Brigette Bardot Fined for Anti-Islamic Writings

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title Newest to Oldest

Pages: PREV 1 2 3 NEXT

chemist Celebrim says what I wished I had 6/13/2004 4:06:56 AM

That's why i made the fair and consistent comment. It seems to be the antithesis of the spirit of hate speech laws in my eyes. Now, if the French courts went after the French author I alluded to I'd find the French system consistent, but still not fair. Like FJV says, it seems that hate speech laws seem to be a tool misused to stiffle criticism and dissent. That's a serious threat to liberty, don't you think? Almost a Robspierre type of action, or am I being to harsh?.

Quote Reply

mudshark RE:Celebrim says what I wished I had 6/13/2004 5:24:21 AM

Her latest outburst, a book called Un Cri Dans Le Silence, attacks Islam, gays, the unemployed, teachers and illegal immigrants, and calls for a return of the guillotine. She says that gays are fairground freaks, teachers arrive at work with greasy hair wearing disgusting jeans and muddy trainers, and that "the professional unemployed" don't even want to work illegally. Brigitte Bardot, now an unabashed fan of the National Front leader, Jean-Marie Le Pen Bardot, 69, has been convicted of similar offences she also condemns the presence of women in government. Bardot complains about the large number of Muslim immigrants in France and especially the ritual slaughter of sheep during a Muslim religious festival. So basically a neo conservative who likes sheep Fairground freaks lol but seriously I can?t help but be concerned over the growing popularity of the national front in the west

Quote Reply

chemist RE:Celebrim says what I wished I had 6/13/2004 5:52:20 AM

What has this got to do with the philosophical points Celebrim and I bring up? Nothing really. If Bardot wants to be a loon, fine. So she's a first class idiot. So what? THe world's full of them. The point is the selectivity of enforcement of the law(nothing dispariging about sacred cow groups can be said, but everyone else is fair game regardless of how hateful or moronic it is). Do you have something other than a pitiful guilt by association argument muddshark? Or should you go join Bardot with the sheep?.

Quote Reply

mudshark RE:Celebrim says what I wished I had 6/13/2004 8:42:09 AM

This thread was not started by you or Celebrim You are correct My post had little to do with your`s or celebrim`s coments. wich for the main part I am in agreement with. I made the post because I picked up a few facts that where not covered in sbulls link that I considered relevant. ?If Bardot wants to be a loon, fine. So she's a first class idiot. So what?? You under estimate what she says what she supports and what effect it has on society The snipe at the neo con`s was just a cheap shot just to amuse my self.

Quote Reply

ilpars RE:Briget Bardot Fined for Anti-Islamic Writings - celebrim 6/13/2004 10:12:18 AM

Maybe because USA did not face Nazis before WW2. Nazis were just speaking at the beginning. Then what is happened when "Decent men are not as brave as the indecent men". Once they had power, they were not just taking anymore. IMO, a line must be drawn against facism. As facism got to hate someone to exist; hatred based on race, religion or sexual preference differances is a very good place to draw the line.

Quote Reply

celebrim RE:Briget Bardot Fined for Anti-Islamic Writings - celebrim 6/13/2004 4:49:03 PM

"Maybe because USA did not face Nazis before WW2." I'm quite sure that this is the case. But outsiders viewing American politics tend to forget that Americans have always had a cultural legacy of fearing authoritainism in any of its forms. A European friend of mine when she speaks of 'far-Right' and 'far-Left' is speaking of Facism and Communism. And, as far as she is concerned, these are polar opposites. But an American will tend to speak of Facism and Communism as if they are basically the same thing - just different forms of authoritarian government. An American will not see the opposite of being Facist to be Communist, but to be Libertarian is to be the opposite of both. In America, we would rather risk letting the Communists and the Fascists speak thier minds, than risk becoming the very thing we hate about the Communists and the Fascists by deciding what it is right to speak and hear. We feel that in an open dialogue, as long as the debate is fair, 'truth, justice and the American way' (as the saying goes) will win out and over any sort of doctrine of injustice and hatred. We passionately believe - or at least most of us passionately believe - that Freedom doesn't need a crutch in order to be more attractive than Serfdom, and that the only way to garauntee true freedom is to allow the enemies of freedom space on the floor. And yes, we stand now at a national test of that belief. Whether we can and will long endure enemies of America using the freedom we grant them to attack America is an open question, and it tests the character of our nation and the wisdom of our beliefs to do so. Yet, I think we can do nothing else. If we ban 'Islamic Extremism' under the guise of protecting our freedoms, it won't be long before we are banning everything we disagree with. And if you can understand that, then you'll understand more about what the debate over 'the Patriot Act' really ammounts to in the U.S. American HIGHLY value freedom of speach, even the freedom to make hateful speach. The closest we have ever come to outlawing a system of beliefs in the U.S.A. was during the early years of the cold war, during what is called 'the Red Scare' or 'the McCarthy Era'. During that time, people of communist beliefs were persecuted for thier communist affliations. But that time has left a very bitter taste in American's mouth, so much so that the name of 'McCarthy' is as much cursed as the name 'Benidict Arnold' (the iconic American traitor). In my opinion, the abuses of the McCarthy era are somewhat overblown, but the very real abuses of that era has left Americans even more skeptical of anything that looks like repression of thought. Looking back on that era, we can see that even the most rapid anti-communists weren't so much interested as trying to make it illegal to promote communism in the USA as they were interested in discovering what we now know were the very real ties between certain American individuals and the Soviet government. But if even the search for traitors in our midst causes revulsion in the American spirit, you can imagine how disgusted most Americans are at repressing freedom of speach for lesser reasons.

Quote Reply

chemist RE:Briget Bardot Fined for Anti-Islamic Writings - celebrim 6/14/2004 1:27:40 AM

Again, we're in agreement ilpars. But it must be a consistent and fairly applied standard..

Quote Reply

ilpars Intolerance at USA - celebrim 6/14/2004 3:05:34 AM

I agree with you that Communism in the way that Soviets practised (it was not what Marx visioned) has many common grounds with Facism. maybe that is why Nazi party's is called nationalist socialist. But Comminism can exist in a non-authoritarian society such as in a democracy. On the other hand facism can not. By its very nature facism is against democracy and democratic ideals. That is the reason I see the facism as the greatest threat to World. If person X says that person Y has no place in this world and must be destroyed, and if person Z actally did kill Person Y; is person X less quilty than person Z. I am not talking about outlawing a belief. McCarthy incident is not relevant to our debate. These men persecuted were not hating any person. They never told something like "All capitalists must be destroyed". Haters on the other hand, advocating discrimitation against certain groups. They are dangerous to the future of society in which they belonged. Not only because some maniac will eventually agree with them and will try to destroy the "illness" as they saw fit; but because other side also hears them. Hears them and when he saw the governments did nothing against them, he got suspicious about if the government can protect him from this hatred. I am hearing from my friends living in USA that being a muslim in USA after 9/11 is a tough thing. Some of them are hiding their religion. One of them is openly insulted for no other reason that being a muslim. I have also friends at Germany and UK. They do not have thi problem. I saw myself in this forum that some Americans has 0 tolerance against every muslim no matter how nice or peaceful are they. One of them even told me that I can not be a muslim because I am against violance and have liberal ideas. These are dangereous prejudges. Yes in my idea saying things like "All muslims must be killed" or "Only good muslim is a dead one" or any other racist or anti-semitist hatred must be illegal. It could have a symbolic small penalty only to show that, this kind of action is not aproved by government and society. There is a good reason why Europe has hate laws. Europe saw that how dangereous is facism. Americans may not see it yet, but it is in their door waiting. Note: Oh yes my opinion is, radical fundementalist Islam must be forbidden all around the world. Only in few countries they are illegal; Turkey is one of them.

Quote Reply

chemist RE:Intolerance at USA - celebrim 6/14/2004 4:30:08 AM

WE may be bogging down in semantics here ilpars. I take socialism to mean what you take communism to mean. i.e One can be a socialist without being totalitarian, but one cannot be a communist without being, by definition, totalitarian. That could be why we're having a disconnect on this. Your muslim friends aren't the only ones getting flack for being who and what they are. I still get insults from complete strangers walking to my car after mass at St. Thomas Aquinas. YOu know, the whole Catholics are pederasts thing, and that I should go and die because I'm a homophobic fascist. Idiots abound ilpars. Remind your buddies of this. White guys get the same treatment as they do from time to time. It won't stop them from being hurt emotionally, but it might salve it because they konw they aren't alone. In regards to Bardoe, I don't think Celebrim and I see her as a facist. An homophobic, racist, anti-modern, and religiously bigoted idiot she most definately is, but there is a difference between an idiot and a facist.

Quote Reply

SGTObvious The problem with laws against hate; 6/14/2004 10:54:22 AM

I see this as one of those Good Ideas which simply doesn't work in Reality, when you factor in Human Nature. The Problems: 1) Where is the border between hate and criticism? 2) What if it's mean, nasty, ugly, and accurate? If, let's say, People belonging to Group X really do cause 70% of the violent crime in an area, is it racist to say "People belonging to Group X cause most of our violent crime"? 3) These laws never seem to work both ways. Are French prosecuted for saying nasty things about Americans? I don't think so. When only a few special groups get protected by rules against racism, that in itself is racist. Even in Liberal Hollywood, it is still perfectly acceptable to portray rural white Christian American southerners as the crudest of racist stereotypes. This is "OK" with the media elite, because the "redneck" is not considered a "protected" class.

Quote Reply

PREV 1 2 3 NEXT