Sunday, August 06, 2006
Previous Posts
- Lost things lie under closing water...
- Going to Berkshire via Burnham-On-Crouch
- Then I'll wake all fresh and new tomorrow...
- Shut up and drink your gin!
- Lost in coffee rings and fingerprints.
- Like plates from shaking hands...
- And then I'll dream of moons and horror shows...
- We're going to hell anyway, let's travel first cla...
- The NHS need a new website.
- Is she more beautiful than me?
8 Comments:
The churlish way in which the goverment continually tries to silence this man, and his supporters, saddens me.
It also saddens me that the only time he is ever reported on in the news or media, is when some sod wants rid of him.
If his message was backed by popular belief then perhaps it wouldn't be so, but the depressing truth of the matter is that people have given up caring about the issue because it's not the latest thing to be interested in. If there's an eco-warrior who has the support of the world today, the likelihood is that in a few months time (s)he'll be forgotten.
The public are as fickle as the press.
Mike xxx
That's a ridiculous argument. Are you suggesting anyone who doesn't represent "popular belief" should be repressed and silenced? That is not the point of a democracy. It's not "forgetting" that I'm objecting to, it's 50 policeman brutally attacking a completely peaceful protest in the middle of the night and seizing a whole load of signs and paintings, as if we're back in Nazi Germany where anything against the government would be seized and destroyed. It's the government introducing a completely repressive law just in order to rid Parliament Square of a man who is protesting simply for basic human rights.
Besides his message is backed by popular belief: the majority was against the war in Iraq, and the majority are now against the bombing of Lebanon. I'm not talking about the British majority either, most people in the world are calling for a ceasefire.
"When I pass protestors every day at Downing Street, and believe me you name it, they protest against it, I may not like what they call me, but I thank God they can. That's called freedom" - Tony Blair, 2001
I haven't given up caring about peace in the middle east, or justice, or freedom from repression and persecution. If you think most people have it's only because you read the Daily Mail.
I don't read it, I just look at the pictures and go through the sports pages.
But in my opinion, the issue about the war in Iraq has become less important to the people who were up in arms a couple of years ago as the state of the world changes, with more pressing matters at home or more violent or explosive events overseas.
I know that it is still an issue for many people, but because it's not in the news so much he doesn't seem to get as much publicity except, as Liam said, when his display is being torn down. If we all felt so strongly about it then why aren't there more of us there with him protesting?
Mike xxx
He's not just protesting about Iraq, he's protesting about "more pressing matters" as well. But what does it matter what he's protesting about anyway? It's not about whether anybody agrees with him, it's not about his level of publicity or popularity, it's nothing to do with his cause (although I am mainly in support of it), it's to do with the fact that we are living in a democracy and regardless of what his campaign is about he should have the right to protest peacefully, as he's been doing for the last five years, without fear of police brutality and repression.
As ever, you've completely missed the point. And for your information 60,000 people were there with him protesting on Saturday. Not that the Daily Mail had any coverage of that.
Get over the Daily Mail thing.
What was the point, then, in its simplest form, if I've missed it by so much?
And yes, I agree that there should be a high level of free speech that we enjoy. But still there's a limit - you guys would have a go if he was making anti-racial slurs, promoting Nazi propaganda or something along those lines, but surely their views should be heard just as much as everyone else. If it was a religious thing, that he was protesting that the government was devaluing the church or something then would you still be up in arms that his plaque was being demolished?
The simple facts are that you agree with the guy so you feel sympathy for his plight, also the reason why 24% of British Muslims seem to believe that the 7/7 attacks were justified.
Mike xxx
All I'm doing is defending the right to protest. It's nothing to do with the fact that I support Brian Haw. There was a crazy religious guy who used to protest on Oxford St, preaching about Satan, and shouting through his loudspeaker "are you a winner or a sinner?" Mysteriously he has disappeared since the government's restrictions around protesting in public. I feel just as strongly about the government's repression of this man as of Brian Haw. I completely disagree with his message, it's total deluded bullshit in my opinion, but he was simply embracing the right to protest in a democracy.
As with every social right comes a responsibility, and for this simple reason I would not tolerate racist propaganda in the same way, purely because we have reached a position in society where anti-semitism is no longer socially acceptable. In the same way I fully support freedom of the press, but I was against the Danish press publishing disrespectful charicatures of Islamic prophets. However Brian Haw, and the man who protests on Oxford Street, and the Jehovah's Witnesses who wave flags in Ilford, and the countless right and left wing campaigners that you see on the streets before elections, have not crossed this line, and are exercising freedom of expression. That is why I defend all of these people. I am not at all biased towards Brian, it just so happens that I support his cause.
I don't see what you're suggesting by stating the proportion of Muslims who think 7/7 was justified: that all Muslims are terrorists? It's the sort of message you seem to consider valid. Besides, where do these statistics come from anyway? Probably from someone asking the question "are you with us or are you with the terrorists?"
It was on the news the other day - it wasn't intentionally a slanderous comment.
And now you have explained your position more clearly I think I understand. And naturally you're right as well. Which makes my continued responses quite invalid. Thanks.
Mike xxx
Post a Comment
<< Home