When did Free Speech disappear?

Topcat123

Cornucopia wrote: »

I don't see the relationship between the two (in fact having an absolute right to speak seems like it would generate more libel, not less).


Yes, you're right, it IS wrong. It's also not happened, AFAICS.

Don't confuse the lack of a published name in the media with inaction on the offence itself - they are two completely different things.

There is no such thing as libel in a fair equitable and just society, no one if harmed by free speech.

Libel laws are a tool of corruption in a world where justice is not about right and wrong but who has the most money, who can pay the biggest bribe.

Oh and if the claim is damaging, how come the censors are allowed to know the name?

That is something I can't figure out, and how do I get to be a censor and privy to all this stuff? What school much I go to?

I mean surely is all the powerful people who will be "in on it" but not the "plebs".

It is just all so stupid, unless the allegations are proven then no right minded person would penalize a person based on rumor.

Topcat123

andrewf75 wrote: »

They don't have "absolute power" though, just the power to decide what is said on their website.
If you allow free speech on a website, say goodbye to sensible debate
I have no idea what people get banned for on here, but its nothing to do with me. It seems like a well run site so I trust them to make judgments.

They do same as Stalin only had absolute power in Russia.

I don't see sensible debate I bid goodbye to that on the internet along time ago, what I see is censor debate, or as it is more accurately know propaganda.

Without free speech there is not sensible debate.

"If you allow free speech on a website, say goodbye to sensible debate" is about the biggest false hood I have ever heard.

It basically says you can't have sensible debate without a censor.

When you go down the pub do you take a censor with you to ensure you only engage in sensible debate? :rotfl:

You idea are unbelievable wrong, it is disturbing to think you believe such rubbish.

Therein lies the danger, with censorship people like you can be brainwashed into believe the most ridiculous and danger stuff.

Censorship is a cancer and it behave like a cancer. it destroys and infects everything it comes into contact with, little by little untill it destroys the whole body.

There is only one cure for this kind of cancer and it is free speech.

It has already destroying Facebook and Twitter.

andrewf75

Topcat123 wrote: »

When you go down the pub do you take a censor with you to ensure you only engage in sensible debate? :rotfl:

but the equivalent of internet trolls shouting abuse would be thrown out of the pub

same thing

Seriously there are loads of places on the internet where anything goes. Take a look. Completely taken over by extremists and zero sensible debate.

Marisco

andrewf75 wrote: »

They don't have "absolute power" though, just the power to decide what is said on their website.
If you allow free speech on a website, say goodbye to sensible debate
I have no idea what people get banned for on here, but its nothing to do with me. It seems like a well run site so I trust them to make judgments.

None of us do, that's the problem.

Cornucopia

Topcat123 wrote: »

There is no such thing as libel in a fair equitable and just society, no one if harmed by free speech.

But presumably you don't believe we live in such a society, so therefore there is libel.

Libel laws are a tool of corruption in a world where justice is not about right and wrong but who has the most money, who can pay the biggest bribe.

If you have any evidence whatsoever of bribery within the UK justice system I suggest you tell as many people as you can using whatever means you can find.

Oh and if the claim is damaging, how come the censors are allowed to know the name?

That is something I can't figure out, and how do I get to be a censor and privy to all this stuff? What school much I go to?

There are no censors, as such.

I mean surely is all the powerful people who will be "in on it" but not the "plebs".

I'm sure that there is well-informed gossip around Parliament - that is inevitable. But it is not something that is explicitly designed to keep the "plebs" down, nor are sexual/criminal scandals involving individual MPs/Celebs going to be particular informative in a political sense, anyway.

It is just all so stupid, unless the allegations are proven then no right minded person would penalize a person based on rumor.

And yet they do.

Topcat123

andrewf75 wrote: »

They don't have "absolute power" though, just the power to decide what is said on their website.
If you allow free speech on a website, say goodbye to sensible debate
I have no idea what people get banned for on here, but its nothing to do with me. It seems like a well run site so I trust them to make judgments.

It is not their site, it is public site.

If they want to take it offline then yea they can do what they like with it.

You fail to recognize people have right as humans and you seem to think that because you own something it give your the right too abuse people's human rights.

So if you owned a ship you think it is your right to sink it mid pacific because
it is "your ship" and you can do what you like with it?

If so you are a very dangerous person.

I don't trust anyone bar my self.

You seem a trusting sort, perhaps I can have your number? I know a number of con artists who would like a word with you! :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

I trust the evidence not the opinion.

Topcat123

Cornucopia wrote: »

But presumably you don't believe we live in such a society, so therefore there is libel.


If you have any evidence whatsoever of bribery within the UK justice system I suggest you tell as many people as you can using whatever means you can find.


There are no censors, as such.


I'm sure that there is well-informed gossip around Parliament - that is inevitable. But it is not something that is explicitly designed to keep the "plebs" down, nor are sexual/criminal scandals involving individual MPs/Celebs going to be particular informative in a political sense, anyway.


And yet they do.

NO there is not libel, libel is a sign of corruption, a society that cannot tolerate the blind light of free speech, it needs the darkness of censorship to maintain it's corrupt order.

If you have any evidence whatsoever of bribery within the UK justice system I suggest you tell as many people as you can using whatever means you can find.

]
Find who for what? What is your point?

It is designed to keep plebs down, one class, the corrupt class are allowed to know, they will not spill the beans as if they do they will have the beans spilt on them.

Savile knew people in high places and he knew damaging things about them, hence no action until he died.

benny81

M'aiq_the_Liar wrote: »

Totally agree.
Our society has turned into one whereby minority religions/fringe groups/sexual orientations can dictate what is appropriate behaviour.

The majority in the UK are an aside.

a very true statement, freedom of speech has been lost amongst being politically correct to the extreme, because people nowdays believe it is their right to be born offended!

Cornucopia

Topcat123 wrote: »

Find who for what? What is your point?

So when you used the word "bribe" you didn't actually mean it? What did you mean?

Savile knew people in high places and he knew damaging things about them, hence no action until he died.

The confluence of the nature of Savile's crimes, his personality, his eccentricities, his celebrity, and issues with the way that the BBC and the NHS operates came together to prevent him being brought to justice. However, I think it's something of a unique case for having all those factors behind it.

I can't imagine anyone could be so shallow as to protect such a man merely to prevent the disclosure of embarrassing information.

andrewf75

Topcat123 wrote: »

So if you owned a ship you think it is your right to sink it mid pacific because
it is "your ship" and you can do what you like with it?

If so you are a very dangerous person.

.

As far as I am aware those banned from this site haven't been murdered. If they have I disapprove!
On my ship I would expect to be able to decide who comes on board and control how they behave. I would be able to refuse entry or remove people safely if they broke the rules.