Wetlook World ForumCurrent time: Tue 28/05/24 14:28:27 GMT |
Message # 17011.1.1.1.1 Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Way off topic Date: Fri 08/07/05 04:46:02 GMT Name: Waterspaniel |
Report Abuse or Problem to Nigel at Minxmovies
|
That's my point. I'm perfectly aware of all the points Paul has made, that these actions were taken by individuals, not the government, and they also had every right to do it. But as I noted, what I find disturbing is the total intolerance and animosity with which it was done. It seems to me that good American citizens would be following the principles of frre speech, freedom of religion, etc. Because once the citizens stop recognizing those rights, how long is it before the government also stops recognizing those rights as well, a la Iraq under Saddam Hussein or Nazi Germany? Hitler was able to rise to power because the masses supported him. Once a leader or principle (like free speech) loses support of the masses, it tends to fade away. That was my point, and that's what I find disturbing. As Voltaire said, I might not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it. And that was Voltaire, a good citizen speaking, not the government. |
In reply to Message (17011.1.1.1) Re: Re: Re: Way off topic
By waterjoe - Fri 08/07/05 00:08:07 GMT But the way, how quite a lot of people in the U.S. are reacting on other opinions (like from the Dixie Chicks), is not good. It's hysterical, fanatic and even paranoic. And this shows a very big problem. It shows, how low is the education, the tolerance and the knowledge about other people.
|
In reply to Message (17011.1.1) Re: Re: Way off topic
By Paul - Thu 07/07/05 19:55:53 GMT It always amazes me how people, both in the US and elsewhere, simply do not understand the concept of "free speech." Free speech, in its simplest terms, means that the GOVERNMENT cannot prosecute you for your political speech, no matter how stupid, ignorant, relevant, etc. it might be. It does NOT mean that you are guaranteed not to suffer the consequences accorded by those outside the government, who, by the way, also choose to exercise their free speech by denouncing yours. All the reactions you site were taken, not by government entitities, but by commercial producers and distributors, or individuals exercising their right to purchase the material and destroy it. In a broader sense, the US Constitution is a delineation of the things the government CAN NOT do - it imposes no limitations on individuals (the laws passed by the various legislative bodies do that).
In the incidents mentioned, the Dixie Chicks made a perfectly legal, albeit studpid remark. They were not arrested, prosecuted or fined. However, they did suffer some consequences because many of those who would normally buy their music CHOSE NOT TO, or bought it and then destroyed it, in the same protected free speech manner that the band itself utilized. If you don't understand the difference, then perhaps you need to study up on history and government theory. Just remember, FREE is not the same as NO CONSEQUENCES.
Paul |
In reply to Message (17011.1) Re: Way off topic
By Waterspaniel - Thu 07/07/05 17:28:03 GMT That's something that has bothered me for awhile here in the U.S. - increasing intolerance for opposing viewpoints. Some people get so caught up in their own rhetoric and ideas they forget what freedom of speech means. Look at the Dixie Chicks, for example. Granted, insulting the president at a music concert isn't the smartest PR move - people go to a music concert to hear music, not politics. But, they had the right to do it, even President Bush said they had the right to do it. So what happens when they do? Their CDs are crunched up, and they're banned from TV, radio, and awards shows. And I don't believe they've had a hit record since. Is that the freedom of speech the United States of America is about? I sure as hell hope not. |
In reply to Message (17011) Way off topic
By AnthonyX - anthonyx@jowc.net Thu 07/07/05 16:55:38 GMT I wasn't going to say anything on this subject, but after seeing all the other threads, here's my two cents...
Yes, it was a despicable act of indiscriminate violence committed against innocent civilians. And it was indiscriminate. London is very much a cosmopolitan city these days, making the bombings an act committed against people of every race, religion, and walk of life. Although on a smaller scale, it is reminiscent of 9/11. I feel for those who have been touched by this incident and am thankful that noone I know was in harm's way. It may only be a matter of time before such things happen on Canadian soil.
This has been a tragic day, and there are divided opinions as to who was responsible. It is reasonable to assume that Al Qaeda was behind it, but without some form of confirmation, it is only opinion and speculation. There are at least a few other possibilities besides Al Qaeda, even if that's where all the clues are currently pointing. Why shout down an opinion just because it differs from yours, especially when the facts aren't all in?
At what point will enough have been said on this topic within this forum? It's geopolitics and we come to this forum for other purposes... don't we?
|
Report Abuse or Problem to Nigel at Minxmovies
If you enjoy this forum, then please make a small donation to help with running costs:
(you can change amount)
|
[ This page took 0.115 seconds to generate ]