Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.

Irish anti-Islamic group protests mosque in Kerry

12357…15

Comments

  • #122
    Clandestine
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,466 ✭✭✭Clandestine


    MadsL wrote: »
    Group repeatedly propagates hate speech that advocates burning churches, a church is burnt and 12 people die. Does the group have any responsibility in your view?
    Well, they didn't burn the church down did they? Besides, what is considered hate speech in this day and age is too subjective.
    MadsL wrote: »
    Free speech does not equal the right to spur people to illegal acts of violence against innocent people.
    Aren't people responsible for their own actions?


  • #123
    Annasopra
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,232 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    Clandestine wrote: »
    Hate speech is free speech

    No. Its not. Free speech is limited by law. In Ireland that means its limited currently by the Incitement to Hatred Act 1989 and Article 10 (2) of the European Convention on Human Rights

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • #124
    darkpagandeath
    Closed Accounts Posts: 24,461 ✭✭✭✭darkpagandeath


    Joeytheparrot wrote: »
    No. Its not. Free speech is limited by law. In Ireland that means its limited currently by the Incitement to Hatred Act 1989 and Article 10 (2) of the European Convention on Human Rights

    And don't forget that Blasphemy law that a certain person threatened to use in Relation to France.


  • #125
    Annasopra
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,232 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    Clandestine wrote: »
    Besides, what is considered hate speech in this day and age is too subjective.

    Many courts and parliaments have in fact defined hate speech

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • #126
    Eugene Norman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,191 ✭✭✭Eugene Norman


    MadsL wrote: »
    What line do you draw then? Is it acceptable to deny the holocaust and agitate for racial war? Or should there be laws to prevent hate speech?

    It should be legally acceptable yeah. As it already is. About as legal as denying or understating the famine, or frankly ignoring British culpability and blaming the Irish for not fishing enough, or choosing to eat potatoes ( a decision forced upon them). Or any other human caused famine. It should be legal, but not necessarily acceptable in polite conversation, to deny anything. Blame the Ukrainians for Stalins famine. Deny the Armenian genovide. Can't see why morons should be jailed.

    Race war would be covered under incitement to violence.


  • Advertisement
  • #127
    Clandestine
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,466 ✭✭✭Clandestine


    Joeytheparrot wrote: »
    No. Its not. Free speech is limited by law.
    Just because something is law, doesn't make it right or just.


  • #128
    Annasopra
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,232 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    Clandestine wrote: »
    Just because something is law, doesn't make it right or just.

    The point is you are wrong. Hate speech is not free speech.

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • #129
    Clandestine
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,466 ✭✭✭Clandestine


    Joeytheparrot wrote: »
    Many courts and parliaments have in fact defined hate speech
    To their own subjective opinion, which varies by country or state. Ask people on the street about their opinion on what constitutes "hate speech". You will get many different opinions.


  • #130
    Eugene Norman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,191 ✭✭✭Eugene Norman


    MadsL wrote: »
    Group repeatedly propagates hate speech that advocates burning churches, a church is burnt and 12 people die. Does the group have any responsibility in your view?

    Free speech does not equal the right to spur people to illegal acts of violence against innocent people.

    Given the anti-Catholic violence in the UK every year, when are we expecting the arrest of Dawkins ( or Fry).


  • #131
    Annasopra
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,232 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    Clandestine wrote: »
    To their own subjective opinion, which varies by country or state. Ask people on the street about their opinion on what constitutes "hate speech". You will get many different opinions.

    Of course because there are different contexts in different countries and cultures.

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Advertisement
  • #132
    Eugene Norman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,191 ✭✭✭Eugene Norman


    Clandestine wrote: »
    To their own subjective opinion, which varies by country or state. Ask people on the street about their opinion on what constitutes "hate speech". You will get many different opinions.

    It's hate speech to condemn the Armenian genocide in Turkey and hate speech not to in France. Both parliaments should arrest each other.


  • #133
    Clandestine
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,466 ✭✭✭Clandestine


    Joeytheparrot wrote: »
    The point is you are wrong.
    Why? Because its the law?

    Slavery and apartheid were once legal, proof that legality doesn't govern morality.


  • #134
    Clandestine
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,466 ✭✭✭Clandestine


    Joeytheparrot wrote: »
    Of course because there are different contexts in different countries and cultures.
    Which proves my point that hate speech is far too subjective to be criminalized. If someone makes a hateful or untrue statement, they should be challenged in open debate. Punishing something just pushes it underground.


  • #135
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Clandestine wrote: »
    Just because something is law, doesn't make it right or just.

    Ahhh yes, I remember now.....you were the guy who used have some BNP splinter group as sig.


  • #136
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Eugene Norman wrote: »
    Given the anti-Catholic violence in the UK every year, when are we expecting the arrest of Dawkins ( or Fry).

    ....never knew the Orange Order were fans of either. Though Fry is a big fecker....they might give him the lambeg.


  • #137
    Clandestine
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,466 ✭✭✭Clandestine


    Nodin wrote: »
    Ahhh yes, I remember now.....you were the guy who used have some BNP splinter group as sig.
    No?

    Also, nice job at trying to associate me with the far-right as a way of disproving my points. Can't refute them properly?


  • #138
    Billy86
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,495 ✭✭✭✭Billy86


    lazybones32 wrote: »
    The airplane was flown into the IRS building in Austin, TX, 2010 by AJ Stack. He left behind a rant about taxation, Govt. and big businesses. No mention or affiliation with Christian group.
    "Relatives described him as a devout Christian and father of six who loved his white cowboy hat and frequently gave to charities."
    http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/wife-pilot-joe-stack-crashed-plane-austin-building-kamikaze-attack-apologizes-article-1.195791

    Funny how here, despite committing a terrorist act, they use his religion to try and paint him in a positive light! :pac:
    The Knoxville shooting, according to Wikip. was "a politically motivated fatal shooting". The investigating officers, ah why bother schooling you..
    All of his motivations were/are teaching of the borderline fundamentalist Christian Right movement. Switch him to a Muslim and we all know what the reaction would have been.
    George Tiller: Roeder had one known meeting with Army of God founder. All right, we'll give you that one on account of your efforts. Tiller was shot as he left church.
    Oh those Christians!
    Actually, he continued to receive threats and face public vilification from the Christian far right right up until he was murdered. Maybe you weren't paying attention when Christian Right channel FOX News was referring to him as 'Tiller the Baby Killer'

    No reply about the LRA, Army of God, Eastern Lightning, etc no?


  • #139
    Eugene Norman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,191 ✭✭✭Eugene Norman


    Joeytheparrot wrote: »
    Of course because there are different contexts in different countries and cultures.

    Indeed. It's hate speech to condemn Islam in Islamic countries and increasingly so in western countries, but Christianity is ok to attack in either.

    As is atheism. Hate speech, being different in every country with different contexts condemns atheists to death in religious countries, while we can be without recrimination by law be condemned to external damnation by imans and priests in Western countries. Which isn't apparantly hate speech.

    And we can't condemn religions? If your ideas on how religions should be criticised are no different from a medevial Pope or an ayatollah it might be time to burn your liberal card. Religion is one form of ideology and if it can't be criticised then we live in a theocracy. Maybe just arrest Dawkins -- have the courage of your evidential fascist convictions -- and be done with it.


  • #140
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Clandestine wrote: »
    No?

    Might be I'm confusing you with someone else.
    Clandestine wrote: »
    Also, nice job at trying to associate me with the far-right..................

    Well, as above, I could be confusing you with somebody else. We can clear it up easily.

    So you believe that "white" and "black" people are equal?
    You have no concerns regarding the percentage of either of a population?


  • #141
    Eugene Norman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,191 ✭✭✭Eugene Norman


    Billy86 wrote: »
    "Relatives described him as a devout Christian and father of six who loved his white cowboy hat and frequently gave to charities."
    http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/wife-pilot-joe-stack-crashed-plane-austin-building-kamikaze-attack-apologizes-article-1.195791

    Funny how here, despite committing a terrorist act, they use his religion to try and paint him in a positive light! :pac:

    All of his motivations were/are teaching of the borderline fundamentalist Christian Right movement. Switch him to a Muslim and we all know what the reaction would have been.

    Actually, he continued to receive threats and face public vilification from the Christian far right right up until he was murdered. Maybe you weren't paying attention when Christian Right channel FOX News was referring to him as 'Tiller the Baby Killer'

    No reply about the LRA, Army of God, Eastern Lightning, etc no?

    I'll reply. All bad. Btw you seem to be doing something you abhor in others. Assuming you are replying to a Christian ( you could well be just throwing that argument to whataboutary about in random fashion) asking him to "explain himself" or referencing Christian atrocities is the kind of generalisation you seem keen to make illegal in other contexts.


  • Advertisement
  • #142
    Eugene Norman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,191 ✭✭✭Eugene Norman


    Nodin wrote: »
    Might be I'm confusing you with someone else.


    Well, as above, I could be confusing you with somebody else. We can clear it up easily.

    So you believe that "white" and "black" people are equal?
    You have no concerns regarding the percentage of either of a population?

    You'll be expecting a perma ban if that's not true of course?


  • #143
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Eugene Norman wrote: »
    You'll be expecting a perma ban if that's not true of course?

    He can't be banned for answering either. They're questions that can be answered with "yes" or "no" , and are deliberately phrased that way.


  • #144
    Eugene Norman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,191 ✭✭✭Eugene Norman


    Nodin wrote: »
    He can't be banned for answering either. They're questions that can be answered with "yes" or "no" , and are deliberately phrased that way.

    No. It's a loaded question. He can deny it but who is going to search all his posts.


  • #145
    squiggledash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 47 ✭squiggledash


    These guys the CPP only have 55 fb likes so whats the problem? No one is taking them seriously.

    They are a predictable reaction to Europe's changing demographics same as Fox news in the USA has got crazier the more the US gets less white. The thing is Europeans are not having babies and these groups are threatened by that. I think the fertility rate is one child per female whereas muslim women have 4 and the overall rate is 1.59 with maintenance needed to be 2.1 overall.

    Thats why these groups want to start a babies arms race. Because the way they look at it whoever has more babies wins look at the catholics in the North, they used to be a minority.

    Its quite strange when you think of it. With a birth rate of 1.59 we would all be extinct in a couple of hundred years if that rate remained unchanged. Without immigration Europe would be a ghost continent.

    If you look at evolutionary history the only times birth rates fall among populations are in times of great stress usually famine or war. Europe has had neither of these for 70 years so it must be some other reason that humanity has not encountered up until this point.

    None of us will have to worry about it.


  • #146
    MadsL
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,299 ✭✭✭✭MadsL


    lazybones32 wrote: »
    That's why neither the Republic nor the UK 'want' NI...too much hatred and a reluctance to let it go.


    man cuts soldiers head off in London; Parisian magazine office workers shot up; tourists on beach gunned down; rogue group, with intentions of forming new state demolish antiquity, behead civilians (men, women and children) and force children to execute soldiers publicly....yes, that sounds like the work of Christians/Jews/Buddhists/Hindu's/






    Tl;dr.
    If you think a crime has been committed, contact the Gardai. Internet activism is no substitute for fulfilling your civil duties.

    Funny how you mention NI!! - without a blink about the levels of Christian sectarian violence! Now you can bluster that away as sectarian rather than religious, and I can point out that most Islamic terrorist violence is political/sectarian but you choose to depict it as religious.
    Eugene Norman wrote: »
    I am neither Christian nor Muslim but this attempt at whataboutary is weak beer. If you were to divide Christian atrocities by Muslim atrocities in the mast decade it would round down to zero percent.

    How many dead in the Troubles? More or less than 9/11? How many in Bosnia at the hands of Serbs?
    Clandestine wrote: »
    Well, they didn't burn the church down did they?
    Osama didn't fly the planes.
    Aren't people responsible for their own actions?

    Yes. All of them. All the actions.


  • #147
    lazybones32
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,647 ✭✭✭lazybones32


    Billy86 wrote: »
    "Relatives described him as a devout Christian and father of six who loved his white cowboy hat and frequently gave to charities."


    Funny how here, despite committing a terrorist act, they use his religion to try and paint him in a positive light! :pac:



    I'll stick with the authorities account of what motivated these actions, not your 'pulled from a website' analysis.

    No, no response about LRA, Eastern Lightening...their actions haven't made news here in Ireland.

    So, to wrap up my interactions with you: are you opposed to people objecting to the proposed building of a mosque in Tralee or do you think they have a right to object?


  • #148
    wakka12
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,786 ✭✭✭wakka12


    squiggledash wrote: »
    These guys the CPP only have 55 fb likes so whats the problem? No one is taking them seriously.

    They are a predictable reaction to Europe's changing demographics same as Fox news in the USA has got crazier the more the US gets less white. The thing is Europeans are not having babies and these groups are threatened by that. I think the fertility rate is one child per female whereas muslim women have 4 and the overall rate is 1.59 with maintenance needed to be 2.1 overall.

    Thats why these groups want to start a babies arms race. Because the way they look at it whoever has more babies wins look at the catholics in the North, they used to be a minority.

    Its quite strange when you think of it. With a birth rate of 1.59 we would all be extinct in a couple of hundred years if that rate remained unchanged. Without immigration Europe would be a ghost continent.

    If you look at evolutionary history the only times birth rates fall among populations are in times of great stress usually famine or war. Europe has had neither of these for 70 years so it must be some other reason that humanity has not encountered up until this point.

    None of us will have to worry about it.

    The reason is western lifestyle, babies are an unnecessary burden for many younger western men and women who care about their personal life, their job, their friends and travelling. Not putting them down I respect that choice, but thats the exact reason. Often when western men and women finally decide they want to start a family the woman may be too old to give birth.
    Muslim women are traditional and generally don't indulge the western lifestyle, they stay at home, often don't go to college and care for their children , thats their 'job' and theyre happy with it.

    Both are respectable life choices, but if Europeans don't want to go extinct then they will have to change their ways.


  • #149
    MadsL
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,299 ✭✭✭✭MadsL


    wakka12 wrote: »
    if Europeans don't want to go extinct then they will have to change their ways.

    Europeans = people who live in Europe.

    Extinct indeed! Nonsense.

    If you mean ethnically white then say it.


  • #150
    wakka12
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,786 ✭✭✭wakka12


    MadsL wrote: »
    Europeans = people who live in Europe.

    Extinct indeed! Nonsense.

    If you mean ethnically white then say it.

    Oh well I thought that was implied. I did mean that. I don't think its racist to not want the indigenous ethnic group of Ireland and other european countries to go extinct


  • Advertisement
  • #151
    squiggledash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 47 ✭squiggledash


    It wouldn't appear to be happening anytime soon as birth rates are falling in Europe not just stagnating? More than likely what will happen is we will mix our genes in with the dominant group and they will survive that way.

    Still its interesting why a subset of a species would behave like this.


Advertisement