Technically you are right of course. I still consider any attempt to stop someone from speaking as wrong. Fires and theatres a different case obviously.
Actually, technically this is bollocks.
The Great British rent-a-mob.
Semantically defensible though. A Forum’s delight.
This would probably be a good place to ask if anyone knows of any good forums for discussing British issues. It is weird that we have to come here to debate stuff like this. Unfortunately, every British forum I’ve browsed through has been rubbish beyond parody. (Is it because we’ve already fixed our gun laws, death penalty, abortion, healthcare and religion or what?)
No. But I am not going to rend my shirt and scourge myself at incredibly minor violence resulting from a demonstration in a good cause.
Now, to qualify that, I’m not saying that violence is always a bad thing either. It seems that it was here. But on the global scale of things, the violence that occurred here is insufficiently important for me to be “overly upset.”
I couldn’t agree more. I’ve never found any UK fora of the caliber of the Dope, but several of the threads I’ve started here on British issues have died a quite early death, due, I suspect to the paucity of UK dopers.
I’ve started a thread in ATMB on this.
Urban75 is pretty good - the politics is of the left, it’s fair to say but it’s a general board as well. 
But there’s lots of clever and funny posters there, and the Editor who runs it is a top bloke. They don’t suffer pseudo-science, conspiracy theorists and the like gladly either, bit like here, but with more drugs. It can be very entertaining in the early hours at the weekend when everyone is pissed.
Explain please.
A recap:
It is not just technically. There is a marked difference between me having the right to hold and voice an opinion in public and one being able to espouse one’s views in broadcast media. I can’t stop you saying something but I can try to stop the BBC from conveying your message.
With regards to the protests outside, here’s a thought - how many times has this behaviour occured before and what does this suggest about the person they were up in arms about?
As An Gadai says, if he wants to air his odious beliefs to a wider audience, he should either get a megaphone and a soap-box and hit the city centres - taking along a lot of his bodyguards to protect him - or get his own tv channel, where again, he could pay for his own protection.
I really don’t get this. If the right to ‘free speech’ means anything in the UK, surely it means being able to express your opinions in any media which invite you to?
What do you think the right involves, and why do you draw the line there?
Yes they should be able to speak at the forum.
The solution is to ensure that the emcee or moderator is sufficiently intelligent and sufficiently educated to show them up as the idiots they are. He knows their stupid arguments how hard would it be to refute such drivel?
What about all the other candidates? Aren’t they speaking up too? This forum would be the place for that as well. As in;
Moderator: So candidate A,B,C how do you feel about what whackjob has just claimed!
Candidate A,B,C; below contempt, too stupid to merit a response, etc…
The “right” to spout off nonsense should not include invitations to do it on national tv. Just because a person is an MP, it shouldn’t entitle them to inflict their archaic and divisive opinions on millions of people.
Have you tried Urban75?
I think you should give all parties appropriate publicity. That’s what being in a democracy is all about, if you start hiding the BNP and pretending they’re not there you undermine the concept of a democracy and cause problems allowing it to fester. If the majority of Britain became racist, then they’d vote for the BNP wouldn’t they? Just because you don’t like that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t give them a platform. If their position is truly abhorrent an exposition of that viewpoint should reveal it’s abhorrence, yes? If you’re afraid they’ll make some good points, then perhaps you’re on position is not entirely perfect.
What frustrated me the most about Question Time is how Jack Straw fumbled his way through, not really addressing the issue. That’s why people might turn to something like the BNP, they’re wanting to tackle issues that do matter to some people.
Nick Griffin actually said he was wrong about denying the holocaust too, and generally he was shown to be wrong about everything else he believes in. Most people will see that, don’t worry they won’t be gaining too much support.
I am with NicePete on this one. We currently have a few of the American equivalents on Council here. They don’t like the light of day we have been bringing them. On the surface some still eat up their shit, but in the background their fellow Councilmembers have grown a pair or two, and it is not so easy for them to get their way anymore.
Let people talk. If he is clever and a problem, I am sure someone twice as clever and not a problem will appear to counter him and expose him for what he is.
And as someone else said, find out what makes his adherents be attracted to him, and address the underlying issues. Helplessness and lack of a view towards a successful future is usually a big part of it. Hint: People see stuff like that as a zero sum game, so they gang up to get their share. But it isn’t a zero sum game.
By the way, it is impossible to censor a group these days. They will just go online. Which they already are, anyway.