Header Image (book)

aowheader.3.2.gif

Thursday, June 27, 2013

Giving Offense


Addendum from AOW: related material.

18 comments:

  1. There were several comments here earlier.

    What happened to them and why?

    ReplyDelete
  2. FT,
    I have no idea about the comments you mentioned because I've barely been near the computer today. I'll check my email.

    ReplyDelete
  3. More silencing of voices and about the ban on Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller from coming to the UK:

    Shooting the Messenger

    Speakers’ Corner at Hyde Park, London was once renowned for being the embodiment of freedom of speech where anyone could appear and speak about anything. In recent years, Islamist speakers have flocked to Hyde Park to deliver their rants and rampages.

    A British convert to Islam declaimed there, “I do not believe that absolute freedom of speech is a good thing. The West doesn’t really believe in that freedom either. No one is free to say exactly what they want.”

    The British authorities have come around to agreeing with him. Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller have been informed that they are banned from the United Kingdom.

    The letter to Robert Spencer informs him, in Orwellian language, that the Home Secretary believes that he should be excluded from the United Kingdom on the grounds that “your presence here is not conducive to the public good.”

    Some figures whose presence is conducive to the public good include Abu Qatada, an Al Qaeda figure who has yet to be deported, and Anjem Choudary, who helped inspire the recent bloody murder of Lee Rigby.

    MP Keith Vaz, who led a march calling for a ban on Salman Rushdie’s “The Satanic Verses,” called for the ban on Spencer and Geller. And the British government has complied.

    While every Islamist leader from around the world has found asylum and taxpayer-funded homes in the UK, Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller are too dangerous to allow into Londonistan.

    A Wikileaks cable revealed that fear of offending Muslims convinced British governments to grant asylum to Islamist leaders. And now fear of offending Muslims has convinced the British government to keep out the people warning of the danger.

    Instead of banning the terrorists, the UK has banned the messenger.

    It is a tragic day for Western civilization.

    ReplyDelete
  4. FT,
    Via comment notification, I found only the following disappeared comment to this blog post:

    Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "The Cost Of Giving Offense":

    Since the first amendment, apparently, has no jurisdiction in the blogging world, I recommend suspending the posting privileges of the odious eider and others of his obnoxious ilk. If an anti-Muslim individual may be silenced, why not purge and henceforth exclude the snide, truculent, most unwelcome prattle of a sneering seditionist?

    Either we accept the expression of every kind of thinking, or we become little Hitlers each ruling his own domain with an iron hand. I see no middle ground.

    -------------> Katharine Heartburn

    Posted by Anonymous to Always On Watch: Semper Vigilans at June 27, 2013 at 8:48:00 AM EDT

    ReplyDelete
  5. Upon taking a second look, the comment above was posted to THIS RELATED BLOG POST.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Dhimmitude in the extreme:

    FBI’s bus ads taken down over Muslim/terrorist stereotyping

    After a wave of criticism from politicians, advocacy groups and the public, 46 bus ads featuring photos of wanted terrorists will be taken down within the next few weeks, officials said Tuesday.

    The “Faces of Global Terrorism” ad was criticized for promoting stereotypes of Muslims and painting a broad brush against one group....


    Isn't that group jihadist terrorists? No longer are we allowed to picture them for fear of offending Mohammedans? Sheesh.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I think the UK simply wants to prevent Spencer from setting off the sand-monkeys. It is far cheaper to keep Spencer out of the UK than to have to spend a ton of money to rebuild entire neighborhoods that the SMs have burned to the ground. It really doesn't take much to set them off, you know.

    Of course, what the UK has lost ... or rather, given up, is far more precious than any run-down neighborhood. It goes back to the UK's immigration policies and their failure to listen to the common sense warnings of Enoch Powell.

    Thus ... the Brits deserve whatever befalls them in the future. IMO, it is a lost civilization.

    ReplyDelete
  8. More people need to speak up louder. In this case, since Western governments no longer wish to defend their citizens freedoms, it seems the squeakiest wheel gets the oil.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Britain, Britain. When or will you ever learn? Considering that was the tiny nation that stood up to Germany, this is pretty poor. I'd expect France to do this, not England.

    But it is easier. There is good reason the phrase 'shoot the messenger' exists. Ignore the problem, and it goes away, right? Wrong. But a forest fire can be ignored at first. Once its so big you can't ignore, you also cannot put it out without much destruction. England seems to want to wait for that. Fine, go ahead, led your nation be taken over... but don't expect our sympathy when it does.

    Though America needs to take a hint too!

    I'm all for free speech, even insulting and crass speech. I'm so blunt by nature I'd be a hypocrite not to. Same for freedom of faith. However, if these guys are calling out to murder people... lets at LEAST let the FBI monitor them! Apparently, until it was banned here, it helped to foil MANY terrorist acts. Freedom of religion comes under the law. And the law does state you CANNOT call for immediate violence! Yello, Feds, you forgot that extremely helpful clause?

    Why England of all places is having the issue I have no idea. They're rights are much more lax, they're country has a state religion, or just about, they are stubborn-necked people, and courageous people. Or were. They didn't take anything from anyone. That was Briticism in short (which we Americans inherited). Why then, are they of ALL people, so willing to give up without a fight?

    To me, that is the most worrying thing. Britain of 60 years ago would never have done this, if history is any proof. How then have they fallen so fast? And what does that say for us, who had all of Britain's pluck? I hesitate to say that our government has fallen that far. But, how much longer before it does?

    -Wildstar

    ReplyDelete
  10. Wildstar,
    In answer to your comment Britain of 60 years ago would never have done this, if history is any proof. How then have they fallen so fast?, please watch THIS SHORT VIDEO. Demographic reality!

    ReplyDelete
  11. Why do I still hear about Liberal white women, so otherwise self-absorbed, conjoining these inbred vermin?

    ReplyDelete
  12. Many of "us," who shall remain nameless, like to imagine "we" are true "Conservatives" and true "Christians," but that element of "we" (not I!) has gone right along with the dictates of Political Correctness, and takes vehement often petulant exception to the use of perfectly decent, respectable terms like "Negro," or "savage," and censors out quoted remarks by people who have used terms like "nigger," "spic," "gook," or "wog," and any remarks that refer to Jews by name at all -- even if respectful and flattering.

    I've had perfectly decent, serious-minded, carefully written posts illustrating a good point censored out of existence, because of fellow "conservatives" taking exception to one or two words I've used out of several hundred.

    This in my view is not only ignorant and narrow-minded, it is also cowardly and ultimately self-defeating.

    Either we have free speech or we do not. There is NO middle ground.

    Giving in to those who would force us to be more "sensitive," or "compassionate," -- according to THEIR definitions -- by surrendering our right of free expression, because "someone," "somewhere" just might take "offense," if "offensive speech" was permitted at one of "our" blogs or websites, and that would reflect oh-so badly on "us" is evidence not only of poor judgment, but of out-and-out mental incompetence. It hands The Enemies of Freedom complete and total victory.

    Try never to forget this perhaps-childish-but-absolutely-true little saying:

    "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but NAMES could never harm me."

    The ONLY things that should EVER be strictly forbidden are:

    MURDER
    RAPE
    ASSAULT and BATTERY
    KIDNAPPING
    THEFT
    VANDALISM
    EXTORTION
    ORGANIZED HARASSMENT


    My parents taught me never ever to call or refer to anyone as a "nigger," or use any of the other slang racial, ethnic and religious terms of derogation, "because decent people don't do that -- it's low class."

    I said exactly that the other day somewhere else, and added:

    "BUT if you want to act like a low-class jerk or guttersnipe, and say those things, it is your RIGHT to do so -- a right that no act of congress or judicial fiat should be able to take away from you. The Constitution does NOT guarantee ANYONE the "right" NOT to be analyzed, criticized, insulted, or offended.

    People who are so God-damned "sensitive" that they can't stand to see or anyone say "Shit!" or "God damn it" or "Raghead," when the person feels the occasion warrants it, ought to stay home and cower in the shadows behind their dark curtains, and keep a triple lock on all the doors and windows, and probably employ a poison tester to sample all their food before they dare eat it as well.

    One thing I can't can't abide is Pusillanimity, Hypocrisy and Censoriousness puffed up and parading around pretending to be noble and virtuous.

    _______________________

    [NOTE: To those who would call me a "hypocrite," because I censored the small army of trolls who attacked my blog: "TROLLING" is decidedly a form of VANDALISM. What's more, organized campaigns by a troll or concatenation of trolls comes under the heading of an Organized Campaign of Harassment.]

    ReplyDelete
  13. "Psycho" Geller and Robert Spencer, her cabana boy speaking at an EDL rally.

    Immediate thoughts:

    1. This passes on the fringe right for constructive speech.

    2. What could go wrong?

    ReplyDelete
  14. I'll repeat what I said elsewhere earlier today, because applies just as well here:

    Since the first amendment, apparently, has no jurisdiction in the blogging world, I recommend suspending the posting privileges of the odious eider and others of his obnoxious ilk. If an anti-Muslim individual may be silenced, why not purge and henceforth exclude the snide, truculent, most unwelcome prattle of a sneering seditionist?

    Either we accept the expression of every kind of thinking, or we become little Hitlers each ruling his own domain with an iron hand. I see no middle ground.

    -------------> Katharine Heartburn

    ReplyDelete
  15. L'audace, l'audace, toujours l'audace.

    ReplyDelete
  16. "odious eider"? I'm a merganser, you jackass.

    ReplyDelete
  17. What maters giving offense if it is free, hmmm?

    ReplyDelete

We welcome civil dialogue at Always on Watch. Comments that include any of the following are subject to deletion:
1. Any use of profanity or abusive language
2. Off topic comments and spam
3. Use of personal invective