...To Think Free Speech is Dead in the UK

[RockyBayEve]

After 3 free speech advocates American Brittany Pettibone, her Austrian boyfriend and Canadian journalist Lauren Southern are detained by UK border force, barred from speaking at Speakers Corner, deported or barred entry.

'Free speech' - have you listened to them?

Britain First has just been kicked off FB too.

Whoopeee!

Free speech cannot be absolute and unlimited.

Anyone wanting to abuse free speech to cause hatred and violence is unwelcome here.

These are exactly the sort of people we do not want.

'Free speech' - have you listened to them?

Have you????

We don’t have free speech laws in the UK?

So where does anti immigration American Brittany and her Austrian boyfriend live?

If you want to get really anal about it we don’t have free speech in the UK. We have freedom of expression and it is not absolute or without limits.

Freedom comes with responsibility (not to incident hatred). They weren't coming over to discuss knitting patterns.

Every one I read about who is anti-immigration always seems to have a wife/partner/family member who is or was an immigrant.

It's ironic how some people don't want certain people in this country who they think spread hate but then complain when it happens to people whose views they support.

Some people support free speech only when it comes to views they support.

They do allow in some awful gobshites though.

I agree with you 100% OP. Free speech should be protected at all cost!

Freedom to say anything - anything? No matter how sexist, racist, violent, repugnant?

Yes, I believe in free speech in full. You can only challenge views that you oppose if you allow them to be aired. If peoples speech is suppressed they a) go underground and b) become more popular as "martyrs". I would say banning these three has given them loads of free publicity and allowed them to air their views. If they had been allowed in people would be able to listen to them and debate them but there would be far less press. Own goal for all those who believe that opinions they disagree with should be silenced.

Besides, in the UK certain hate speech rules seem to be very inconsistent.

The problem is who gets to decide what counts as free speech. Once you start putting boundaries on it, then people you might want to be heard are covered by the same legislation. I do not really agree with PosieParker (or at least not the way she chooses to frame her argument) , but once we start down the road we have done, you can expect the right to free-speech for everyone to be curtailed. www.theposieparker.com/news

Also, how do you determine what is "hate speech". It depends on your perspective and political opinion. For example, a transsexual might believe that women who are opposed to trans people being called women use "hate" speech. Whereas women might think being labelled as "cis" is hate speech. Should we silence one side?

Free speech means you can’t be arrested for what you say- unless what you say is inciting hate. It doesn’t mean anyone has to host or listen to you - on-line or elsewhere. So, I don’t think this is an attack on free speech. We shouldn’t be letting people in to preach hate in our communities.

So you'd be happy to allow anyone from a far right neo nazi (violence to anyone who isn't white) to the most conservative weird religious type (beating and raping your wife is fine) on a soapbox at speakers corner?

Even though they are just there specifically to be provocative and cause a riot? This lot were heading for speakers corner purely because they though it to be a high Muslim area.

We have enough homegrown gobshites of our own. We don't need to import any more.

I tend to agree with mygoditsfullofstars for one main reason - Nick Griffin. Letting him go on question time was the best decision they made, because they gave him enough rope to hang himself. He couldn't answer any questions outside of his own nasty agenda, clearly wasn't used to being challenged in a properly chaired fair debate, and it sunk him and the BNP for the next election. All swinging voters I knew who had been considering them as a protest vote saw just how vile and stupid their beliefs were, and were completely put off.

Having said that, there is a fine line between discriminatory speech and discriminatory actions - but I'd rather a sexist racist pig be able to out themselves, so I can avoid working for them or having them as a partner!

Freedom to say anything - anything? No matter how sexist, racist, violent, repugnant?

Who decides that exactly? You or your friends, people who think like you?

Quote by from Evelyn Beatrice Hall
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"

I absolutely agree with Evelyn Beatrice Hall
Open debate should ALWAYS be welcome.

Wrong think is a very dangerous and a totalitarian mindset imo.

We should value the freedoms that were fought for and won by our parents or grandparents!

Open debate should ALWAYS be welcome.

But these people don't want open debate, they just want to spread their hate filled lies.

I'd rather my children, and my friends children be protected from Far Right hatred, and the violence that follows. Freedom of speech doesn't mean you can spew hate speech without consequence.

I think the op maybe agrees with them? The 'my grandfather's fought...' is often used as an argument for the right to say anything you like.

They must have broken some law or been seen as a threat to be boomeranged back from whence they came. Which is ironic considering their antics in the med.

Unless they are actually inciting violence (as opposed to say stuff that may result in someone else rioting) there is no legal grounds for excluding them. Not that it’s stoped the government in the past. There have been a fair few right wingers enxcluded over fears that their opponents will riot in recent years. It’s amazing what rights you can curtail provided that your case is heard by the right judge.

On the one hand, I know what you mean re Nick Griffin and giving someone like him the rope to hang himself but on the other I think there’s a risk that in giving people with very extreme views a very public platform we are normalising those attitudes.

In terms of defending someone’s right to say things even if you don’t agree with them, no one is stopping anyone expressing thier opinions - they are just not being given a public platform to do so (because of a risk of incitement).

At a time when letters are being distributed across East London calling for “punish a Muslim day” I think we as a society need to take a strong stand against incitement as there are clearly extremists bent on persuading and pressuring others into commiting crimes.