View Single Post
Old 18-05-2016, 08:04 AM   #46
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 26,740
Likes: 13,667 (7,885 Posts)

The Extremism Bill means that the Queen's speech might be the only one you hear from now on
The Extremism Bill will be introduced in the Queen’s Speech. But, for those who hold extreme views and are attempting to persuade others, surely the answer is not to ban them but to win the argument
by Alistair Carmichael, 17 hours ago

This Government still seems wedded to the notion that if you ban something it will go away.They banned psychoactive substances, despite zero evidence that it would reduce harm. They tried banning encryption, making all of our data less secure. Now they are trying to ban “extremist speech” via an Extremism Bill which they will introduce in the Queen’s Speech tomorrow.

It is common knowledge that when you ban something what you risk doing is driving that behaviour underground: any parent can tell you that. To be clear: we absolutely need to tackle violent extremism. It is a threat to us and our way of life – but the Government will get nowhere with these proposals. In fact, by driving those who preach non-violent extremism into the shadows, we help their cause.

read on here:

meanwhile as theresa may bans talking about 911 conspiracy:

9/11 attacks: Senate passes bill allowing victims to sue Saudi Arabia
President Barack Obama has said he will veto the legislation, which still needs to be passed by the House
by Andrew Buncombe New York, @AndrewBuncombe, 12 hours ago

The US senate has passed legislation that would allow the victims of the September 11 attacks to file lawsuits seeking damages from officials from Saudi Arabia - a move that sets the bill for a showdown with the White House.

Fifteen of the nineteen men who hijacked four planes and flew them into targets in New York and Washington in 2001 were Saudi citizens, though Riyadh has always denied having any role in the attacks. A US commission established in the aftermath of the attacks also concluded there was no evidence of official Saudi connivance. However, the White House has been under pressure to declassify a 28-page section of the report that was never published on the grounds of national security.

Why won't they publish the 28 pages? As the AUTHORITARIANS always love to say to us as they steal our privacy: ''if you've got nothing to hide, then what's the problem?''
when the people in power want you dead, just existing is a revolutionary act

Last edited by iamawaveofthesea; 18-05-2016 at 08:08 AM.
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote