Justice done

[old.Tohtori]

At the risk of making myself a "non agreeable person", while in this thread i've been on the majority side(shock), i have to say that democracy is working here.

People voted other people to lead, those leaders then banned these other people from marching.

Isn't the point of democracy to vote in people that you believe are those who hold your views?

Just a different perspective on it

 

[mooSe_]

At the risk of making myself a "non agreeable person", while in this thread i've been on the majority side(shock), i have to say that democracy is working here.

People voted other people to lead, those leaders then banned these other people from marching.

Isn't the point of democracy to vote in people that you believe are those who hold your views?

Just a different perspective on it

At the risk of instigating a classic toht argument:
So the point of a democracy is for the majority to silence minorities? It seems like that is what you are trying to say: that because one party won the election they are now allowed to ban people who disagree with them?

Of course if I have misinterpreted you then you can just clarrify here and we can avoid another 6 pages of confusion

 

[Chronictank]

What? Again, the government have banned a group, not stuffed gags down peoples throats. [/quote[
That is exactly what is happening, they are stopped from having an organised voice

There are 58 organisations banned in the UK under the terrorist acts, Al-Qaeda amoung them. It has never been proven Al-Qaeda did 9/11, so they should be allowed to actively recruit in the UK, right?

Al-Queda have been proven to have performed terrorist acts, in fact they took credit for them.
Your example is plain ridiculous, you are comparing a group which has no provable affiliation with terrorist groups to a terrorist organisation

Police State, aite. Attempting to curtail terrorism with pointless banning gestures, Police State.

Are you serious or just trolling?
They are stopping a group of like minded people lawfully airing their views

The anti-terror laws are one of the worst pieces of legislation in the history of this country, they are so subjective and open to interpretation that the authorities can ignore almost all due process and there is absolutely nothing you can do about it

 

[old.Tohtori]

At the risk of instigating a classic toht argument:
So the point of a democracy is for the majority to silence minorities? It seems like that is what you are trying to say: that because one party won the election they are now allowed to ban people who disagree with them?

Of course if I have misinterpreted you then you can just clarrify here and we can avoid another 6 pages of confusion

Let me try to clarify it

I didn't mean that they have absolute power, but democracy is defined(by wiki atleast);

"Representative democracy is a form of government founded on the principle of elected individuals representing the people, as opposed to either autocracy or direct democracy." (i think most are representative in western?)

So if majority has chosen these people as representation for themselves, surely the democracy is working?

Ofcourse major changes have to(should) go through the people again, or atleast by several political parties(to ensure view of the people as by representatives).

Now, if these people in power aren't accurate representation, shouldn't it be a problem elsewhere, like bad voting?

I don't want to derail the topic, just that in a way, in a way democracy is at work here.

 

[Aoami]

act they took credit for them.
Your example is plain ridiculous, you are comparing a group which has no known affiliation with terrorist groups to a terrorist organisation

No, it's not. It has been proven that members of Al-Muhajiroun attempted to carry out terrorist attacks, which failed. Al-Muhajiroun is now known as Islam4uk, the only difference being that the old co-leader Omar Bakri is not involved anymore because he is banned from the Country. The other leader was Choudary, now leader of Islam4uk.

I don't understand how people can think it's a bad thing that a group so clearly linked to terrorist attacks have been banned.

UK Islamic Group, Banned from Campus, Claims Misrepresentation -- 09/21/2001
Islamists Down Under
How not to deal with al-Muhajiroun | Yahya Birt

 

[Ezteq]

Here is the thing Ez, the proposed march was never banned or stopped from happening. It was a big publicity stunt that achieved it's aim. Islam4uk called the march off themselves on Sunday.

The fact you and others believe this ban is a ban on the march as well is really sad, shows that we still eat up everything we are told in unreliable news reports.

The only information I have on this is what I have seen on the news/heard from other people, if that is wrong then I'm a bit stuffed tbh lol because with certain things I really am not all that interested and cba researching it deeply for myself. If it was something that I was going to act upon then I would do a lot more research but seeing as all I did was share my opinion (based on the information presented to me) with you guys I don't feel the need to double check.

I am very suspicious of all news reports (even weather reports) and generally take most things I hear with a pinch of salt, the fact that I formed an opinion on it isn't the same as believing it, I wouldn't have staked my life on it or defended it to the death or anything I was just...as the saying goes 'shooting the shit'

Don't go suspecting us of being blind idiots just because we give opinions based on what is presented, tbh I open my mouth and stuff comes out usually thats it, it's not something I feel passionate about and it's not 'really sad'

 

[Aoami]

If the media would yap the fuck up about things like this then people wouldn't be misinformed. god i hate the fucking press.

 

[Azurus]

Let me try to clarify it

I didn't mean that they have absolute power, but democracy is defined(by wiki atleast);

"Representative democracy is a form of government founded on the principle of elected individuals representing the people, as opposed to either autocracy or direct democracy." (i think most are representative in western?)

So if majority has chosen these people as representation for themselves, surely the democracy is working?

Ofcourse major changes have to(should) go through the people again, or atleast by several political parties(to ensure view of the people as by representatives).

Now, if these people in power aren't accurate representation, shouldn't it be a problem elsewhere, like bad voting?

I don't want to derail the topic, just that in a way, in a way democracy is at work here.

Tyranny of the majority - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Ch3tan]

This is democracy for me, and this article sums up how the march should have been dealt with nicely. Wij's link, but he doesn't really post down here ;p

We all have the right to be offensive | David Mitchell | Comment is free | The Observer

 

[old.Tohtori]

Tyranny of the majority - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Yes it's a fair point and i'm not disagreeing that it's most likely happening all the time, still i hope what i said has some form of validity, albeit a different perspective on it.

 

[Aoami]

what is democracy if the majority don't get what they want over the dissenting few?

surely this is how democracy has worked since it was first adopted? Everyone has a voice, but at the end of the day not everyone is going to be happy.

 

[Bugz]

I think there's a difference between silencing people's beliefs and views and those who voted tories having to deal with labour policies.

No amount of democracy should give you the right to silence people's beliefs unless they firmly violate the laws of the country. This example seems to be a bit sketchy and government or not, democracy does not go as far as banning freedom of speech in circumstances like these.

 

[Ch3tan]

I think there's a difference between silencing people's beliefs and views and those who voted tories having to deal with labour policies.

No amount of democracy should give you the right to silence people's beliefs unless they firmly violate the laws of the country. This example seems to be a bit sketchy and government or not, democracy does not go as far as banning freedom of speech in circumstances like these.

they haven't banned them from speaking, they have banned being a member of or speaking as a member of islam4uk and its aliases - as it was already banned under its previous name.

 

[Bugz]

Oh your right.

So they just banned the group? So really it's a victory for the people in question: free publicity; divided the country a bit more and they are free to preach/speak under a different group...

 

[Aoami]

Yes.

Morally, banning them was the right thing to do, but as Ch3t said earlier in the thread, the timing of it couldn't have been worse.

 

[Raven]

Silencing anyone's opinion no matter how retarded that view is goes against democracy. Its the same reason why people like the BNP should not be banned. If they have links to terrorism or anything illegal then they should be prosecuted or deported.

You can't have it both ways in a democracy, you can't silence those that don't agree with you.

 

[Aoami]

Banning a group doesn't stop them voicing their opinion though, this is a point i've been trying to make. It stops them actively recruiting people into an organisation with known links to terror, but doesn't stop idiots like Anjem Choudary standing up and saying what he wants to say.

 

[tierk]

Sinn Fein?

 

[Aoami]

Sinn Fein are a political party, it's different.

 

[tierk]

Sinn Fein are a political party, it's different.

Laughable and quite frankly i knew that this would be your answer.

FYI A Political wing of the IRA with all the top leadership holding - allegedly, couldn't tell you 100% one way or the other - seats on the IRA Command Council.

Irish Taoiseach Bertie Ahern subsequently called Sinn Féin and the IRA "both sides of the same coin"

Read about Sinn Fein, digest, understand and then maybe try and explain how it is different, instead of trying to just dismiss it so casually.

This type of action, would not have been possible a few years ago but as more and more fear is injected into our daily lives by the government and the media, it is getting easier and easier to do this sort of things.

We have started down a very long slippery slope of infringements of our civil rights, rights that a few years ago would have been unthinkable to infringe on and i for one am scared where it will stop.

 

[Aoami]

bullshit

wtf?

How can you say it's the same? Sinn fein are the second most highly supported political party in norn iron. Islam4uk are a load of right-wing facists who want to change an entire countrys belief and justice systems who quite frankly probably aren't very welcome in the UK.

The IRA don't even exist anymore (maybe, hopefully).

 

[Ingafgrinn Macabre]

We have started down a very long slippery slope of infringements of our civil rights, rights that a few years ago would have been unthinkable to infringe on and i for one am scared where it will stop.

It'll probably take a massive (>10% population) demonstration against the loss of civil rights, because those in power probably won't consider it much of a problem unless a significant population speaks out. These things tend to go slowly, resulting in the civillians' "boiling frog" tolerance to these changes.

I say, remember remember the fifth of November, Gunpowder treason and plot.

 

[Ingafgrinn Macabre]

wtf?

How can you say it's the same? Sinn fein are the second most highly supported political party in norn iron. Islam4uk are a load of right-wing facists who want to change an entire countrys belief and justice systems who quite frankly probably aren't very welcome in the UK.

The IRA don't even exist anymore (maybe, hopefully).

A group doesn't need to be a political party to enjoy immunity against freedom of speech limitations, and no matter what group, the actions of a few within that group should never be placed on the shoulders of the group as a "legal person". This is exactly the reason why they have such difficulties dealing with the antics of the hell's angels.

 

[Huntingtons]

Aye alot of them were born here, doesn't change the outcome they can still be exiled

being born as a citizen of a country and you still feel its justified to exile them because the colour of their skin or their religion? what about the so called british people who have german, french, jugoslavian or finnish roots, exile them too?

 

[Aoami]

think you might have missed the point here, huntingtons

 

[tierk]

wtf?

How can you say it's the same? Sinn Fein are the second most highly supported political party in norn iron. Islam4uk are a load of right-wing facists who want to change an entire countrys belief and justice systems who quite frankly probably aren't very welcome in the UK.

The IRA don't even exist anymore (maybe, hopefully).

OK i didnt want to get into this but i took the bait. If you cannot understand the the purpose behind bringing Sinn Fein into this argument, let me draw a picture for you.

Sinn Fein's top echelon of leaders are known for being on the IRA Command Council. They were not banned as a party, even though they were /are people that the government of the day thought /new where associated with KNOWN TERRORISTS.

They may be today a big party in N Ireland but it wasn't always so. The leaders of the party maybe into politics today as well but it wasnt always so.

Get what i am driving at yet?

think you might have missed the point here, huntingtons

Hahahahahahahaha from the arch retard in chief!!

 

[Huntingtons]

its not a comment to your discussion, but what the first 3 posts are about.

i want to join the discussion but you seem too blatantly ignorant to discover the travesty of this.

 

[Aoami]

OK i didnt want to get into this but i took the bait. If you cannot understand the the purpose behind bringing Sinn Fein into this argument, let me draw a picture for you.

Sinn Fein's top echelon of leaders are known for being on the IRA Command Council. They were not banned as a party, even though they were /are people that the government of the day thought /new where associated with KNOWN TERRORISTS.

They may be today a big party in N Ireland but it wasn't always so. The leaders of the party maybe into politics today as well but it wasnt always so.

Get what i am driving at yet?



Oh and FYI the IRA are still with us today.





Hahahahahahahaha from the arch retard in chief!!

Show me some proof that the IRA exist post 2005.

The difference lies in the fact that Islam4uk are Al-Muhajiroun, an already banned terrorist organisation, under a different name. Sinn Fein are not the IRA, even if some of their members are members of the IRA.

 

[Raven]

Actually, they were so close they may as well be the political wing of the IRA

For a start Martin McGuinness - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Yes, yes, I know, Wikipedia.

Leader of a terrorist group, now a politition.

 

[tierk]

Show me some proof that the IRA exist post 2005.

The difference lies in the fact that Islam4uk are Al-Muhajiroun, an already banned terrorist organisation, under a different name. Sinn Fein are not the IRA, even if some of their members are members of the IRA.

God you are thick.