough. Lets get back on topic. Cods do you think that rewarding terrorists for acts of terrorism by giving them what they want will discourage them from using terrorism to get what they want?

So, stopping terrorism is the topic now? I see, how silly to think the thread title had something to do with the topic.

So, in terms of stopping terrorism then, do you think that anything done currently is actually stopping terrorists from committing acts of terrorism?

What reward is Cods offering up specifically and how does the offer of these "rewards" translate to stopping (or not) terrorism?

Has the death of 17 journalists/cartoonists (in short non terrorists) in anyway shape or form reduced acts of terrorism?

It seems to me that with regard to fanatical, one eyed maniacs, nothing will actually appease them or stop them finding an excuse to behave like arseholes. But I am sure that badgering Cods for her comments will do its bit for world peace - I guess we have to be heroic where we can...

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 16^th, 2015 at 8:38am

freediver wrote on Feb 16^th, 2015 at 7:30am:

Fair enough. Lets get back on topic. Cods do you think that rewarding terrorists for acts of terrorism by giving them what they want will discourage them from using terrorism to get what they want?

are you turning this into a lets get cods thread???..

I asked first

I am getting a bit of back lashing as some think I am complaining about being abused......when all I am doing is trying to get what you consider to be freedom of choice.....

.and I see it doesnt apply to cods... thats all..

should cods suggest stop printing ugly insulting cartoons... I am called all manner of names...coward and terrorist lover...which you of course enjoy and encourage...

you have no idea what the real truth is you are too absorbed with your own freedom of speech...and repeating meaningless words...

you will be the first to know when my crystal ball is working again so I can predict the future....

till then...are you turning this into a LETS GET CODS THREAD..?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Feb 16^th, 2015 at 8:51am

Quote:

you will be the first to know when my crystal ball is working again so I can predict the future....

Another lame excuse from cods for her refusal to think about the consequences of her spineless appeasement of terrorists. It does not take a crystal ball cods. You are the only one having trouble with this.

Quote:

So, stopping terrorism is the topic now? I see, how silly to think the thread title had something to do with the topic.

Cods brought it up. Her justification for promoting the abandonment of freedom of speech (ie giving terrorists what they want) is that she was the only one interested in stopping the violence.

Quote:

So, in terms of stopping terrorism then, do you think that anything done currently is actually stopping terrorists from committing acts of terrorism?

Shooting them helps. There are lots of people working very hard to stop them.

Quote:

What reward is Cods offering up specifically and how does the offer of these "rewards" translate to stopping (or not) terrorism?

Cods is suggesting we refrain from mocking Muhammed. Any appeasement of terrorists rewards them and will encourage terrorism.

Quote:

It seems to me that with regard to fanatical, one eyed maniacs, nothing will actually appease them or stop them finding an excuse to behave like arseholes.

That does not stop cods from trying.

Quote:

But I am sure that badgering Cods for her comments will do its bit for world peace - I guess we have to be heroic where we can...

It is defending freedom of speech from those who would have us abandon it - both the terrorists and their willing appeasers. I think this is important. I would hate for someone to mistake silence on one of the many threads where cods promoted her spineless appeasement for support or respect for her opinion. The terrorists and the appeasers need to know that it will not happen and that we have no respect for what they promote.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 16^th, 2015 at 8:52am

Phemanderac wrote on Feb 16^th, 2015 at 8:34am:

freediver wrote on Feb 16^th, 2015 at 7:30am:

Fair enough. Lets get back on topic. Cods do you think that rewarding terrorists for acts of terrorism by giving them what they want will discourage them from using terrorism to get what they want?

So, stopping terrorism is the topic now? I see, how silly to think the thread title had something to do with the topic.

So, in terms of stopping terrorism then, do you think that anything done currently is actually stopping terrorists from committing acts of terrorism?

he thinks being bwave behind his computer will stop them...

What reward is Cods offering up specifically and how does the offer of these "rewards" translate to stopping (or not) terrorism?

he thinks harassing someone will make them change their minds..its his form of bullying

Has the death of 17 journalists/cartoonists (in short non terrorists) in anyway shape or form reduced acts of terrorism?

add 2 more to that count.

It seems to me that with regard to fanatical, one eyed maniacs, nothing will actually appease them or stop them finding an excuse to behave like arseholes. But I am sure that badgering Cods for her comments will do its bit for world peace - I guess we have to be heroic where we can...

shhh fd thinks I have the magic bullet...if he says it often enough then it has to be true.. ::) ::)

dont let a boring person get in the way of a good topic..

I will now revert to ignore mode...mummy might find him something else to play with. >:(

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 16^th, 2015 at 8:54am

it makes sense to fd....it really does.. ;D ;D ;D ;D

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Yadda on Feb 16^th, 2015 at 10:06am

Phemanderac wrote on Feb 16^th, 2015 at 8:34am:

freediver wrote on Feb 16^th, 2015 at 7:30am:

Fair enough. Lets get back on topic. Cods do you think that rewarding terrorists for acts of terrorism by giving them what they want will discourage them from using terrorism to get what they want?

Terrorism works!

The entire history of ISLAM attests to the fact that the use of terror [by moslems] has served the interests of moslems/ISLAM well.

Mohammed himself attested to that fact [that terrorism works] in the Hadith.

Moslems have come to understand [through previous experience], that if they threaten violence against a group, very often the mere threat of their violence [intimidation], will have an effect which is to the advantage of 'the moslem'.

This consequence occurs, because those who have been threatened [by 'the moslem'] will often see no harm in appeasing 'the moslem' in his demands, in order to avoid the other 'consequences' of displeasing him.

cods is saying that we should follow that common historic response to intimidation, emanating from the moslem community.

freedom of speech = = the freedom to express ideas and concepts.

But, moslems reject all ideas and concepts which they [moslems] deem to be un-ISLAMIC in their basis, OR, ideas and concepts which they [moslems] deem to threaten the integrity of the ideas and concepts which ISLAM itself, promotes in the world.

And in that, we come back to a necessary recognition by us, of the wholly supremacist [fascist] nature of ISLAM.

i.e.
[Wherever moslems have become a significantly large minority, within a larger non-moslem host community]....
ISLAM takes to itself, the 'divine' right to oppose and prohibit the broadcasting of any ideas and concepts which do not actively promote the interests of ISLAM/moslems - on pain of death! [e.g. Charlie Hebdo attacks, Copenhagen attacks, etc]

i.e.
Moslems try to impose a new 'reasonable' 'idea', upon those that they [moslems] live among, the new and 'reasonable' idea, that scrutiny and criticism of the ideas and concepts which ISLAM promotes in the world, should be strictly prohibited.

Why so ?

Because the masters of ISLAM [i.e. the clerics] know that there is no benefit to ISLAM, if they were to ever allow any scrutiny [and consequent criticism] of the ideas and concepts which ISLAM promotes in the world.

Any scrutiny [and consequent criticism] of ISLAM, can never serve the interests of ISLAM/moslems.

Any scrutiny [and consequent criticism] of ISLAM, can only ever be to the detriment of the interests of ISLAM/moslems !!

Appeasing the moslem opposition to cartoon-ery, will result in the loss of our freedoms;

freedom of speech = = is the right to be able to freely publish a cartoon which uses truth combined with ridicule, to satirise corrupt and foolish men.

Which is a right which is NOT, NOT curtailed by ISLAMIC law, if i am a French man/woman or if i am a Danish man/woman.

But if as cods proposes, i choose to curtail the expression of my own freedoms [freedoms that are protected in the laws of France and Denmark], because of the threats of what 'the moslem' may do against me, then i am [in effect!] giving power to ISLAMIC law, above the laws of France and Denmark, which protect my freedoms, which my forefathers fought and died for.

If i [as a citizen of France or Denmark] choose to appease the sensibilities of moslems who live among us, and curtail the expression of my own freedoms, THEN BY DEFAULT, i have allowed 'the moslem' [who lives among us] to become the arbiter of the rights freedoms which i may be allowed to enjoy.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Svengali on Feb 16^th, 2015 at 11:12am

Yadda wrote on Feb 16^th, 2015 at 10:06am:

Phemanderac wrote on Feb 16^th, 2015 at 8:34am:

freediver wrote on Feb 16^th, 2015 at 7:30am:

Fair enough. Lets get back on topic. Cods do you think that rewarding terrorists for acts of terrorism by giving them what they want will discourage them from using terrorism to get what they want?

Another Muslim hate rant for Israeli paid shill Yadda.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Feb 16^th, 2015 at 11:38am

Any Muslim Extremists, & the greater majority of those so called moderate Muslims that support them, regardless of what they say (lying is permitted by the Koran), must be grinning from ear to ear watching us all self-destruct, & attack each other.

Expressing points of view, after the second dozen times, becomes an exercise in futility. Changing the words, but expecting a different outcome is a waste of time.

"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." .......... Albert Einstein

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Soren on Feb 16^th, 2015 at 2:24pm

We're expected to do the not-all-Muslims-want-to-shoot-you-dead shtick. And that's true. But Islam itself has no feeling whatsoever for the spirit of free speech.

The more Islamic a society gets, the less free speech it has - the less intellectual inquiry, artistic achievement, contrarian spirit. Most western Muslims are not willing themselves to open fire on synagogues or Lars Vilks, but they help maintain the shriveled definition of acceptable expression that helps license the fanatics of Copenhagen and Paris. Muslims in Europe, North America and Australia will pay lip service to "free speech", and then promptly re-define it as excluding speech that "blasphemes" or "insults" their faith - which is to say them. Which is to say the great vulgar, brawling, free-for-all of free societies does not apply to them. So, when, say, France's Muslim population reaches 20 per cent, you will need to have the support of three-quarters of the remaining 80 per cent to maintain even a bare popular majority in favor of free speech.

Is that likely? Or will there be more and more non-Muslims like the wretched quisling Welsh bishop, the Right Reverend Gregory Cameron, frantically arguing that if you hadn't been so "offensive" you wouldn't have caught their eye? Islam and free speech are, as His Miserable Grace implicitly recognizes, incompatible. And ultimately, therefore, you have to choose between liberty and mass Muslim immigration.

http://www.steynonline.com/6813/the-morning-after

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 26^th, 2015 at 4:52am

I wonder what happened to FREEDOM OF SPEECH on ozpol....funny how they worry about other peoples FoS but not the members..

funny that.would that be another lefty double standard?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Feb 26^th, 2015 at 9:33am

Soren wrote on Feb 16^th, 2015 at 2:24pm:

You must have been a carpenter in a previous life, 'cause you continually hit the nail square on the head every time!

Gotta hand it to ya.... http://i.imgur.com/IAMjnkA.png

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Feb 26^th, 2015 at 9:36am

cods wrote on Feb 26^th, 2015 at 4:52am:

I wonder what happened to FREEDOM OF SPEECH on ozpol....funny how they worry about other peoples FoS but not the members..

funny that.would that be another lefty double standard?

Outside the specific use of some specific choice swear words (which are used by 95% of Australian parents in front of their kids anyway), outside of the use of those words, care to explain exactly what you mean in uncomplicated detail?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 26^th, 2015 at 10:33am

Panther wrote on Feb 26^th, 2015 at 9:36am:

cods wrote on Feb 26^th, 2015 at 4:52am:

I wonder what happened to FREEDOM OF SPEECH on ozpol....funny how they worry about other peoples FoS but not the members..

funny that.would that be another lefty double standard?

I wont if you dont mind....you dont like what I say anyway...and the message wasnt intended for you so no point...

best you just stick with those you agree with.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Feb 26^th, 2015 at 10:45am

cods wrote on Feb 26^th, 2015 at 10:33am:

Panther wrote on Feb 26^th, 2015 at 9:36am:

cods wrote on Feb 26^th, 2015 at 4:52am:

I wonder what happened to FREEDOM OF SPEECH on ozpol....funny how they worry about other peoples FoS but not the members..

funny that.would that be another lefty double standard?

I wont if you dont mind....you dont like what I say anyway...and the message wasnt intended for you so no point...

best you just stick with those you agree with.

First of all, I stick with no one......you won't se a name on any friends list of mine.. I've been asked, but I don't want any.

Now, it makes no difference if I like what you say, or disagree with what you say.

If you feel (key word is you) you want to say something, go for it.

If I don't like it I can ignore it, or I can say what I feel about what you say.

Makes no never mind.

You have now, & will always have the right to say it.

It may not go down well, but if they can't handle it, that's their problem, not yours.

You still have the right to your piece no matter how popular, no matter if the world disagrees.......period.

In the end though, along with the right to say whatever inspires you, you also have the right to say nothing.

Saying nothing is another form of Free Speech.

The choice is yours & yours only, & unlike others, I respect that.

Put that in your book when you decide to write it.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 27^th, 2015 at 2:11pm

its a shame we cannot get answers to queries about oz pol FREEDOM OF SPEECH..

seeing as how FOS is worth dying for outside of ozpol.. it would be wonderful to understand why some of us are singled out to have their FREEDOM OF SPEECH actually stolen from them..with no word of explanation I fidn that pretty two faced to be honest... then again not much about honesty at ozpol either..

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Feb 27^th, 2015 at 2:44pm

cods wrote on Feb 27^th, 2015 at 2:11pm:

.......it would be wonderful to understand why some of us are singled out to have their FREEDOM OF SPEECH actually stolen from them......

Well, I feel sorry for you. You seem to insist you are having your Freedom of Speech 'stolen from you', when that is impossible, & testament to that is you are here saying what you are, which is in of itself a pure exercise of the Freedom of Speech, of which you say is being 'stolen' from you.

If I were a Psychiatrist I would probably have a 5 syllable word describing some defining syndrome or complex, but being I'm not, all I can offer you is my sincere pity in lieu of a diagnosis. :-/

If you are truly unhappy with your 'perceived treatment' in this forum, even though it would be a loss felt by some of us, I might suggest you tune in to a different channel so to speak, a more acceptable one to you than this, more to your own personal liking.....for your own sake -- not anyone elses.

If you so choose, that would be an exercise of another Freedom, your Freedom of Choice.

"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." .......... Albert Einstein

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 27^th, 2015 at 3:13pm

Panther wrote on Feb 27^th, 2015 at 2:44pm:

reamRyderX Posted on: Today at 2:44pm
cods wrote Today at 2:11pm:
.......it would be wonderful to understand why some of us are singled out to have their FREEDOM OF SPEECH actually stolen from them......

Well, I feel sorry for you. You seem to insist you are having your Freedom of Speech 'stolen from you', when that is impossible, & testament to that is you are here saying what you are, which is in of itself a pure exercise of the Freedom of Speech, of which you say is being 'stolen' from you.

If I were a Psychiatrist I would probably have a 5 syllable word describing some defining syndrome or complex, but being I'm not, all I can offer you is my sincere pity in lieu of a diagnosis.

If you are truly unhappy with your 'perceived treatment' in this forum, even though it would be a loss felt by some of us, I might suggest you tune in to a different channel so to speak, a more acceptable one to you than this, more to your own personal liking.....for your own sake -- not anyone elses.

If you so choose, that would be an exercise of another Freedom, your Freedom of Choice.

"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." .......... Albert Einstei

thank you for your KIND word on input....its a shame you dont have a clue what you are talking about...only THINK you do...you are very quick to judge people...I dont think that is an asset myself but some do ..

insanity is not involved I can assure you so no need to read and worry...and or give advice.... ::)

as you say you are not a psychiatrist [ your own words] or a good follower of the boards by the look of it..

thank you.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Feb 27^th, 2015 at 9:14pm

Cods I have answered the same stupid question for you hundreds of times. None of the rules here restrict your freedom of speech.

But you cannot answer once - what do you think would be the likely outcome of rewarding terrorists for their acts of terrorism by abandoning freedom of speech?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Aussie on Feb 27^th, 2015 at 9:23pm

freediver wrote on Feb 27^th, 2015 at 9:14pm:

If you have, I doubt you have explained to cods why it is that you want the Muslim bashers to have freedom of speech on their patches, yet you do not allow cods the same freedom here to bash you on your patch.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 27^th, 2015 at 9:47pm

freediver wrote on Feb 27^th, 2015 at 9:14pm:

you have blocked me from FEEDBACK so I ahve no intentions of answering a question from someone who restricts my STUPID FREEDOM OF SPEECH ON FEEDBACK.

from some who is such a hypocrite he slams the door when he cant be bothered with those he picks and chooses yet when some requests they stop drawing hideous pictures of their Messiah he cries.. FOUL how dare they ask that.. yet he uses his own POWER to thwart others FREEDOM OF SPEECH..

sorry hypocrite I dont do deals with them

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 27^th, 2015 at 9:54pm

Aussie wrote on Feb 27^th, 2015 at 9:23pm:

freediver wrote on Feb 27^th, 2015 at 9:14pm:

that not quite fair aussie I was not bashing him on feedback... thats why I have no idea why he shut me down and one can only suss on his PM link as well..

funny how he worries about what terrorists may do.. when hes doing the same thing ....

you have special powers fd you can shut people out as and when it suits you...in other words rob them of their freedom of speech... if I wish to join in a topic on feedback you have stopped me....

without explanation without warning... even the terrorists gave their victims that courtesy..!!!!! >:(

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Feb 27^th, 2015 at 9:56pm

Quote:

yet when some requests they stop drawing hideous pictures of their Messiah he cries.. FOUL how dare they ask that..

Nothing wrong with asking cods. That's what freedom of speech is all about. The problem is slaughtering the cartoonists, and the spineless apologists who want to appease them by abandoning freedom of speech because "they are the only ones trying to stop the killing".

Why do we still need to explain this to you, after all this time?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 27^th, 2015 at 9:57pm

freediver wrote on Feb 27^th, 2015 at 9:56pm:

Quote:

yet when some requests they stop drawing hideous pictures of their Messiah he cries.. FOUL how dare they ask that..

you dont....bye sunshine

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Aussie on Feb 27^th, 2015 at 10:06pm

freediver wrote on Feb 27^th, 2015 at 9:56pm:

Quote:

yet when some requests they stop drawing hideous pictures of their Messiah he cries.. FOUL how dare they ask that..

You are a funny little bugger FD. You seem unable to see the direct analogy between 'slaughtering cartoonists' with your equivalent action here. Sure, you have not killed anyone, but in the figurative sense, that is exactly what you have done.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Feb 27^th, 2015 at 10:18pm

The distinction - which I have already explained hundreds of times already - is that slaughtering cartoonists is an attack on freedom of speech. Rules on this website are not a restriction on freedom of speech.

Now, if you want to be really clever you could ask why - which is another question I have already answered hundreds of times - because freedom of speech is not a right to compel others to publish.

This is where you and cods run away. Oops, cods already has. In future rather than asking the same idiotic questions over and over again, how about you just save everyone the trouble and copy and paste this post and we can pretend we went round in the same circle again?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Aussie on Feb 27^th, 2015 at 10:28pm

freediver wrote on Feb 27^th, 2015 at 10:18pm:

The distinction - which I have already explained hundreds of times already - is that slaughtering cartoonists is an attack on freedom of speech. Rules on this website are not a restriction on freedom of speech.

Now, if you want to be really clever you could ask why - which is another question I have already answered hundreds of times - because freedom of speech is not a right to compel others to publish.

This is where you and cods run away. In future rather than asking the same idiotic questions over and over again, how about you just save everyone the trouble and copy and paste this post and we can pretend we went round in the same circle again?

Yeas, we could do that....or, you could simply admit that while you want freedom of speech for people who do not post here, the freedom of speech people have here is restricted by you.....i.e. there is no such thing as freedom of speech, and this Forum is living proof of that.

One man's freedom of speech is another's deprivation of that same freedom.

You restrict freedom here with a ban button, others do it elsewhere with their ban button. Everyone is happy. Jolly.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Mohammed on Feb 27^th, 2015 at 11:42pm

It's pretty easy really, if you don't like it here go post somewhere else.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by it_is_the_light on Feb 27^th, 2015 at 11:44pm

SweetLambo wrote on Feb 27^th, 2015 at 11:42pm:

It's pretty easy really, if you don't like it here go post somewhere else.

many blessings yasser

you could and should take your own advice

yet either way be at peace

namaste

- : ) =

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Mohammed on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 12:20am

Buggeroff idiot and troll elsewhere you babbling loon.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Setanta on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 12:21am

SweetLambo wrote on Feb 27^th, 2015 at 11:42pm:

It's pretty easy really, if you don't like it here go post somewhere else.

Or start your own forum. FoS never means you'll get that on someone else's property. Most of you may not want me in their lounge saying what I say here, I wouldn't put up with it either. But that doesn't mean you can't speak and publish what you want or take your soapbox to the street.. Then it's my choice if I listen to you and you get to say whatever you want. This forum is FD's property, just because you don't get everything you want to say here, and it's pretty bloody free, doesn't mean he is barring you from your FoS.

Set up your own forum, then you get to make the rules. FoS is about what you can say in public, this is private property. Aussie should know better.

edit: FoS is about what you can say, not where you get to say it.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 7:08am

it_is_the_light wrote on Feb 27^th, 2015 at 11:44pm:

SweetLambo wrote on Feb 27^th, 2015 at 11:42pm:

It's pretty easy really, if you don't like it here go post somewhere else.

many blessings yasser

you could and should take your own advice

yet either way be at peace

namaste

- : ) =

hilarious..

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 7:23am

Setanta wrote on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 12:21am:

SweetLambo wrote on Feb 27^th, 2015 at 11:42pm:

It's pretty easy really, if you don't like it here go post somewhere else.

ok lets call it a DOUBLE STANDARD THEN..

FoS is a furphy and we all know that...

so DOUBLE STANDARDS IT IS..

first of all setanta FD suggested a thread be opened for this very subject....perhaps you need to go back to the beginning..

this was not a whinge on FoS bec ause I for one have said all along.. there is really no such thing..

however FD claims his is threated if those nice cartoonists stop ridiculing some ones GOD..

in fact he is so upset at the suggestion " its wrong" that he also would kill to preserve cruel unkind pictures...

yet he feels quite at home to remove certain peoples freedom of speech to comment on the feedback board as and when it suits them....we are blocked and I also presume we are blocked from contacting fd on P.M.

now that seems fair enough because we can complain on here.......so we can still talk about being banned....

however to fight for a cartoon.. whilst depriving someone theoretically by doing what he is whingeing about others doing..

I find remarkable..

and of course he only wants people to see his point of view..

he seems to have won you over...

its not about starting your own forum...

its about DOUBLE STANDARDS

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Lisa Jones on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 7:38am

Aussie wrote on Feb 27^th, 2015 at 10:28pm:

freediver wrote on Feb 27^th, 2015 at 10:18pm:

The distinction - which I have already explained hundreds of times already - is that slaughtering cartoonists is an attack on freedom of speech. Rules on this website are not a restriction on freedom of speech.

Now, if you want to be really clever you could ask why - which is another question I have already answered hundreds of times - because freedom of speech is not a right to compel others to publish.

This is where you and cods run away. In future rather than asking the same idiotic questions over and over again, how about you just save everyone the trouble and copy and paste this post and we can pretend we went round in the same circle again?

Yes, we could do that....or, you could simply admit that while you want freedom of speech for people who do not post here, the freedom of speech people have here is restricted by you.....i.e. there is no such thing as freedom of speech, and this Forum is living proof of that.

One man's freedom of speech is another's deprivation of that same freedom.

You restrict freedom here with a ban button, others do it elsewhere with their ban button. Everyone is happy. Jolly.

AND THAT MY DEAR FRIENDS, IS THAT.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Dame Pansi on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 8:02am

We have the freedom to say what we like on this forum, but if we say the wrong thing, we may be banned......consequences.

We know the rules, we have been warned. If we want to contribute to the forum, we obey the rules.

The cartoonists have the freedom to print their cartoons, but if they print the wrong thing they may be killed....consequences.

They know the rules, they have been warned. If they want to stay alive, they obey the rules.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by issuevoter on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 8:11am

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 8:02am:

Being murdered for expressing your view of religion is hardly a rule, except in Islam. If this threat in the Western world is a fait-accomple (Sic) it proves that what is often called Islamophobia is no phobia at all.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 9:05am

Quote:

One man's freedom of speech is another's deprivation of that same freedom.

No Aussie. One man's freedom is another's confusion. You have freedom of speech, even if you cannot understand it.

Quote:

in fact he is so upset at the suggestion " its wrong" that he also would kill to preserve cruel unkind pictures...

This may be news to you cods, but that is exactly what the authorities are doing on our behalf. The civilised world is rallying behind the cartoonists and killing the perpetrators as we find them. This is what decent people do when confronted with attacks on our liberty.

Quote:

yet he feels quite at home to remove certain peoples freedom of speech

Earth to cods: that is not what I am doing.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 9:23am

freediver wrote on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 9:05am:

Quote:

One man's freedom of speech is another's deprivation of that same freedom.

No Aussie. One man's freedom is another's confusion. You have freedom of speech, even if you cannot understand it.

[quote]in fact he is so upset at the suggestion " its wrong" that he also would kill to preserve cruel unkind pictures...

yet he feels quite at home to remove certain peoples freedom of speech

Earth to cods: that is not what I am doing.[/quote]

HOUSTON I HAVE A PROBLEM I CANNOT EXPRESS MYSELF IN FEEDBACK... AS IS MY WANT..

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 9:26am

No-one cares cods, and your attempts to use the terrorist attacks to draw attention to your 'plight' are not exactly helping your cause.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 9:34am

issuevoter wrote on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 8:11am:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 8:02am:

the facts are a lot of people take offence at religious mockery...if someone vandalises a church or a headstone or a War Memorial there is hue and cry and people get charged and we clap out hands... and say thats the right way ...we cant have people displaying their FREEDOMOF SPEECH in that fashion...

lets remember we dont all speak the same language...

the extremists of Islam have said they take extreme offence at anyone mocking their god...

and they say they will deal with it by killing people.. innocent people people who have not a thing to do with mocking....people who happen to be in the way..

I think it is worth trying to appease these guys by not mocking...its worth a try....thats all I am saying.. but some think thats taking away their personal freedom of speech...how dare any madman do that...let him kill as many as he wants.. I demand to read this mocking...

and yet I cannot read feedback...to me thats a double standard..

we think its okay to send someone to jail for throwing pain on a war memorial...they even get up in arms when one is used as a public urinal.. peeing a very normal human thing to do... JUST DONT DO IT ON .....feedback.. ::) ::) :P

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 9:36am

freediver wrote on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 9:26am:

No-one cares cods, and your attempts to use the terrorist attacks to draw attention to your 'plight' are not exactly helping your cause.

says you...

but when will you admit you have blocked me and others from your precious board????....you are on here telling all and sundry you are winning this double standard.. REALLY?..

me thinks its your cause that is going down.sir!

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 12:00pm

Setanta wrote on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 12:21am:

SweetLambo wrote on Feb 27^th, 2015 at 11:42pm:

It's pretty easy really, if you don't like it here go post somewhere else.

Or start your own forum. FoS never means you'll get that on someone else's property. Most of you may not want me in their lounge saying what I say here, I wouldn't put up with it either. But that doesn't mean you can't speak and publish what you want or take your soapbox to the street.. Then it's my choice if I listen to you and you get to say whatever you want. This forum is FD's property, just because you don't get everything you want to say here, and it's pretty bloody free, doesn't mean he is barring you from your FoS.

......FoS is about what you can say in public, this is private property.........

.....FoS is about what you can say, not where you get to say it.

Some excellent points, but I disagree with the "where you get to say it" part.

You can say whatever you want, wherever you want, but in some places you may get that opportunity only ONCE (or until those that object take action).

Expressing your Freedom of Speech, just like most any other action, may have it's downside, it may be subject to a 'penalty', but as I've said before, the 'penalty' only occurs AFTER you've already exercised your Freedom of Speech, NOT BEFORE. http://imgur.com/8myJ5wt.gif

What do you think about that? http://i.imgur.com/9no1k4p.png

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Setanta on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 3:10pm

Panther wrote on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 12:00pm:

Setanta wrote on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 12:21am:

SweetLambo wrote on Feb 27^th, 2015 at 11:42pm:

It's pretty easy really, if you don't like it here go post somewhere else.

Or start your own forum. FoS never means you'll get that on someone else's property. Most of you may not want me in their lounge saying what I say here, I wouldn't put up with it either. But that doesn't mean you can't speak and publish what you want or take your soapbox to the street.. Then it's my choice if I listen to you and you get to say whatever you want. This forum is FD's property, just because you don't get everything you want to say here, and it's pretty bloody free, doesn't mean he is barring you from your FoS.

......FoS is about what you can say in public, this is private property.........

.....FoS is about what you can say, not where you get to say it.

As this guy found out. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-31669061

Quote:

A leading Russian opposition politician, former Deputy Prime Minister Boris Nemtsov, has been shot dead in Moscow, Russian officials say.

If only he had shut up when he received death threats.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 4:48pm

Setanta wrote on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 3:10pm:

Panther wrote on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 12:00pm:

Setanta wrote on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 12:21am:

SweetLambo wrote on Feb 27^th, 2015 at 11:42pm:

It's pretty easy really, if you don't like it here go post somewhere else.

Or start your own forum. FoS never means you'll get that on someone else's property. Most of you may not want me in their lounge saying what I say here, I wouldn't put up with it either. But that doesn't mean you can't speak and publish what you want or take your soapbox to the street.. Then it's my choice if I listen to you and you get to say whatever you want. This forum is FD's property, just because you don't get everything you want to say here, and it's pretty bloody free, doesn't mean he is barring you from your FoS.

......FoS is about what you can say in public, this is private property.........

.....FoS is about what you can say, not where you get to say it.

As this guy found out. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-31669061

Quote:

A leading Russian opposition politician, former Deputy Prime Minister Boris Nemtsov, has been shot dead in Moscow, Russian officials say.

If only he had shut up when he received death threats.

I guess that's better than no answer at all http://i.imgur.com/oEenJEK.png

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Setanta on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 5:35pm

Panther wrote on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 4:48pm:

Setanta wrote on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 3:10pm:

Panther wrote on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 12:00pm:

Setanta wrote on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 12:21am:

SweetLambo wrote on Feb 27^th, 2015 at 11:42pm:

It's pretty easy really, if you don't like it here go post somewhere else.

Or start your own forum. FoS never means you'll get that on someone else's property. Most of you may not want me in their lounge saying what I say here, I wouldn't put up with it either. But that doesn't mean you can't speak and publish what you want or take your soapbox to the street.. Then it's my choice if I listen to you and you get to say whatever you want. This forum is FD's property, just because you don't get everything you want to say here, and it's pretty bloody free, doesn't mean he is barring you from your FoS.

......FoS is about what you can say in public, this is private property.........

.....FoS is about what you can say, not where you get to say it.

As this guy found out. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-31669061

Quote:

A leading Russian opposition politician, former Deputy Prime Minister Boris Nemtsov, has been shot dead in Moscow, Russian officials say.

If only he had shut up when he received death threats.

I guess that's better than no answer at all http://i.imgur.com/oEenJEK.png

I thought that was an answer to "Expressing your Freedom of Speech, just like most any other action, may have it's downside, it may be subject to a 'penalty' [/b]but as I've said before, the 'penalty' only occurs AFTER you've already exercised your Freedom of Speech"

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 5:43pm

Setanta wrote on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 3:10pm:

If only he had shut up when he received death threats.

is there a politician alive that has never received death threats????????????..

maybe you can name them...

the 17 killed because of Charlie hebdo were not politicians as far as I know..

again you probably know more than I.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Setanta on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 6:05pm

cods wrote on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 5:43pm:

Setanta wrote on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 3:10pm:

If only he had shut up when he received death threats.

So now it depends on the job they do too? Which jobs are still allowed to speak after death threats are made?

edit: I notice over here you take a different view to the one you have on the cartoonists.

cods wrote on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 3:16pm:

pretty average for Russia no stab in the leg with an umbrella..

I am sure they have a deputy opposition leader..
business as usual

No big deal, hire more cartoonists? Business as usual?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 6:20pm

Setanta wrote on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 6:05pm:

cods wrote on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 5:43pm:

Setanta wrote on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 3:10pm:

If only he had shut up when he received death threats.

So now it depends on the job they do too? Which jobs are still allowed to speak after death threats are made?

well lets put it this way...

if I was a pollie I would know at least 49% of the people didnt want me to run the country...otherwise I wouldnt be opposition leader.. ::) ::)

so straight away I think to myself.. if I received a death threat... hey I have really upset someone...some one doesnt like what I am saying I WILL DO IF I GET ELECTED.

but then I would be told carry on as death threats go with the territory...... why do you think they are surrounded by body guards 24/7.. or havent you noticed?..

if I was a cartoonist and drew pics of someones god that drew their wrath at such a level they threatened me with death....and I have seen evidence of them carrying out their threats...

I would take notice I would rethink how important is that cartoon to the world...will it change mankind for the better... maybe not.. so I would not risk drawing said cartoon...even more so if it meant the death of my fellow workmates..

cringe worthy I know.. wimp... yep put my hand up...

the opposition leader would have had many guards I am sure...

but as far as I know those cartoonists didnt have guards...just a couple of cops at the front door..of the building.and they were first to get shot..

it all depends who is being threatened adn for what reasons....some can be avoided others well ????? I cant answer for everyone..I can only say what I would do if it was humanly possible....

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Mar 4^th, 2015 at 6:53am

cods wrote on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 9:36am:

freediver wrote on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 9:26am:

No-one cares cods, and your attempts to use the terrorist attacks to draw attention to your 'plight' are not exactly helping your cause.

You think freedom of speech is going down because this forum has rules?

Setanta wrote on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 6:05pm:

cods wrote on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 5:43pm:

Setanta wrote on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 3:10pm:

If only he had shut up when he received death threats.

pretty average for Russia no stab in the leg with an umbrella..

I am sure they have a deputy opposition leader..
business as usual

No big deal, hire more cartoonists? Business as usual?

Cods cannot think more than one very simple step ahead to what the consequences might be. She is the ultimate frog in a pot. You could turn her into a slave by taking away one right at a time, and she would defend you every step of the way, so long as you gesticulated wildly so she knew how deeply you felt about it.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Mar 4^th, 2015 at 7:07am

freediver wrote on Mar 4^th, 2015 at 6:53am:

cods wrote on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 9:36am:

freediver wrote on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 9:26am:

No-one cares cods, and your attempts to use the terrorist attacks to draw attention to your 'plight' are not exactly helping your cause.

You think freedom of speech is going down because this forum has rules?

yes.... the rules do not apply to everyone... I cannot stop you from posting on my thread but you can bully me into not posting on your feedback if you dont like what I say.. bang your gone...

I am not complaining about the RULES...as far as I know I didnt even break one of the rules....

so you are abusing the FoS...

as I said I call it a double standard on your part...

If I break the speed limit I pay a fine...I broke a rule.

where did I break a rule in the forum rule book.. on feedback???...

you are the one that claimed he would fight to the death for his FOS... not I...

I am saying you have restricted my fos by banning me from one of the main boards on here...

one where I can contact the management should I have the need....I get no response to PM...

as far as I can tell I am blocked from admin completely.... and have no idea why???...

I question YOUR VERSION of FOS..

which seems to me to be the opposite of

fighting to the death for.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by it_is_the_light on Mar 4^th, 2015 at 7:19am

cods wrote on Mar 4^th, 2015 at 7:07am:

freediver wrote on Mar 4^th, 2015 at 6:53am:

cods wrote on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 9:36am:

freediver wrote on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 9:26am:

No-one cares cods, and your attempts to use the terrorist attacks to draw attention to your 'plight' are not exactly helping your cause.

You think freedom of speech is going down because this forum has rules?

many blessings beloved cods

you are grounded in ego and fear

this is ok and cool as it is forgiven

so let it be written , so let it be done

and so be it

namaste

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by it_is_the_light on Mar 4^th, 2015 at 7:22am

cods wrote on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 6:20pm:

Setanta wrote on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 6:05pm:

cods wrote on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 5:43pm:

Setanta wrote on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 3:10pm:

If only he had shut up when he received death threats.

So now it depends on the job they do too? Which jobs are still allowed to speak after death threats are made?

many blessings

this post is quite manic and grounded in fear based scenarios

like ' what if ' this and ' what if that and then this might happen ! '

beloved look at your life and count your blessings

rather

than searching for everything that is perceived wrong

arising from a countless number of ' what if ' scenarios

yet either way beloved

be at peace

namaste

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Mar 4^th, 2015 at 7:32am

it_is_the_light wrote on Mar 4^th, 2015 at 7:22am:

manly possible....

many blessings

this post is quite manic and grounded in fear based scenarios

like ' what if ' this and ' what if that and then this might happen ! '

beloved look at your life and count your blessings

rather

than searching for everything that is perceived wrong

arising from a countless number of ' what if ' scenarios

yet either way beloved

be at peace

namaste

I do light I count my blessings every day..

I have NO FEAR I can assure you..

just seek the truth ... thats all..

amen to that.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by it_is_the_light on Mar 4^th, 2015 at 7:34am

cods wrote on Mar 4^th, 2015 at 7:32am:

it_is_the_light wrote on Mar 4^th, 2015 at 7:22am:

I do light I count my blessings every day..

I have NO FEAR I can assure you..

just seek the truth ... thats all..

amen to that.

many blessings beloved cods

you are a fine and honourable being

much love and light is within you

it is plain to see

namaste

- : ) =

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Mar 4^th, 2015 at 7:54am

it_is_the_light wrote on Mar 4^th, 2015 at 7:34am:

cods wrote on Mar 4^th, 2015 at 7:32am:

it_is_the_light wrote on Mar 4^th, 2015 at 7:22am:

I do light I count my blessings every day..

I have NO FEAR I can assure you..

just seek the truth ... thats all..

amen to that.

many blessings beloved cods

you are a fine and honourable being

much love and light is within you

it is plain to see

namaste

- : ) =

thats not what most say.. ;D ;D ;D

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by it_is_the_light on Mar 4^th, 2015 at 7:56am

yes I know

lol

- : ) =

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Setanta on Mar 4^th, 2015 at 10:13am

cods wrote on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 6:20pm:

Setanta wrote on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 6:05pm:

cods wrote on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 5:43pm:

Setanta wrote on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 3:10pm:

If only he had shut up when he received death threats.

So now it depends on the job they do too? Which jobs are still allowed to speak after death threats are made?

Well Cods, the Ruski certainly didn't have bodyguards, he may still be kicking if he had, what does that do to your theory? As you say Charlie at least had a couple of coppers.

Really there is no difference, both had death threats, both kept going because they believed in what they were doing. That doesn't mean I have to agree with what they were doing but they were both speaking out in their own way. If no-one did that we would be living in a world dictatorship by now as all anyone would have to do is be willing to kill for their cause to make everyone shut up.

Should Lambie shut up now because of threats?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Mar 4^th, 2015 at 10:36am

Setanta wrote on Mar 4^th, 2015 at 10:13am:

Should Lambie shut up now because of threats?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Mar 4^th, 2015 at 1:11pm

cods wrote on Mar 4^th, 2015 at 7:07am:

freediver wrote on Mar 4^th, 2015 at 6:53am:

cods wrote on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 9:36am:

freediver wrote on Feb 28^th, 2015 at 9:26am:

No-one cares cods, and your attempts to use the terrorist attacks to draw attention to your 'plight' are not exactly helping your cause.

You think freedom of speech is going down because this forum has rules?

Cods it is not "my" version of freedom of speech. It is "the" version. There is no double standard on my part, only a complete inability on your part to comprehend the standard.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by PZ547 on Mar 4^th, 2015 at 1:40pm

.
Reminds me of ebay. Someone sold me a fake emerald. Advertised as 'genuine Colombian natural emerald, size such and such'. Free postage

I emailed the seller several times and he told me he'd bought it in Cairns as an engagement ring from a 'reputable dealer', receipt to come. Receipt didn't arrive by the time bidding started

There were photos on ebay which did show a natural emerald of the size advertised as far as I could tell

14 people bid for it. I won it. Soon as the auction ended the seller emailed to tell me postage (registered, signed-for) would be $17. I'm not stingy, but he'd said in big letters in the auction that it would be free postage. I emailed to remind him

Emerald arrived. Didn't look right at all. Took it to three separate jewellers of 'good reputation'. All told me it was simulated. One even showed me the exact ring in his showcase. Not natural at all

Emailed seller who told me I was lying. It 'was so' a genuine, natural emerald, he said, and had come from his grandmother's ' Californian estate'

Not happy. Emailed ebay and told the story

Automated email from ebay

Emailed back

Automated email from ebay

several times

Ebay Terms and Conditions at that time stipulated sellers must leave their Item Description photos online, on ebay, for three months

Ebay told me I would have to provide them with the sellers Item Description photos

but they were gone

removed

Seller had contravened eBay's rules

Emailed ebay and told them

Too bad, so sad, said ebay. No photos? What do you expect us to do about it?

Emailed ebay again

Automated emails in response

Emailed seller

Get stuffed, he said in largest possible font

several times

So I went online and found a place where people could send their complaints if they'd been ripped off by an online seller

Spent all weekened composing a massive explanatory email to them

sent it

never heard a word back, lol. I think they were connected to the CIA

So I wrote to someone who I believed was The Head of Ebay

no response

In the end, I gave the ring to my daughter. She doesn't like it much I suppose because she's never worn it

I stayed away from ebay for close to a year

I was so disillusioned. I'd been buying away under the delusion I was covered by Trust and Safety ebay. I thought they had a handle on security matters and would recognise my case - my rights - and uphold their own rules

Ebay didn't give a poo

I can laugh now at how indignant and upset I was at the time

Felt very betrayed

Then I found out it happens to almost everyone at some point

I'm forced to the realisation, especially lately, of how short Life really is. I know it must be, because I catch myself saying ' A while ago', and 'A few years ago'. Then realise I'm speaking of twenty years back

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Mar 4^th, 2015 at 3:08pm

freediver wrote on Mar 4^th, 2015 at 1:11pm:

Cods it is not "my" version of freedom of speech. It is "the" version. There is no double standard on my part, only a complete inability on your part to comprehend the standard.

can you explain who created the OZPOL RULE BOOK then?....

and how gave you the power to send someone into cyberspace at will....suffocating my fos..

sure I can whinge to you on other boards.. but if I want to complain about the system I cannot contact you..

you only come on here to spread lies about me....otherwise you are have no interest...

of course YOU have a double standard...every knows it..only you live in ... ignorance.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Mar 4^th, 2015 at 3:10pm

PZ547 wrote on Mar 4^th, 2015 at 1:40pm:

I can laugh now at how indignant and upset I was at the time

Felt very betrayed

Then I found out it happens to almost everyone at some point

isnt that really a matter of FREEDOM OF CHOICE and not SPEECH? ::) ::)

no one FORCED you to buy the ring

yet someone has FORCED myself off feedback

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Mar 5^th, 2015 at 2:24pm

cods wrote on Mar 4^th, 2015 at 3:08pm:

freediver wrote on Mar 4^th, 2015 at 1:11pm:

Cods it is not "my" version of freedom of speech. It is "the" version. There is no double standard on my part, only a complete inability on your part to comprehend the standard.

You gave me that power cods, by attaching so much emotional baggage to your "right" to use this forum. You have no such right. Me restricting your use of it does not infringe your freedom of speech. It has clouded your judgement to the absurd extent that you equate it with terrorists murdering cartoonists in an effort to make everyone afraid to mock Muhammed.

I did not spread any lies about you. You have even conceded that your position here is one of spineless appeasement of terrorists. It was you who argued that appeasing terrorists would somehow prevent them from using terrorism to get what they want.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Aussie on Mar 5^th, 2015 at 3:00pm

Quote:

Me restricting your use of it does not infringe your freedom of speech.

Of course not, and 1 + 1 = 3.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Mar 5^th, 2015 at 3:25pm

Aussie what concept of freedom of speech dictates that websites cannot choose what to publish?

It sounds to my like you and cods are simply trying to hitch your whining about mistreatment on this website to the plight of the murdered cartoonists.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Aussie on Mar 5^th, 2015 at 4:00pm

freediver wrote on Mar 5^th, 2015 at 3:25pm:

It might sound like that to you, but you don't get to put words in my mouth.

I agree, you can set the Rules about what can be said and posted here. Why can't you agree that amounts to a lack of freedom of speech here?

I can, of course, take you all the way down that primrose path if you like, but I know you'll bail out.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Mar 5^th, 2015 at 5:08pm

freediver wrote on Mar 5^th, 2015 at 2:24pm:

cods wrote on Mar 4^th, 2015 at 3:08pm:

freediver wrote on Mar 4^th, 2015 at 1:11pm:

Cods it is not "my" version of freedom of speech. It is "the" version. There is no double standard on my part, only a complete inability on your part to comprehend the standard.

that is not what I am about.. thats the way YOU choose to interpret it....and spread your views... I call them LIES...so you see if I have a problem understanding the difference between fos and your rules..

then so do you have a problem understanding my intentions...

you dont mind people insulting me..

but they cannot insult you...

thats your version of FoS...

if a person is asked not to draw insulting pictures of a prophet...

I think thats quite reasonable to ask that

you on the other hand feel its an infringement on your FoS

yet you cannot see thats the restriction you place on others....

hilarious.... >:( >:( >:( >:( >:(

take the blinkers off and see what others can see.. for a change

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Mar 5^th, 2015 at 5:13pm

freediver wrote on Mar 5^th, 2015 at 3:25pm:

thats the way I see you.... your the one that talks about appeasement all the time...as if drawing a cartoon infringes on anyones fos... yet to block people from one section of a forum..without any prior warning is very rude you claimed the =terrorists are non negotiable... ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

what do you call your blocking???? n o word no right of reply.. nothing..

you see you dont have to come on this thread until you have had much to think about and then repeat yourself adnauseam to pass the buck....

you have made it loud and clear whom you like and dislike..who has fos and who doesnt..

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Mar 5^th, 2015 at 5:16pm

I believe now, as we always have had, the Freedom of Speech here, but I am acutely aware that if I break posting guidelines, as outlined in the "RULES", I run the risk of suspension or even banishment. The severity would probably be dependent on how flagrant of an infringement I chose.

Those penalties though would only come into play AFTER, I repeat AFTER I've said
what I wanted to say -- after I exercised my Freedom of Speech -- NEVER BEFORE.

Inconvenient to some, but a fact nevertheless, for none be so deaf as those who refuse to hear.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Aussie on Mar 5^th, 2015 at 6:35pm

Panther wrote on Mar 5^th, 2015 at 5:16pm:

That proposition ignores the reality that Rules inhibit or scare off those who would like to say something in breach of the Rules.

I want to stress that I agree FD is totally correct in having the position he is entitled to have Rules which do inhibit what people may say here. It is his dung hill.

My point is simple. He cannot be a champion for Freedom of Speech while he has said Rules which restrict or inhibit or deter someone from saying what they want here.

Ergo, absolute Freedom of Speech simply does not exist anywhere. It is a myth.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Mar 5^th, 2015 at 9:24pm

Aussie wrote on Mar 5^th, 2015 at 6:35pm:

That proposition ignores the reality that Rules inhibit or scare off those who would like to say something in breach of the Rules.

I want to stress that I agree FD is totally correct in having the position he is entitled to have Rules which do inhibit what people may say here. It is his dung hill.

My point is simple. He cannot be a champion for Freedom of Speech while he has said Rules which restrict or inhibit or deter someone from saying what they want here.

Ergo, absolute Freedom of Speech simply does not exist anywhere. It is a myth

that has been my whole point... but fd will not have it...

he thinks by saying no to an insulting cartoon is infringing on his fOS. and he would kill to preserve his FOS....but he is not ashamed of taking away someone elses

who may prefer to engage on feedback...

rules btw are not LAWS...

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Mar 5^th, 2015 at 10:15pm

cods wrote on Mar 5^th, 2015 at 9:24pm:

....rules btw are not LAWS...

Different sound, different spelling,
but when you are in a place where the rule of law (hey, that sounds familiar doesn't it?), is simply grouped under a term called "RULES", the terms RULE & LAW are the same if the maker of the so called RULES can enforce those RULES, as one would enforce a LAW, with the same force of LAW.

Maybe they wouldn't have the same effect in a court of law, but in the private places where rules are enforced in a similar fashion as a law, they are in essence the same.

We are not in a court of law..........we are in a private place.

Oh, BTW, freediver has the right to say he champions the Right to Free Speech, all the while asserting his ability & right to enforce rules restricting someone who breaks the rules he created for his forum, even if what the offender did was simply exercise their right to free speech in expressing something that was contrary to the rules.

Why?

Because freediver has the Freedom of Speech protecting his right to simply say that he can in his private place -- this forum.......period......end of argument........an argument you can never, ever win.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Mar 6^th, 2015 at 7:43am

Panther wrote on Mar 5^th, 2015 at 10:15pm:

te Yesterday at 9:24pm:
....rules btw are not LAWS...

Different sound, different spelling,
but when you are in a place where the rule of law (hey, that sounds familiar doesn't it?), is simply grouped under a term called "RULES", the terms RULE & LAW are the same if the maker of the so called RULES can enforce those RULES, as one would enforce a LAW, with the same force of LAW.

Maybe they wouldn't have the same effect in a court of law, but in the private places where rules are enforced in a similar fashion as a law, they are in essence the same.

We are not in a court of law..........we are in a private place.

Oh, BTW, freediver has the right to say he champions the Right to Free Speech, all the while asserting his ability & right to enforce rules restricting someone who breaks the rules he created for his forum, even if what the offender did was simply exercise their right to free speech in expressing something that was contrary to the rules.

Why?

Because freediver has the Freedom of Speech protecting his right to simply say that he can in his private place -- this forum.......period......end of argument........an argument you can never, ever win.

only so far.. there are now laws in place...check facebook and twitter those who are self styled OWNERS..do have responsibilities...NOW..

ok thats stretching this I know and not my intentions at all.

to me he has a double standard.. I am not saying its not is right as its his forum...and has every right to have his rules...its what we sign up up for.. ::) ::)..

all I am saying is he has one rule for himself and one for everyone else....btw he has said in the past this forum is not a democracy.....so please dont go on wasting your time telling me what rights fd has.. we ALL KNOW thank you...

you think being a self appointed emperor makes him more equal in the real world...

but I dont..not when I am talking about someone who tells us he would KILL for his FOS..

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Mar 6^th, 2015 at 9:30am

cods wrote on Mar 6^th, 2015 at 7:43am:

Panther wrote on Mar 5^th, 2015 at 10:15pm:

I guess you might be talkn' about me too then. :)

I'd kill for the Freedom of Speech alongside all the other Freedoms we've, most of us have, come to take for granted.

I already have, & I would again in a heartbeat if the threat was sure certain, & my services were required & asked for.

No, I might not be able to plunk a 50 cent sized piece at 800 meters on a regular basis as I once could, but I can still sight in a hub cap on a barn at 500 meters, & a trash can lid at 1400 meters with 'dead on accuracy'. ;)

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Svengali on Mar 6^th, 2015 at 12:39pm

Panther wrote on Mar 6^th, 2015 at 9:30am:

cods wrote on Mar 6^th, 2015 at 7:43am:

Panther wrote on Mar 5^th, 2015 at 10:15pm:

What a load of Walter Mitty crap.

You are evidently confused with freedom of Spetch.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Mar 6^th, 2015 at 4:39pm

Svengali wrote on Mar 6^th, 2015 at 12:39pm:

Panther wrote on Mar 6^th, 2015 at 9:30am:

cods wrote on Mar 6^th, 2015 at 7:43am:

Panther wrote on Mar 5^th, 2015 at 10:15pm:

What a load of Walter Mitty crap.

You are evidently confused with freedom of Spetch.

Gotcha!!..... http://imgur.com/6jAsC9L.gif ........That's Freedom of Speech fer ya.......hope it don't cause ya nightmares. http://imgur.com/QEmwAPx.gif

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Mar 6^th, 2015 at 6:03pm

Panther wrote on Mar 6^th, 2015 at 4:39pm:

What a load of Walter Mitty crap.

You are evidently confused with freedom of Spetch.

Gotcha!!..... ........That's Freedom of Speech fer ya.......hope it don't cause ya nightmares

sven does have a point some of your ramblings remind me of light...I give up after the first line....

I start worrying if I start to understand it... ;D ;D ;D ;D

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Mar 6^th, 2015 at 7:08pm

Aussie wrote on Mar 5^th, 2015 at 4:00pm:

freediver wrote on Mar 5^th, 2015 at 3:25pm:

Because freedom of speech does not have a baby every time someone starts a new website Aussie. Posting here is not a right. It is not a freedom. It is a privilege that is granted to you on my whim.

"freedom of speech here" is just another pathetic attempt from you and cods to hitch your whiny victimhood bitching to the actual victims of Islamic terrorism.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by cods on Mar 6^th, 2015 at 7:32pm

freediver wrote on Mar 6^th, 2015 at 7:08pm:

Aussie wrote on Mar 5^th, 2015 at 4:00pm:

freediver wrote on Mar 5^th, 2015 at 3:25pm:

;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

a privilege... hilarious....where would your forum be with members??.. hummmmmmmmm..

where would woollies and coles be without customers....hummmmmmmmmmmmmmm

try to be nice to your members you would look even worse just talking to yourself..

well maybe and light and bobby......not sure which would be worse to be honest..

the 3 Amigos...I can see you storming the ISIL outpost.....

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Aussie on Mar 6^th, 2015 at 7:36pm

freediver wrote on Mar 6^th, 2015 at 7:08pm:

Aussie wrote on Mar 5^th, 2015 at 4:00pm:

freediver wrote on Mar 5^th, 2015 at 3:25pm:

Of course not. Freedom of Speech (a fanciful notion which simply does not exist) has nothing to do with the birth of babies, and that's gotta be a great thing freediver. No doubt about it.

And there you go again, desperately trying to put words into my mouth about Islam.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Mar 6^th, 2015 at 7:45pm

Quote:

Why can't you agree that amounts to a lack of freedom of speech here?

Because it's

Quote:

a fanciful notion which simply does not exist

Aussie just because you are bewildered by the concepts that other people talk about does not mean they don't know what they are talking about.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Aussie on Mar 6^th, 2015 at 7:51pm

freediver wrote on Mar 6^th, 2015 at 7:45pm:

Quote:

Why can't you agree that amounts to a lack of freedom of speech here?

Because it's

[quote]a fanciful notion which simply does not exist

[/quote]

Sheeet, and it's taken how many pages for you to finally concede there is no such thing as Freedom of Speech! Great.

If that does not exist, then neither does your alleged appeasement to protect that which does not exist.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Aussie on Mar 6^th, 2015 at 8:14pm

Nifty and sneaky edit there freediver. I guess you can do that.

Quote:

Aussie just because you are bewildered by the concepts that other people talk about does not mean they don't know what they are talking about.

I'm pretty good at understanding clear statements, but I find it impossible to comprehend you when, for example, somehow in a Thread about Freedom of Speech, I find myself having to understand voodoo about the birth of babies.

In any event, you have finally conceded the point cods and I have been at you about for how many pages?

Over to you on appeasement of those who attack that which you now admit does not exist, Big Boy.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Mar 6^th, 2015 at 9:40pm

No Aussie, you are still confused.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Aussie on Mar 6^th, 2015 at 9:46pm

freediver wrote on Mar 6^th, 2015 at 9:40pm:

No Aussie, you are still confused.

freediver, just because you are bewildered by the concepts that other people talk about does not mean they don't know what they are talking about.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Mar 6^th, 2015 at 9:59pm

So tell us Aussie, what does freedom of speech mean to you?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Aussie on Mar 7^th, 2015 at 2:38pm

freediver wrote on Mar 6^th, 2015 at 9:59pm:

So tell us Aussie, what does freedom of speech mean to you?

It's quite simple. It is what either Government (in the case of Forums, the owner) allows you to have, or what someone with a bigger gun let's you get away with.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Svengali on Mar 8^th, 2015 at 12:35pm

In regard to freedom of speech Freediver is a blathering hypocrite.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Mar 8^th, 2015 at 12:46pm

Svengali wrote on Mar 8^th, 2015 at 12:35pm:

In regard to freedom of speech Freediver is a blathering hypocrite.

And how?

Kindly explain your personal slur upon Freediver's integrity.....if you can.

Are you an expert on hypocrisy?

Then again maybe you're just content to cower on the sidelines & then whimper out your flaccid epithets
without providing any substance to your empty http://i.imgur.com/p7HRYOB.png personal attack.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Svengali on Mar 8^th, 2015 at 2:50pm

Panther wrote on Mar 8^th, 2015 at 12:46pm:

Svengali wrote on Mar 8^th, 2015 at 12:35pm:

In regard to freedom of speech Freediver is a blathering hypocrite.

Freediver incriminates itself ...

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?action=post;num=1421614428;virboard=;quote=780;title=PostReply

freediver wrote on Mar 6^th, 2015 at 7:08pm:

... Posting here is not a right. It is not a freedom. It is a privilege that is granted to you on my whim. ...

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by DreamRyderX on Mar 8^th, 2015 at 4:54pm

Svengali wrote on Mar 8^th, 2015 at 2:50pm:

Panther wrote on Mar 8^th, 2015 at 12:46pm:

Svengali wrote on Mar 8^th, 2015 at 12:35pm:

In regard to freedom of speech Freediver is a blathering hypocrite.

Freediver incriminates itself ...

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?action=post;num=1421614428;virboard=;quote=780;title=PostReply

freediver wrote on Mar 6^th, 2015 at 7:08pm:

... Posting here is not a right. It is not a freedom. It is a privilege that is granted to you on my whim. ...

So, now you've proven you know how to copy, paste, & quote, lets see if you know anything about independent thinking......now this is important.....interpret what it means, & how does it make him as you called him, a "blathering hypocrite"?

Or, are you just regurgitating someone else's words?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Svengali on Mar 8^th, 2015 at 5:31pm

Panther wrote on Mar 8^th, 2015 at 4:54pm:

Svengali wrote on Mar 8^th, 2015 at 2:50pm:

Panther wrote on Mar 8^th, 2015 at 12:46pm:

Svengali wrote on Mar 8^th, 2015 at 12:35pm:

In regard to freedom of speech Freediver is a blathering hypocrite.

Freediver incriminates itself ...

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?action=post;num=1421614428;virboard=;quote=780;title=PostReply

freediver wrote on Mar 6^th, 2015 at 7:08pm:

... Posting here is not a right. It is not a freedom. It is a privilege that is granted to you on my whim. ...

WetDreamerX attempts to conduct its pathetic, wimpy version of the Spanish inquisition.

Your hero (or alter ego) Freediver demands unconditional freedom of speech for the French cartoonists but provides limited and conditional freedom of speech on its forum based on it's "whim".

I believe Freediver's conditional freedom of speech is based less on whim than on Islamophobia, xenophobia and racism.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Aussie on Mar 8^th, 2015 at 5:39pm

Svengali wrote on Mar 8^th, 2015 at 5:31pm:

Panther wrote on Mar 8^th, 2015 at 4:54pm:

Svengali wrote on Mar 8^th, 2015 at 2:50pm:

Panther wrote on Mar 8^th, 2015 at 12:46pm:

Svengali wrote on Mar 8^th, 2015 at 12:35pm:

In regard to freedom of speech Freediver is a blathering hypocrite.

Freediver incriminates itself ...

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?action=post;num=1421614428;virboard=;quote=780;title=PostReply

freediver wrote on Mar 6^th, 2015 at 7:08pm:

... Posting here is not a right. It is not a freedom. It is a privilege that is granted to you on my whim. ...

WetDreamX tries to conduct its wimpy version of the Spanish inquisition.

Your hero (or alter ego) Freediver demands unconditional freedom of speech for the French cartoonists but provides limited and conditional freedom of speech on its forum based on it's "whim".

I believe Freediver's conditional freedom of speech is based less on whim than on Islamophobia, xenophobia and racism.

I would never have said that.

It is like being pregnant. You either are, or you are not. There are no degrees of pregnancy and if there is a freedom......that means unconditional, unrestricted, unlimited by whim or gun. It is either absolute or it is not a freedom.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Svengali on Mar 8^th, 2015 at 6:18pm

Aussie wrote on Mar 8^th, 2015 at 5:39pm:

Svengali wrote on Mar 8^th, 2015 at 5:31pm:

Panther wrote on Mar 8^th, 2015 at 4:54pm:

Svengali wrote on Mar 8^th, 2015 at 2:50pm:

Panther wrote on Mar 8^th, 2015 at 12:46pm:

Svengali wrote on Mar 8^th, 2015 at 12:35pm:

In regard to freedom of speech Freediver is a blathering hypocrite.

Freediver incriminates itself ...

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?action=post;num=1421614428;virboard=;quote=780;title=PostReply

freediver wrote on Mar 6^th, 2015 at 7:08pm:

... Posting here is not a right. It is not a freedom. It is a privilege that is granted to you on my whim. ...

Whether or not you would have said that, do you believe it?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Aussie on Mar 8^th, 2015 at 6:30pm

Of course I do.

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by freediver on Mar 10^th, 2015 at 12:12pm

Aussie wrote on Mar 7^th, 2015 at 2:38pm:

freediver wrote on Mar 6^th, 2015 at 9:59pm:

So tell us Aussie, what does freedom of speech mean to you?

It's quite simple. It is what either Government (in the case of Forums, the owner) allows you to have, or what someone with a bigger gun let's you get away with.

So you have been attaching two very different meanings to it, and pretending it is the same thing? No wonder you are going round in circles.

Quote:

Your hero (or alter ego) Freediver demands unconditional freedom of speech for the French cartoonists but provides limited and conditional freedom of speech on its forum based on it's "whim".

Neither of these are true. This website is not a spring of freedom. You have serious issues if you think your freedom of speech in any way hinges on what one website will publish on your behalf.

Quote:

It is like being pregnant. You either are, or you are not. There are no degrees of pregnancy and if there is a freedom......that means unconditional, unrestricted, unlimited by whim or gun. It is either absolute or it is not a freedom.

But it changes depending on which website you are trying to post on? Isn't that like saying you definitely pregnant, or definitely not, but it depends on who is asking?

Perhaps you think you have no freedom of speech at all until you are free to post idiotic garbage on every website in existence?

Title: Re: FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
Post by Tap on Mar 23^rd, 2015 at 6:01am

I'll drink to that.

Spot on FD. +1