Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Protest in Dublin

13»

Comments

  • #62
    irishconvert
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,866 ✭✭✭irishconvert


    oceanclub wrote: »
    So slagging off Fianna Failers is an abuse of freedom then?

    P.

    If you want to test out how much freedom of speech you really have, draw an offensive cartoon of your neighbour's mother, stand in the street with it and see what happens. You will be arrested by the Guards, that is if your neighbour doesn't beat the life out of you first.


  • #63
    oceanclub
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,413 ✭✭✭oceanclub


    irishconvert wrote: »
    If you want to test out how much freedom of speech you really have, draw an offensive cartoon of your neighbour's mother, stand in the street with it and see what happens. You will be arrested by the Guards, that is if your neighbour doesn't beat the life out of you first.

    You're derailing the question. You have said that groups of people should be protected from concepts that offend them. In the above instance, the neighbour's mother actually exists and therefore the cartoon depending on content could be considered libel.

    If you feel that religious groups should be protected, I hope you are at least consistant and apply it to anti-Semitic Islamic clerics:

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=67157280

    P.


  • #64
    irishconvert
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,866 ✭✭✭irishconvert


    oceanclub wrote: »
    You're derailing the question. You have said that groups of people should be protected from concepts that offend them. In the above instance, the neighbour's mother actually exists and therefore the cartoon depending on content could be considered libel.
    I didn't specify if his mother is alive or dead. For consistancy, let's assume she is dead. The son would probably be even more upset.
    oceanclub wrote: »
    If you feel that religious groups should be protected, I hope you are at least consistant and apply it to anti-Semitic Islamic clerics:

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=67157280

    P.

    You accuse me of derailing and then you link to this! LOL.

    For the record I did not say I believe religious groups should be protected. I believe that people shouldn't be allowed to use the freedom of speech excuse to go out and purposely offend others.


  • #65
    oceanclub
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,413 ✭✭✭oceanclub


    irishconvert wrote: »
    I didn't specify if his mother is alive or dead. For consistancy, let's assume she is dead. The son would probably be even more upset.

    There's no crime of libel/slander against the dead. Therefore, people can write what they like about them. The son's upset or lack of, whether it's one of the Haughey family or someone else, doesn't come into it.

    Besides which, _we already have a blasphemy law_. If you or others on the recent marches think someone in this country is responsbile for blasphemy, why hasn't it been reported to the Gardai?
    I believe that people shouldn't be allowed to use the freedom of speech excuse to go out and purposely offend others.

    Neither do it, but I don't think this should be enforced by law. I mean, I also don't think people should commit adultery but neither should the police enforce that either. It doesn't mean I support adultery.

    P.


  • #66
    boiledsweets
    Site Banned Posts: 104 ✭✭boiledsweets


    they protest about a few lampooning cartoons,but wont protest against the crimes against humanity and sexual abuse and domestic abuse prescribed under sharia law and the book of islam..


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    Kailyn Poor Pancake
    Posts: 81,309 CMod ✭✭✭✭ Kailyn Poor Pancake


    irishconvert wrote: »
    If you want to test out how much freedom of speech you really have, draw an offensive cartoon of your neighbour's mother, stand in the street with it and see what happens. You will be arrested by the Guards,
    not freedom of speech
    that is if your neighbour doesn't beat the life out of you first.
    Is freedom of speech


  • #68
    irishconvert
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,866 ✭✭✭irishconvert


    oceanclub wrote: »
    There's no crime of libel/slander against the dead. Therefore, people can write what they like about them. The son's upset or lack of, whether it's one of the Haughey family or someone else, doesn't come into it.

    Besides which, _we already have a blasphemy law_. If you or others on the recent marches think someone in this country is responsbile for blasphemy, why hasn't it been reported to the Gardai?



    Neither do it, but I don't think this should be enforced by law. I mean, I also don't think people should commit adultery but neither should the police enforce that either. It doesn't mean I support adultery.

    P.
    So why are you arguing with me when we are in agreement? :)


  • #69
    Onesimus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,055 ✭✭✭Onesimus


    hivizman wrote: »
    The protest was against the recent video Innocence of Muslims and the reproduction by the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo of the controversial cartoons of Muhammad originally published by the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten in 2005.

    There's a report of the march on the Irish Times website.

    Edit: Thanks to everyone who beat me to it! The link above is the same as the one that Frank Grimes has given.

    I don't get it. That youtube video was up there for months and months prior to the demonstrations in the middle east. Its obvious there were no protests while it was up there for months and that it was a scapegoat for the terrorists in the middle east to incite the crowd to hatred around the world.


  • #70
    irishconvert
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,866 ✭✭✭irishconvert


    Onesimus wrote: »
    I don't get it. That youtube video was up there for months and months prior to the demonstrations in the middle east. Its obvious there were no protests while it was up there for months and that it was a scapegoat for the terrorists in the middle east to incite the crowd to hatred around the world.

    I believe it was purpously hyped up knowing there would be this kind of reaction in order to prepare the people of the west into accepting an attack on Iran, which seems to be imminent.


  • #71
    oceanclub
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,413 ✭✭✭oceanclub


    irishconvert wrote: »
    I believe it was purpously hyped up knowing there would be this kind of reaction in order to prepare the people of the west into accepting an attack on Iran, which seems to be imminent.

    Just to note it wasn't up "months and months"; the Arabic version was only uploaded in early September and almost immediately found and promoted on Al-Nas TV, an Egyptian Islamist television station:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innocence_of_Muslims

    The theory that Al-Nas is attempting to prepare Westerners for war on Iran is an interesting one.

    P.


  • Advertisement
  • #72
    irishconvert
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,866 ✭✭✭irishconvert


    oceanclub wrote: »
    Just to note it wasn't up "months and months"; the Arabic version was only uploaded in early September and almost immediately found and promoted on Al-Nas TV, an Egyptian Islamist television station:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innocence_of_Muslims

    The theory that Al-Nas is attempting to prepare Westerners for war on Iran is an interesting one.

    P.

    Backed by a Saudi Arabian investor. That's enough information for me to make up my mind on it.


  • #73
    oceanclub
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,413 ✭✭✭oceanclub


    irishconvert wrote: »
    Backed by a Saudi Arabian investor. That's enough information for me to make up my mind on it.

    It's hardly odd that anything in the Muslim world is backed by Saudi investors. They have lots of money.

    Nevertheless, even if we accept your claim, you're saying a Sunni theocracy is undermining a Shia theocracy with nuclear ambitions, and somehow this is entirely the West's fault.

    P.


  • #74
    systemsready
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 297 ✭✭systemsready


    oceanclub wrote: »
    http://www.reddit.com/r/ireland/comments/10i13r/dublin_a_few_minutes_ago_about_200_people_very/

    I for one am disappointed there doesn't appear to be a single "Down With That Sort of Thing" poster.

    P>


    Missed opportunity


  • #75
    oceanclub
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,413 ✭✭✭oceanclub


    Some video footage of the protest, via Broadsheet:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQ6ztdyj8kU

    "We will struggle to the very last drop of blood", screams an hysterical man at a search engine.

    P.


  • #76
    getz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,255 ✭✭✭getz


    MagicMarker wrote: »
    There are limits, but they haven't been reached in this particular instance. Just like they wouldn't be reached should I decide to draw a picture of Mohammed riding a unicorn over a rainbow or if I decide to call Mohammed a pedofile.
    if one is secure in his/her religious belief,why the hell would they get worked up about the opinions of others,


Advertisement