The United States bans Al-Manar's anti-Semitic and incitement programs. Other countries and satellite corporations which permit them to be broadcast are called upon to follow the example of Australia, France and the United States.
State Department spokesman Richard Boucher's announcement:
"The designation is to put Al-Manar television on the terrorist exclusion list because of its incitement of terrorist activity. Our law says that the organization can be put on the list if it commits or incites to commit any terrorist activity, and that is what we've found them."
Talking about the "Freedom of Speech":
Do you think banning anti-semitic and pro-jihad televison stations is against the "Freedom of Speech" we have in the West.
Originally posted by ivanhoeNo, because just as you can't shout "bomb" in a crowded place, you can't shout "kill Jews because..." in a nation full of gullible, impressionable, morally vaccuumed youth.
The United States bans Al-Manar's anti-Semitic and incitement programs. Other countries and satellite corporations which permit them to be broadcast are called upon to follow the example of Australia, France and the United States.
State Department spokesman Richard Boucher's announcement:
"The designation is to put Al-Manar television on the ...[text shortened]... mitic and pro-jihad televison stations is against the "Freedom of Speech" we have in the West.
Actually, this is interesting to me. I was in a Jewish chat room the other day debating the prominence of anti-semitism in the US and Europe. Anyway, long story short, my conclusion is this: Anyone willing to state WHY they hold "anti-semitic" views is exercising free speach and should not be moderated in the general public.
While I am not personally disappointed in the removal of this program, I take great personal offense at the theological favortism it shows. I am not Jewish. I am not Islamic. I don't particularly like either faith, to be honest. However, they should have every much a right to speak their mind as I do, and other should have every much a right to speak against them. That's my two cents atleast. Anything else (like what we have here) impedes freedom in its very nature.
Originally posted by OmnislashSo in other words, murderers should be allowed to preach how and why to murder other people?
Actually, this is interesting to me. I was in a Jewish chat room the other day debating the prominence of anti-semitism in the US and Europe. Anyway, long story short, my conclusion is this: Anyone willing to state WHY they hold "anti-semitic" views is exercising free speach and should not be moderated in the general public.
While I am not personally ...[text shortened]... y two cents atleast. Anything else (like what we have here) impedes freedom in its very nature.
Give me a break.
Originally posted by DarfiusI beg your pardon, but that is not what I said sir. Please read again and try to understand what I am attempting to communicate here.
So in other words, murderers should be allowed to preach how and why to murder other people?
Give me a break.
EDIT: As an after though, I would offer you to PM if you like. If it is simply a matter of clarity (i.e. something I have said seem ambigious) I would be happy to do so by PM so as not to clutter up the forums. If you do indeed quarrel with my point, then let us keep the discussion public.
Best Regards,
Omnislash 🙂
Originally posted by OmnislashI saw what you wrote.
I beg your pardon, but that is not what I said sir. Please read again and try to understand what I am attempting to communicate here.
You said Islamic Jihadists should be allowed to be sponsored by our government to preach what they would like.
I disagree for moral and logical reasons.
Originally posted by Darfius...and I think you may have some very valid points sir. What I am saying is that to deny the free speach of a person or group, especially when they are willing to state the rational of their statements, based upon another person or groups dislike of their statement is both unconstituional and self defeating in my opinion. I don't like a lot of what is said here in these forums. People here bash my faith, my political views, and just about any principle whatsoever which has any meaning to me and that I hold any stock in. They do so often without any rational justification and are completely lacking of any constructive intent. Nonetheless, I take issue with their choice to express this, and not their ABILITY to express this.
I saw what you wrote.
You said Islamic Jihadists should be allowed to be sponsored by our government to preach what they would like.
I disagree for moral and logical reasons.
I do not live under a pretense of respecting these statement and their ilk. I do however respect their ability to express unhindered.
Originally posted by DarfiusYou're a hypocrite; you spew more hatred than anybody on this site. As far as incitement to violence, Fox News is in a class of its own; its cheerleaded for wars against Afghanistan and Iraq and its commentators are now spewing war talk against North Korea, Iran, Syria, etc. etc. etc. Deny it, you self-righteous jerk.
Can you back that up at ALL or is it typical liberal spewing hatred?
Originally posted by no1marauderI spew love, and it's today's twisted moral standards that make it seem like hate.
You're a hypocrite; you spew more hatred than anybody on this site. As far as incitement to violence, Fox News is in a class of its own; its cheerleaded for wars against Afghanistan and Iraq and its commentators are now spewing war talk against North Korea, Iran, Syria, etc. etc. etc. Deny it, you self-righteous jerk.
"Don't tell me that I'm responsible for my actions, I don't want to hear it you ****."
That's a typical answer to any mention of Christianity. Compare that to most of our nation's history before 1950.
Are you telling me we should not have gone after Bin Laden? Is that what you are attempting to sell here?
Originally posted by DarfiusWhatever happened to "turn the other cheek" Mr. Holy Roller?
I spew love, and it's today's twisted moral standards that make it seem like hate.
"Don't tell me that I'm responsible for my actions, I don't want to hear it you ****."
That's a typical answer to any mention of Christianity. Compare that to most of our nation's history before 1950.
Are you telling me we should not have gone after Bin Laden? Is that what you are attempting to sell here?
Besides, all I said is Fox News incites to violence the same as Islamic TV stations. Both think they're justified, but they still endorse violence. Therefore, ban em all or ban none.
Originally posted by no1marauderFox incites violence as a response, which of course, is totally justifiable before God. It's called JUSTICE.
Whatever happened to "turn the other cheek" Mr. Holy Roller?
Besides, all I said is Fox News incites to violence the same as Islamic TV stations. Both think they're justified, but they still endorse violence. Therefore, ban em all or ban none.
Islamists incite violence as a CAUSE.