Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5


Glurp
8205 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3780

Subscriber

  Reply # 2059715 20-Jul-2018 23:40
Send private message

Just like those brave creeps who post anonymous threats. For instance, this gem cited in The Herald:

 

 

 

Auckland Peace Action group is among those opposing the pair's visit, with spokeswoman Valerie Morse saying she had been receiving "threats of violence from neo-Nazis for speaking up against the visit of these two racists".

 

This included a Facebook user called Maori Basher attempting to post a violent message on the Auckland Action Peace group's page.

 

"In a fist fight, we Proud Boys of NZ will f*** you c*** up and i'll smash Valerie Morse myself," the user's post reads.

 

"That b*** needs to suck out of a straw for a month while in ICU."

 

 

 

I guess those boys can't be all that proud if they haven't even got the guts to stand up in public. 

 

 





I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage
 


1759 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 895


  Reply # 2059852 21-Jul-2018 11:13
4 people support this post
Send private message

I am happy that they have been allowed entry. Who are we as a democracy to refuse people entry based on what they say. Get over it!!

 

Exercise your democratic rights and if you dont like what you think they may say...DONT GO AND SEE THEM




Glurp
8205 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3780

Subscriber

  Reply # 2059876 21-Jul-2018 11:35
Send private message

You are making the wrong argument. This is not a free speech issue. If you are interested in preserving your democracy, you should be doing everything possible to prevent people like this from spreading their poison. You don't have to drive over a cliff to know you will have a bad time when you reach the bottom.

 

 





I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage
 




Glurp
8205 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3780

Subscriber

  Reply # 2059878 21-Jul-2018 11:44
Send private message

This:

 

Victoria Police is reportedly charging Ms Southern more than $67,000 for their presence at the event.

 

"Their actions put their lives, the lives of the public and the lives of police officers at risk," Commander Tim Hansen said.

 

"The safety of the community is our main concern and our officers could have been used more effectively across Melbourne on a Friday night. It is disappointing that we had to use significant resources to mediate between two groups with opposing views."

 

 

 

I very much hope our own officials send these scumsuckers a very big bill.

 

 





I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage
 


7347 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3841


  Reply # 2059900 21-Jul-2018 12:37
One person supports this post
Send private message

Pumpedd:

 

I am happy that they have been allowed entry. Who are we as a democracy to refuse people entry based on what they say. Get over it!!

 

Exercise your democratic rights and if you dont like what you think they may say...DONT GO AND SEE THEM

 

 

In Southern's case it's not just what she says - it's what she's done.

 

A mistake has been made by immigration stating that she hasn't incited violence or illegal actions - she has.

 

 




Glurp
8205 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3780

Subscriber

  Reply # 2059960 21-Jul-2018 13:45
Send private message

I decided to (re)start this thread after I heard that the nasty twosome had been given permission after all to come to New Zealand. I think this is a serious mistake, and I find it incomprehensible that some others don’t seem to see this. I would like to try to explain my reasoning.

 

Those who support allowing these people to speak here are presenting this as a free speech issue. In a healthy democracy, everyone should have the right to say whatever they like, regardless of how unpalatable it may be to the majority. The whole point of a democracy is to give everyone a say and to protect the rights of the individual. I agree with this.

 

If a minority of people, however noble their motivation may be, is allowed to dictate what others may say, or who may be allowed to speak, then democracy no longer exists. How can there be free speech, and the essential rights that derive from that, if select individuals are given the power to determine what may or may not be heard? As I understand it, this is the argument of the free speech advocates. Either you have free speech for everyone, or you don’t have free speech at all.

 

I think this is wrong for several reasons and I will try to explain them. First, no-one is trying to curb free speech. Anyone who actually want to listens to this kind of thing, despicable as it may be, is free to do so. This stuff is all over the Internet, also from these two people. If you want to know the content of what they are saying, you can easily find it. If you want to actually hear them saying it, you can do that as well. I can’t speak for others, but for myself what I am saying is I don’t want these people saying these things here. It isn’t necessary. We don’t need it. If you must listen to them you can do so. No-one is interfering with your free speech rights. But you don’t have to have them come here to do it.

 

But why not have them come here? What is the objection? Well, one thing is the civil disorder occurring right now in Melbourne. Riots follow these people. Do we really need that?

 

Another thing is the way certain deplorables can be fired up. As some have pointed out, we already have an unfortunate extreme right segment in our population. There are evil people, or at least stupid ones, who want to hear and be motivated by the kind of vicious rhetoric this couple disgorges. It is bad enough to have such types in our society. Do we really need to offer them encouragement?

 

The type of people who are drawn to this couple and others like them, are the type of people who post anonymous threats to do violence to those they disagree with. They threaten to rape and murder and torture. How can anyone possibly think this kind of thing should have free speech protection? These are people who want to hurt other people. They are not entitled to free speech. Neither are those who encourage them. It is incomprehensible to me that anyone thinks there should be a place for this kind of thing in any democracy.

 

Allowing these people to spread their venom from a public forum of any kind in this country lends legitimacy to their twisted ideas and gives strength to the haters that follow them. People like this do not play by any rules. They manipulate and manoeuvre to gain the upper hand. They will pretend to accept democratic principles in order to worm their way into positions of power. Once they achieve that power, they will silence those who oppose them by doing what they once could only threaten to do. Democracy will cease to exist and so will the free speech everyone claims to be defending. This is nothing new. It is how **** did it. (Edit: sorry, FUG violation. I forgot this is not the President thread).

 

Free speech is not just the freedom to say anything you like. It is also about responsibility and respect, two things utterly lacking on the extreme right. I believe passionately in free speech and that is why I believe passionately that those who do not respect it should have any. They don’t belong on a podium. They belong in jail and for the sake of all of us that is where I sincerely hope they will end up.

 

 





I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage
 


1759 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 895


  Reply # 2060037 21-Jul-2018 16:13
3 people support this post
Send private message

It is really your thread...I have said my bit. Maybe you should start a blog?




Glurp
8205 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3780

Subscriber

  Reply # 2060043 21-Jul-2018 16:30
Send private message

You are welcome to contribute here. You don't have to agree with me. I have tried to explain why I feel the way I do. That is all.





I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage
 


13429 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2428

Trusted

  Reply # 2060086 21-Jul-2018 17:01
4 people support this post
Send private message

Pumpedd:

 

I am happy that they have been allowed entry. Who are we as a democracy to refuse people entry based on what they say. Get over it!!

 

Exercise your democratic rights and if you dont like what you think they may say...DONT GO AND SEE THEM

 

 

I agree. I dislike what these two are up to as much as anyone else, but what defines free speech? We are all equal but some are more equal than others? As per George Orwell. If free speech is free speech unless we dont agree or like it, thats not free speech. Its censorship. Then who decides censorship??  I hate bias. We mainly all agree on the normality of many parts of our lives, but when we cherry pick and choose when bias is ok, thats not right. 

 

Let these two w#nk on about what they want. If they found a support base, we need then to look at ourselves and why this is.If our moral fibre is strong, its no issue.


1759 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 895


  Reply # 2060130 21-Jul-2018 19:20
3 people support this post
Send private message

tdgeek:

 

Pumpedd:

 

I am happy that they have been allowed entry. Who are we as a democracy to refuse people entry based on what they say. Get over it!!

 

Exercise your democratic rights and if you dont like what you think they may say...DONT GO AND SEE THEM

 

 

I agree. I dislike what these two are up to as much as anyone else, but what defines free speech? We are all equal but some are more equal than others? As per George Orwell. If free speech is free speech unless we dont agree or like it, thats not free speech. Its censorship. Then who decides censorship??  I hate bias. We mainly all agree on the normality of many parts of our lives, but when we cherry pick and choose when bias is ok, thats not right. 

 

Let these two w#nk on about what they want. If they found a support base, we need then to look at ourselves and why this is.If our moral fibre is strong, its no issue.

 

 

If it wasnt for our pathetic media I would never have heard of them, but watching the violent protests on TV tonight it was the protesters who should be paying for the police!! The protesters were not only violent in what they were saying but their actions were violent as well. Seems to me to be the pot calling the kettle black.


1139 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 462
Inactive user


  Reply # 2060134 21-Jul-2018 19:32
Send private message

I think the above is why I am struggling with, and now slowly moving away from my long held Liberal beliefs - simply because of the way the Left leaning Liberal argument has become - "Free speech for everyone, as long as you agree with me". Really??

 

A Right leaning Liberal approach that is tolerant of individualism is a far better approach than left leaning Liberal collectivism.

 

Maybe I am just getting too old for this PC nonsense now.




Glurp
8205 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3780

Subscriber

  Reply # 2060136 21-Jul-2018 19:51
Send private message

We are not talking about free speech here. We are talking about people advocating evil things, supported by people willing to employ any means. Yes, there is also violence and ugliness by the protestors, but that seems to be the only thing you guys want to fixate on. The point is not that the protestors are also behaving badly. It is the violence and ugliness, full stop. Maybe if people didn't want to come here and say outrageous things that should not be tolerated by any civil society, there wouldn't be violent protests. You seem so eager to find something to blame on the 'liberal left' (if that's what it is), that you don't even care about the bigger issue. I find that very perplexing.

 

 





I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage
 


1759 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 895


  Reply # 2060299 22-Jul-2018 09:32
5 people support this post
Send private message

Rikkitic:

 

We are not talking about free speech here. We are talking about people advocating evil things, supported by people willing to employ any means. Yes, there is also violence and ugliness by the protestors, but that seems to be the only thing you guys want to fixate on. The point is not that the protestors are also behaving badly. It is the violence and ugliness, full stop. Maybe if people didn't want to come here and say outrageous things that should not be tolerated by any civil society, there wouldn't be violent protests. You seem so eager to find something to blame on the 'liberal left' (if that's what it is), that you don't even care about the bigger issue. I find that very perplexing.

 

 

 

 

People have been saying evil things for donkeys years and they will continue to do so. Evil is all around us. Social media imo is evil because it accentuates alternative views and allows people to become heroes for those views.

 

IMO Trump is evil, but we cant stop him travelling can we?

 

Sometimes we need to see evil to understand that it is evil and should be avoided. It is totally wrong for a good democracy to stop people entering a country because it is believed they have strongly alternative views.

 

If we dont write about these people, dont watch these people, and dont attend their live functions they will simply vanish. Your thread is giving publicity to these people whether you like it or not. 

 

As I get older I find it easier to just switch channels or simply ignore something. There is so much happening in our world today that could be classed as evil due to social media promoting it. 

 

Dont watch it if it upsets, or watch it and learn how not to be.

 

 




Glurp
8205 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3780

Subscriber

  Reply # 2060352 22-Jul-2018 11:27
Send private message

This is a valid argument, though I don't agree with it. I think the issue here is I don't believe free speech is, or can be, or should be completely unfettered. Most seem to disagree and want to uphold the principle of free speech as something absolute, as in, it must always be allowed, regardless of content. 

 

The real argument seems to be that if restrictions are placed on free speech, who controls those? I think society should, and I don't see this as a problem. Society controls all kinds of other things, like what kinds of actions are considered unacceptable public behaviour. There are all kinds of things that are not allowed, or simply 'not done', because most people find them offensive. I don't see why this kind of common sense cannot also apply to free speech. We are under no obligation to allow foreigners to come here to say hateful things. We already ban hate speech. We just need to broaden the definition a little. I do not believe that will destroy our freedoms. Allowing enemies of democracy to come here and pick at our weaknesses might.

 

   





I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage
 


92 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 76


  Reply # 2060354 22-Jul-2018 11:33
2 people support this post
Send private message

Geektastic:
Rikkitic:

 

You are under no compulsion to contribute to this thread.

 

 

 

 

 



Of what relevance is that to my question?

I want to make sure it's now ok to refer to, for example, the Labour Party as "socialist scum" before letting rip, so I'm enquiring whether that sort of thing is now ok here, because it never used to be.

 

Get lost, troll.


1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic

Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.