Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨

"Dort wo man Bücher verbrennt..."

Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
... "verbrennt man auch am Ende Menschen". - Heinrich Heine



Trans: "Where they burn books, you will in the end burn people"

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    :yeees: no it doesn't
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I think that's the state sponsoring burning books being a problem, not an individual doing so where the state seems rather pissed off about it (but being a democracy unable to stop him acting)
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I think that's the state sponsoring burning books being a problem, not an individual doing so where the state seems rather pissed off about it (but being a democracy unable to stop him acting)

    I think it starts when people believe that this type of thing is acceptable. Eventually, while good men stand by, support grows until such time that it becomes state sponsored...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    As always he has the right to throw his tantrum. I just wish the media wouldn't give him so much coverage. Had the media done the sensible thing and just ignored him he and his small following could have had their demonstration and no one would have cared.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    America commemorates 9-11 by causing another one...

    (Thanks to the 'Mash for that one)
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Where they burn hastily made effigies over just about anything, it's probably an Islamic country.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I nearly started a thread a couple of weeks back about the disgraceful scenes regarding the possible construction of a mosque near the site of the WTC- or the '9/11 mosque', as some cunts insist on calling it.

    There are some worrying things going on in the US at the moment. Not just that there are sizeable numbers of racist cunts peddling their obscene shit about, but that some of them are actually mainstream politicians.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Aladdin wrote: »
    I nearly started a thread a couple of weeks back about the disgraceful scenes regarding the possible construction of a mosque near the site of the WTC- or the '9/11 mosque', as some cunts insist on calling it.

    There are some worrying things going on in the US at the moment. Not just that there are sizeable numbers of racist cunts peddling their obscene shit about, but that some of them are actually mainstream politicians.

    It's an election year.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Aladdin wrote: »
    I nearly started a thread a couple of weeks back about the disgraceful scenes regarding the possible construction of a mosque near the site of the WTC- or the '9/11 mosque', as some cunts insist on calling it.

    There are some worrying things going on in the US at the moment. Not just that there are sizeable numbers of racist cunts peddling their obscene shit about, but that some of them are actually mainstream politicians.

    If refer you to my previous post. There is a worrying undercurrent in the US at the moment, we also have a own few idiots here...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Much as I agree with some of her sentiments in this statement, I do think linking the building of a mosque as equivalent to burning the Koran as tenuous at best.

    Sarah Palin Speaks

    As usual she misses the fact that the actual link is intolerance of Islam.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    MoK wrote: »
    I think it starts when people believe that this type of thing is acceptable. Eventually, while good men stand by, support grows until such time that it becomes state sponsored...

    Possibly though given that the UK, US and Germany remain vibrant democracies despite organised book burnings of the Satanic Verses, Harry Potter and what looked like a French translation of Hugh Trevor Roper's book on Hitler I think the risk is extremely minimal.

    And certainly it more minimal than the risk of us slouching towards authoritarianism because the 'good' men decide to use anti-pollution or health and safety legislation to stop other people exercising their rights (though frankly the risk that if the local county does decide that burning the Koran violates local laws on bonfires and toxicity that the US will be rounding up and undesirables to send them to the US equivalent of Gulags is also extremely low)
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    And certainly it more minimal than the risk of us slouching towards authoritarianism because the 'good' men decide to use anti-pollution or health and safety legislation to stop other people exercising their rights (though frankly the risk that if the local county does decide that burning the Koran violates local laws on bonfires and toxicity that the US will be rounding up and undesirables to send them to the US equivalent of Gulags is also extremely low)
    If you are not being tongue in cheek and are serusiouly suggesting public burning of Korans (or Bibles for that matter) might pose less of a danger to society to H&S legislation, I strongly suggest you cancel your Daily Mail subscription and avoid all articles and pieces by Richard Littlejohn, because it (or something else, anyway) is certainly doing untold damage to your common sense.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I think that the point being made is that one is an act of total freedom (burning books) whereas the other has an element of Govt control. In this instance the control is demonstrated by using H&S to prevent the burning of book for political reasons, not actually safety.

    It's a fair point.

    I don't agree with burning books, it shows a lack of tolerance and does highlight a dangerous undertone which even Herr Heine recognised back in the 19th Century. I will shout from the rooftops, not about the act itself but the intolerance it demonstrates.

    By the same token I don't believe that any US law officials should stop it, under any guise. That is controlling free speech (I wish out laws enshrined that like their do) and I take an equally dim view of that.

    Intolerance isn't defeated by laws. It's defeated by liberation, by force of argument.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Aladdin wrote: »
    If you are not being tongue in cheek and are serusiouly suggesting public burning of Korans (or Bibles for that matter) might pose less of a danger to society to H&S legislation, I strongly suggest you cancel your Daily Mail subscription and avoid all articles and pieces by Richard Littlejohn, because it (or something else, anyway) is certainly doing untold damage to your common sense.

    I may not have written it well, but I am suggesting that there is a danger in using H&S and pollution legislation as a back door way to stop this man exercising his rights

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/7992411/911-Koran-burning-what-the-law-says.html
    He has failed to obtain a permit for a bonfire, and under a city ordinance is prohibited from starting a fire that is more than 3ft across 3ft high. The burning ink from the pages of the Korans could be toxic and contravene local regulations.

    But if you're alright with this I expect your next post to be fully supportive of councils using anti-terrorism legislation to spy on dog-fouling...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    MoK wrote: »
    I think that the point being made is that one is an act of total freedom (burning books) whereas the other has an element of Govt control. In this instance the control is demonstrated by using H&S to prevent the burning of book for political reasons, not actually safety.

    It's a fair point.

    I don't agree with burning books, it shows a lack of tolerance and does highlight a dangerous undertone which even Herr Heine recognised back in the 19th Century. I will shout from the rooftops, not about the act itself but the intolerance it demonstrates.

    By the same token I don't believe that any US law officials should stop it, under any guise. That is controlling free speech (I wish out laws enshrined that like their do) and I take an equally dim view of that.

    Intolerance isn't defeated by laws. It's defeated by liberation, by force of argument.

    Welcome back MoK, I was starting to think someone had hacked your account...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    :)
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I may not have written it well, but I am suggesting that there is a danger in using H&S and pollution legislation as a back door way to stop this man exercising his rights

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/7992411/911-Koran-burning-what-the-law-says.html
    Oh I see now... for a moment I thought you'd gone all Daily Mailesque on us.


    But if you're alright with this I expect your next post to be fully supportive of councils using anti-terrorism legislation to spy on dog-fouling...
    Nah, I think governments should at least be upfront and honest, if they're going to ban things.

    Having said that, I do believe there are times when it might be in the wider public interest to stop someone from being a cunt, even if it infringes their freedom of speech. For instance, I am glad to live in a country that prevents the likes of the Westboro Church from entering with the intention of picketing funerals of homosexuals and dead soldiers. You might think Britain is less 'free' than the US for this- I happen to think it is actually the exact opposite.

    It does not need to be all or nothing. Lines and can be drawn quite effectively, and even if a few individuals see their right infringed from time to time, it is preferable IMO to a free for all situation that can lead to cunts like this risking an enormous amount of grief for potentially tens of thousands of others. Sure, it is paramount to ensure such powers are not abused and used only in exceptional circumstances, but so long as that rule is observed, absolutely fine by me.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Whilst I understand the principle of "for the greater good", too many awful acts have been carried out under the guise of "the greater good" (anyone else getting visions of Hot Fuzz here?)... and the principle overlooks the rights of the individual. In fact I find the fact that you used the expression "even if a few individuals see their right infringed from time to time, it is preferable" horrendous and extremely frightening. That's the same defence for locking up Muslims/Irish/Black/Jews/Socialists/[insert scapegoat here] in pretty much any totalitarian state you could name.

    Like you I think that Westboro Church a deeply offensive group and I have little compassion for them. Where we differ is that I like the fact that the freedom they have to make their statements is the same one we have which enables you to call them "cunts" and me to agree with your sentiment, whilst also arguing with you.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    As always he has the right to throw his tantrum. I just wish the media wouldn't give him so much coverage. Had the media done the sensible thing and just ignored him he and his small following could have had their demonstration and no one would have cared.

    Yes, but how would've this given them shit-loads of stuff to write about? I've they hadn't stirred it up a bit, they wouldn't have a load of "muslim outrage" to shout about, and maybe 3 people wouldn't have been shot in Afghanistan yesterday. I'm sure they're fucking pleased with themselves. This is the same as the Danish cartoons incident. Nobody was genuinely offended. A lot of people were told they should be offended (not by the media this time, although not showing the pictures in the UK certainly validated that offence). If the media hadn't bothered with this story, nobody would've ever heard about it, and those muslims who did find out would've likely just dismissed him as some nutter looking for publicity.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I think this is very relevant.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
Sign In or Register to comment.