[MTVN]

Originally Posted by angus58

I dare all the "freedom of speech at any cost" advocates on this thread to stand outside any mosque with a loudspeaker and chant the above. Any takers? No I thought not - and the reason? Because the law would come down on you like a ton of bricks - you'd be inside so fast your feet wouldn't touch the ground. So just spare us all your muddle headed, perverse PC bull****, wake up and smell the coffee - there is one law for some and another for the rest of us. No such thing as freedom of speech for all - never has been and never will be.

I wouldnt do it out of personal principle but I wouldnt jail someone who did.

And why do people insist on bringing up certain laws and regulations and whinging that Muslims get treated better than you, do you not realise it's possible that someone can hold an opinion that's outside of the law? Under our current legal systems than yes you probably would be prosecuted for doing that, just as these Muslims have been; I am just saying that from a personal perspective I dont think you should, not from a legal perspective.

[Pyramid*]

Originally Posted by MTVN

I wouldnt do it out of personal principle but I wouldnt jail someone who did.

And why do people insist on bringing up certain laws and regulations and whinging that Muslims get treated better than you, do you not realise it's possible that someone can hold an opinion that's outside of the law? Under our current legal systems than yes you probably would be prosecuted for doing that, just as these Muslims have been; I am just saying that from a personal perspective I dont think you should, not from a legal perspective.

Simply put - because there are laws for good reason. Just as there as laws in Muslim countries, far far stricter than our own. Just as anyone living in Saudi Arabia (citizen or not) has to abide by the laws of the land, so too should those who are living on British soil.

You can bet your last £1 that if this had been a British white man, burning symbols to deliberately offend anyone from a Muslim culture - the white man would be up in court and whacked with something a lot heavier that a £50 fine.

What really hacks me off: this man works part time only, and receives state benefits from the same British Government that provide troops to fight to protect and allow him freedom,as did those in WWI and WWII.

If he loathes it all so much, I'm sure he knows the way out of Britain. but then..... who'd pay for all his benefits and allow him to behave in such an offensive manner in public. Only this bloody country. (that was a rant at the situ - not you btw!!_)

[MTVN]

Originally Posted by Pyramid*

Simply put - because there are laws for good reason. Just as there as laws in Muslim countries, far far stricter than our own. Just as anyone living in Saudi Arabia (citizen or not) has to abide by the laws of the land, so too should those who are living on British soil.

You can bet your last £1 that if this had been a British white man, burning symbols to deliberately offend anyone from a Muslim culture - the white man would be up in court and whacked with something a lot heavier that a £50 fine.

What really hacks me off: this man works part time only, and receives state benefits from the same British Government that provide troops to fight to protect and allow him freedom,as did those in WWI and WWII.

If he loathes it all so much, I'm sure he knows the way out of Britain. but then..... who'd pay for all his benefits and allow him to behave in such an offensive manner in public. Only this bloody country. (that was a rant at the situ - not you btw!!_)

I know, I just didnt like that she went off on one about my opinion because it might not tie in with what the law dictates. As I said I was not looking at it from a legal perspective. It's none of my concern whether the law would treat a non-Muslim differently or whether someone would be jailed for shouting derogatory comments about Allah outside the Mosque, just because something is law it doesnt mean I'm obliged to agree with it. The "PC bull****" comment was equally unnecessary and I would hardly say my stance was PC on this.

And yes he is legally obliged to follow our laws but it's odd that this protest of theirs is suddenly considered a crime considering it was at the time authorised and even given a police guard. For all of America's faults I do admire their respect for free speech that they have over there, we seem all too keen to rush to silence and censor any view that offends us.

[Shasown]

Originally Posted by MTVN

I know, I just didnt like that she went off on one about my opinion because it might not tie in with what the law dictates. As I said I was not looking at it from a legal perspective. It's none of my concern whether the law would treat a non-Muslim differently or whether someone would be jailed for shouting derogatory comments about Allah outside the Mosque, just because something is law it doesnt mean I'm obliged to agree with it. The "PC bull****" comment was equally unnecessary and I would hardly say my stance was PC on this.

And yes he is legally obliged to follow our laws but it's odd that this protest of theirs is suddenly considered a crime considering it was at the time authorised and even given a police guard. For all of America's faults I do admire their respect for free speech that they have over there, we seem all too keen to rush to silence and censor any view that offends us.

Err no its not.

They asked if they could assemble for a peaceful protest, this was allowed.

The police werent there to guard them, rather to oversee and make sure that not only did they not commit public order offences but that same werent committed against them.

The protestor that was prosecuted was prosecuted for burning poppies and chanting, acts that were either complained about to the police or deemed by the police present to be violent public order laws.

The laws covering public order offences may be seen by some to be there to limit peoples freedoms, in fact they were brought onto the statute books to protect people and to prevent situations from escalating.

People get or take offence too easily nowadays, part of the compensation culture in a way. Consequently if police are given the powers to arrest when only minor offences have been committed they can move in and arrest ringleaders in the hope it not only deters others from escalating the trouble but also disrupt any protestors plans for scaled increases in trouble.

Not the best legislature in the world, typical Labour kneejerk reaction to both domestic trouble and outside criticism and pressure

[Angus]

What unbelievable bloody cheek for this ungrateful piece of sh*t to protest his "right" to free speech by deliberately insulting the memory of the very servicemen and women who sacrificed their lives to give him that privilege - a privilege that would be denied him in his own country, where he obviously does not want to live!

To add insult to injury he is pocketing hundreds of pounds in benefits leeched off the British taxpayer, from which this derisory fine will be paid. So basically he's not paying the fine himself at all. What a joke! So much for the alleged contribution these parasites make to our society - what a load of total bollocks propaganda the morally bankrupt Labour Party has force fed us for 13 interminable years.

[Beso]

Originally Posted by MTVN

I dont think he should have got a prison sentance, as insulting and offensive as they might have been they were exercising their right to free speech and to freedom of assembly

this.

Lets just kick his head in.

[letmein]

Originally Posted by karezza

Mohammed was an epileptic who was married to a 7-year-old girl.

That's debatable, and in places in America, 7 year olds were allowed to marry. Please, there are a lot of horrible things you can pull out of the Koran and the Bible, but this isn't one of them.

[Angus]

Originally Posted by letmein

That's debatable, and in places in America, 7 year olds were allowed to marry. Please, there are a lot of horrible things you can pull out of the Koran and the Bible, but this isn't one of them.

To be fair, he married her when she was 6 years old but apparently didn't consummate the marriage till she was 9 years old. I believe he was in his 50s at the time. As to whether or not he was an epileptic this is still a matter of some debate and is based on a diagnosis of symptoms he suffered with, though why the disease should be considered shameful I have no idea. Furthermore, all this is well documented by muslims themselves, so what's with the attitude?