British dhimmitude delivers blow to free thought and free speech in the EU

[Dowly]

Originally Posted by Happy Times

I like this pic (I take it's about the "american freedom").

[Happy Times]

Originally Posted by Dowly

I like this pic (I take it's about the "american freedom").

Yes, and ours also, America has more freedom than most European countries, including Finland.

Prove it, i call BS.

You clearly demonstrate that you have no idea what you are talking about .
So which British laws about public order and breach of the peace is it that you don't understand ?
Going on what you have written I would say it is a pretty safe bet to say that you understand none of them whatsoever .
Tell you what , when you find the relevant laws in the Criminal justice and public order acts you can go down to section 155 of the latest version and see the law that makes Wilders visit somewhat difficult .

Just like they did it last time.

Wow your ignorance knows no limits .
Where was that protest held ?
Where did lord Ahmed say he was going to have his demonstration ?
What are the differences between the two ?
Which laws apply to one but not the other ?
It really is very simple stuff , but it does seem quite beyond your mental abilities .

Were has Wilders said he wanted to provoke violent reactions?

That was on his interview with BBC newstalk prior to the release of his film .

The Danish cartoons prove, that you really dont need much, to get a violent reaction from the muslims.

Actually they proved that you do need to do lots .
What was the reaction when they were published ?
Pretty much nothing wasn't it , a few letters of protest and couple of idiots doing little demonstrations .
What was the reaction after a lengthy tour to gather opposition includuing a massive propoganda campaign , heaps of false information , a selection of cartoons which had never been published and the use of pictures that had nothing to do with the subject in the slightest ?

But I suppoose the real irony there is the reaction of the cartoonists to Wilders , they don't want their cartoons associated with his piece of crap do they :rotfl:

[Happy Times]

You clearly demonstrate that you have no idea what you are talking about .
So which British laws about public order and breach of the peace is it that you don't understand ?
Going on what you have written I would say it is a pretty safe bet to say that you understand none of them whatsoever .
Tell you what , when you find the relevant laws in the Criminal justice and public order acts you can go down to section 155 of the latest version and see the law that makes Wilders visit somewhat difficult .

I checked that your breach of peace BS is regarded as legally superfluous.
I bet i can call Pope a poof freely but calling Muhammed a pedofile and genociding psychopath he was, would probably take me to jail. Starting the laywer talk doesnt increase your credibility btw.:rotfl:

Wow your ignorance knows no limits .
Where was that protest held ?
Where did lord Ahmed say he was going to have his demonstration ?
What are the differences between the two ?
Which laws apply to one but not the other ?
It really is very simple stuff , but it does seem quite beyond your mental abilities .

Lord Ahmed threatened he would mobilise 10.000 muslims to prevent Wilders from entering the parlament. So they would have had to be there on Wilders arrival. And where did he say he was going to even give a formal notice.
You really should be concerned of your own mental abilities, you border on retarded.

That was on his interview with BBC newstalk prior to the release of his film .

First ive heard, ive seen the hard talk interwiew. Could be your BS again.

Actually they proved that you do need to do lots .
What was the reaction when they were published ?
Pretty much nothing wasn't it , a few letters of protest and couple of idiots doing little demonstrations .
What was the reaction after a lengthy tour to gather opposition includuing a massive propoganda campaign , heaps of false information , a selection of cartoons which had never been published and the use of pictures that had nothing to do with the subject in the slightest ?

I dont think the reaction was acceptable or normal, even if they would have been shown a picture of Muhammed facking a pig in top of the Kaaba.


You should emigrate to Saudi Arabia, retarded laws are the rule there.

I have to mostly ingnore you, not trough forum tools but otherwise.
Your stupity makes my blood boil, please dont reprocriate, ever.

[heartc]

Originally Posted by Dowly

I like this pic (I take it's about the "american freedom").

I take it it's more along this line of "reasoning":





But let's blame America, makes us look more manly and original, no?

[Happy Times]

Im happy to see that signatures in the petition on behalf of Wilders are growing at a rate of thousands per day. They are coming all over the world and makes me happy to see so many Finnish people signing it. You cand find it as my sic.

I checked that your breach of peace BS is regarded as legally superfluous.

It is still the law so it is not BS .

Lord Ahmed threatened he would mobilise 10.000 muslims to prevent Wilders from entering the parlament. So they would have had to be there on Wilders arrival. And where did he say he was going to even give a formal notice.
You really should be concerned of your own mental abilities, you border on retarded.

You demonstrate your ignorance again , you cannot gather near parliament without permission , under the new laws a single person can now count as an illegal gathering and be liable to arrest . And needless to say (though maybe it should be said as you really havn't a clue) any attempt by a protest to prevent access even if permission for the protest had been granted would leave them liable to arrest and prosecution for obtruction , in fact such an action would give the police the ability to use the dispersal order once the demonstration had breached its permitted actions ...and of course they coulduse that great old chestnut you call superfluous which is actions likely to cause a breach of the peace .

First ive heard

Well since you find Geert Admirable then you really should listen to the crap he talks more often .

I dont think the reaction was acceptable or normal

Who said it was ?
But it was a reaction that people had to work really hard to make happen wasn't it .

You should emigrate to Saudi Arabia,

Is that the new version of the idiots "why don't you move to Russia" that is used when their arguements fall apart ?

Your stupity makes my blood boil

Says someone who has not only demonstrated their ignorance of the subject but who linked to a real font of stupidity like jihadwatch:rotfl:

[Happy Times]

It is still the law so it is not BS .

Its legal talk for it is BS.

You demonstrate your ignorance again , you cannot gather near parliament without permission , under the new laws a single person can now count as an illegal gathering and be liable to arrest . And needless to say (though maybe it should be said as you really havn't a clue) any attempt by a protest to prevent access even if permission for the protest had been granted would leave them liable to arrest and prosecution for obtruction , in fact such an action would give the police the ability to use the dispersal order once the demonstration had breached its permitted actions ...and of course they coulduse that great old chestnut you call superfluous which is actions likely to cause a breach of the peace .

Dont you get it by now, that the illegal riot with arrests and fighting, was what Lord Ahmed threatened with and what British Goverment was scared of.

Well since you find Geert Admirable then you really should listen to the crap he talks more often .

So can you link me to some source about Wilders wish to provoke violence? Im sure media must have noted that.

Who said it was ?
But it was a reaction that people had to work really hard to make happen wasn't it .

Not very hard, fact is they had large scale violance because of cartoons.

Is that the new version of the idiots "why don't you move to Russia" that is used when their arguements fall apart ?

Its your arguments that fell apart. I thought that you would fit better in SA with your wiews of freedom of speech.

Says someone who has not only demonstrated their ignorance of the subject but who linked to a real font of stupidity like jihadwatch:rotfl:

Here i can quote Robert Spencer who runs the site Jihad Watch.

I present the work not on the basis of my credentials, but on the basis of the evidence I bring forth; evaluate it for yourself. One example: after I spoke at the University of North Carolina, Professor Carl Ernst of the university wrote a piece about me warning that my books were non-scholarly and were published by presses that he believed reflected a political agenda of which he did not approve. That kind of approach may impress some people, but Carl Ernst did not and cannot bring forth even a single example of a supposed inaccuracy in my work. I would, of course, be happy to debate Carl Ernst or any other scholar of Islam about Islam and jihad; this is a standing invitation.

Its legal talk for it is BS.

The law of the land is the law of the land, the fact that you think it is B/S does not alter the fact does it .

Dont you get it by now, that the illegal riot with arrests and fighting, was what Lord Ahmed threatened with and what British Goverment was scared of.

What threats ? don't you understand British law at all do you ?
OK fair enough you have demonstrated relativly in bloody BIG LETTERS for everyone to see that when it comes to British law you are completely clueless .

So now Mr Happy times could you perhaps write something on any given subject where you are not such an absolute clueless muppet ?

Not very hard, fact is they had large scale violance because of cartoons.

Did you read what I wrote ? OK going by what has been presented maybe reading and comprehension are far beyond your abilities

Now for those that might be slightly confused .
I thoroughly disagree with the recent British public order or criminal justice bills .Be it from the earleist Thatcherite manifestations attempting to dealwith miners/dockers /watchmakers/railwaymen ...or hippies or ravers.
However for simplicity
The law has been put in place ,if you want to object to the law fair enough .
I f you want to object to the law because your particular flavour of bul**** does't meet the threshold then tough excrement unless you can make a case.
So Happy Times , you are really slacking ....would you like to present a case that might stand up to a moments scrutiny ?