Silence at Remembrance Day ceremony disrupted by protestors

[JPINFV]

Quote from ORIGINAL reports: Police told the Daily Mail three men were arrested - two for public order offences and one for assaulting an officer.

Apparently the bobbies / coppers did, it appears you WIN in failing to read the entire post, one does not have to break a law to be arrested just accused. As stated prior its a very good thing for this protest group that did not occur in my home town, likely the police would NOT have been called, but in the UK apparently intervening to prevent "mob rule" and one of my most favourable hobbies (only exceeding my pleasure on as is part time axe murderer a bit) see avatar.

Congrats at failing at realizing that just because they did arrest them doesn't necessarily mean they should have. The US put over 100,000 US citizens in concentration internment camps during WW2, which we now realize was an incredibly stupid and bad thing to do. Are you suggesting that, because we did, that it was the de facto correct course of action? Additionally, if someone is arrested, but it is obvious that they did not commit a crime, I expect those police officers to be fired and charged with false imprisonment. Not everyone that is accused of something is arrested. Similarly, if people decided to rely on mob rule and enforce their own laws, I expect the police to arrest them and for them to be charged for their offenses.

Good Point ! but for clarity again its a very good thing for this protest did not occur in my home town police would NOT have been called, small town, no media, no anonymity, lots of "rednecks" (of which this is a compliment by the way, where I live) just saying. I wonder if this "protest" occurred at the Arlington Cemetery if we would not be watching on CNN and in passing applauding the actions of patriotic Americans supported by patriotic Canadians ? Or you would ever dare post your "interpretation"

So, you believe, or at least tacitly support, that it isn't the police job to enforce morality, but the job of a bunch of rednecks to commit vigilante "justice," and that there's nothing wrong with that? The media and state and federal police agencies have a way of finding their way to backwards communities like that. ...and yes, communities that see no problem with vigilante justice is backwards, be it in the Middle East, Africa, or the US. Just because you (generic "you") disagree with the law or court rulings doesn't give you permission to commit murder.

Agreed you WIN in memetics and now my personal use of medications called emetics, that said: Firstly this Godwin pseudo Internet Law, and this a humorous observation made by Mike Godwin in 1989 which has become an Internet adage. I find no humour in your comments or incorrectly applied personal interpretation of US Law in the slightest, but you do fail for applied logic or sensitivity.

I find no humor with the assumption that because I have a different opinion, I have to be thankful that the Nazis didn't win WW2. I guess I should also be lucky that the Ottoman Empire didn't win WW1 as well.

Quote: Godwin's law does not claim to articulate a fallacy; it is instead framed as a memetic tool to reduce the incidence of inappropriate hyperbolic comparisons. "Although deliberately framed as if it were a law of nature or of mathematics, its purpose has always been rhetorical and pedagogical: I wanted folks who glibly compared someone else to Hitler or to Nazis to think a bit harder about the Holocaust," Godwin has written.

Perhaps you missed the point of Godwin ? I did not compare glibly to someone else Hitler or the Nazis I was saying without the very war heroes and members of my Family that died for YOUR freedom of speech and YOUR rights (which in my opinion you now are now worthy as you do not understand the intent of law) My comments in comparing languages is called "situational irony" as YOU WOULD be speaking a different language, saluting in a different manner (of which you must have spent hours to locate on line) by the "rare chance" that you did not fit into groups acceptable by those defeated groups your family and even yourself would not have come to be ? I so am thankful that Churchill and Franklin Delano Roosevelt shared the same language and ideals.

Oh, that's funny. You support vigilante red necks, but I don't understand the intent of law? Wow, that's actually quite hilarious. Oh, and I didn't spend hours online finding the Bellany salute. See, I observe and learn things every day I live. I knew that existed years before this conversation ever started. Oh, but keep thinking that the Nazis invented that salute. Here's something else that might blow your mind. The terms "under God" are political in nature. Those two words were added during the Cold War to separate ourselves from the 'Godless communists.'

Also, you know what else would have me or you speaking or saluting in a different manner? Any change in history, including where you and I were born. Congrats on that magnificent observation. However, why Japanese or German if not trying to Godwin the conversation? We could have just of easily be speaking French, Spanish, or a whole host of other languages if a few changes in history occurred. After all, what would have happened if Spain won the Spanish-American war, or the French won the French and Indian war? I bet we wouldn't be speaking English. So, the only reason to pick those two languages is obviously because the Japanese and Germans did terrible things during WW2, thus the only reason to pick those two language is to make the Nazi reference, which therefore invokes Godwin.

So you WIN for applied rhetoric in your attempts to convince in anyway that this EXTREMIST MUSLIM GROUP has any validity in their protest, but by continuing your nonsensical "Freedom of Speech" argumentative position you could yourself be accused of promoting hatred, you should be cognitive that any commentary will be opposed vehemently. Wrong is Wrong as was as I pointed out that burning the Koran generated an international incident outcry by Muslims world wide ... Do we as Canadians or Brits condemn all of them to death to burn a symbol of respect and Remembrance (see rock_shoes "comments).

Really, support for freedom of speech is now the same as supporting the goals of any group? I support the NSP vs Village of Skokie decision, but that doesn't mean that I support the National Socialist Party. Congrats on confusing support for freedom for the support of any specific group.

...and yes, I realize that not everyone supports freedom of speech if it means supporting speech they don't agree with. However failing to support speech you don't agree with is one and the same as not supporting freedom of speech.

You WIN for knowledgeable of geography so did this event did not take place on Canadian soil perhaps I am confused or thought that this protest occurred in HYDE PARK UK ? It happened in SEE LINK and right close to Franklin D. Roosevelt National Historic Site WOW Thanks for the correction.

http://maps.google.ca/?utm_campaign=en&utm_source=en-ha-na-ca-bk-gm&utm_medium=ha&utm_term=google%20map

Yes you WIN for applying American Law to a Commonwealth and a Monarchy, or are you perhaps you are attempting to perpetuating the stereotypical ugly American concept ?

Apologies to my American Friends and no slight intended, to those who I value their friendship and those I DO highly respect on this site.

cheers

Did you miss, or intentionally ignore, every time I mentioned that 'while I can't speak intelligently on Canadian or UK law, if this was the US...'? Seriously, I said that several times. Additionally, the conversation of whether a sovereign state should do something is not confined by the laws of that country. Just because a sovereign state shouldn't do something doesn't mean they can't.

[tniuqs]

Congrats at failing at realizing that just because they did arrest them doesn't necessarily mean they should have

Serve and Protect is wrong ? I here I thought protecting the weak minded is the Bobbies job, could they be actually preventing someone from getting dead, ever been to a football game Manchester United ?

btw RCMP motto is "We Always get our Man" with hooligans burning stuff at the last G20 summit protesting with fire you think those people are still walking around today ... LOL.

I expect those police officers to be fired and charged with false imprisonment.

Please explain TORT Law in the BNA act and if and how it applies in this case?

So, you believe, or at least tacitly support, that it isn't the police job to enforce morality, but the job of a bunch of rednecks to commit vigilante "justice," and that there's nothing wrong with that?

Yes and No ... I live in a province of "red necks" that's oil, gas, cattle, grain and we can vote and change the laws and by the majority by doing just that, because my forefathers laid down their lives.

Care to visit in my province with your "freedom of speech" supporting "Muslims against the Crusades" and burning of the symbol that honours the lost on remembrance day ? ... I would be most pleased to arrange a conference in the local Hockey area, conference, perhaps we could have the local Fire Dept.

btw they were "called out and responded during the ceremonies" maybe to be security ? I would also invite annie, mobey, and rock_shoes, happiness and host of other uneducated Albertasuris red neck vigilante type's on this website a meet and greet ... do you drink beers ?

Godwin:

Perhaps I won that point ? You took the silly internet law out of context and I hereby charge you with "out of context" it is a punishable offence here, you will have to write 100 lines.

Oh, that's funny. You support vigilante red necks, but I don't understand the intent of law? Wow, that's actually quite hilarious.

So its acceptable to support a radical Muslim group's rights voicing their opinion to destroy western culture .. but (ME an da bouys, drinken beers EH) to voice our opinion and lay an education on them and a hearty welcome is not in my rights to free speech nor the opinion "You have every right to go back to whenever you came is wrong" sounds like a double standard to me.

Hey us RED NECKS got rights too Eh ?

Did you miss, or intentionally ignore, every time I mentioned that 'while I can't speak intelligently on Canadian or UK law.

So I win ?

cheers

[paramedicmike]

Do you, who are arguing for a limit to free speech, honestly believe that there should be limits place on speech based on what is deemed "offensive"?

[JPINFV]

Serve and Protect is wrong ? I here I thought protecting the weak minded is the Bobbies job, could they be actually preventing someone from getting dead, ever been to a football game Manchester United ?

btw RCMP motto is "We Always get our Man" with hooligans burning stuff at the last G20 summit protesting with fire you think those people are still walking around today ... LOL.

Let me know when we start discussing football/soccer games and the G20 riots. Were the protesters in this case running down the street destroying the property of someone else?

Please explain TORT Law in the BNA act and if and how it applies in this case?

Are you suggesting the the entire legal system of Canada, including all laws and sources of judicial relief, can be found in the BNA? Is false imprisonment not a crime an Canada? Also, false imprisonment is not just a tort.

Yes and No ... I live in a province of "red necks" that's oil, gas, cattle, grain and we can vote and change the laws and by the majority by doing just that, because my forefathers laid down their lives.

Are you suggesting that you can pass what ever laws you want without regard to the rights of other citizens? So if the majority vote to make everyone with red hair slaves, since a majority says so, that law is both just and enforceable?

Care to visit in my province with your "freedom of speech" supporting "Muslims against the Crusades" and burning of the symbol that honours the lost on remembrance day ? ... I would be most pleased to arrange a conference in the local Hockey area, conference, perhaps we could have the local Fire Dept.

btw they were "called out and responded during the ceremonies" maybe to be security ? I would also invite annie, mobey, and rock_shoes, happiness and host of other uneducated Albertasuris red neck vigilante type's on this website a meet and greet ... do you drink beers ?

Oh, so now everyone in Alberta is a red neck because you said so? An entire province of red neck vigilantes? Strange, the only person I seem to remember endorsing vigilantism is you. Also, why Alberta? After all, the original case occured in London, England. Shouldn't the conference occur there?

Perhaps I won that point ? You took the silly internet law out of context and I hereby charge you with "out of context" it is a punishable offence here, you will have to write 100 lines.

I am not a citizen of Canada, nor am I currently located in Canada. As such, Canada can go pound sand. Oh, and if Canada wants to arrest me, come and get me.

So its acceptable to support a radical Muslim group's rights voicing their opinion to destroy western culture .. but (ME an da bouys, drinken beers EH) to voice our opinion and lay an education on them and a hearty welcome is not in my rights to free speech nor the opinion "You have every right to go back to whenever you came is wrong" sounds like a double standard to me.

Yes, you don't have the right to make credible threats of assault or murder. If you can't see the difference between "I'm going to kill _____" and "_____ will burn in hell when ____ dies," then I don't understand how I can help you. Similarly, I never said that you can't have the opinion that "____ should go back to where ____ came from." Of course the fatal flaw is if _____ was born in Canada (regardless of how close the nearest immigrant relative came over), then _____ came from Canada, and if _____ is a naturalized citizen of Canada, then ____ is their rightful, and legal home with ____ having every bit of right to call Canada their home that you do. Similarly, if they are a citizen, don't they have every right to tell you to go back to where your immigrant relatives (regardless of how recent or distant said relative is) came from?

[tniuqs]

Do you, who are arguing for a limit to free speech, honestly believe that there should be limits place on speech based on what is deemed "offensive"?

Salient Point MIKE you be the judge.

Quote from original post: A group that calls itself Muslims Against Crusades chanted, "British soldiers burn in hell," and held signs saying, "Islam will dominate" and, "Our dead are in paradise, your dead are in hell."

Please Note: British Soldiers are ordered to defend the country by their Government, logically disrespecting the Troops is contempt of the Government.

http://loganswarning.com/2010/11/13/uk-muslims-against-crusades-hate-filled-video/

Perhaps this video link will put things in better "light" Try that at Arlington cemetery, or the Tomb of the unknown soldier or in my Royal Canadian Legion on Remembrance day, Yes, there would be 2 minutes of silence and then it would get REALLY F**KING LOUD ! I think the Brits showed tremendous restraint.

So that JP liberal can educate himself in another country's laws, the BNA act preceded the:

CANADIAN CHARTER OF RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS

Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law:

Guarantee of Rights and Freedoms

1. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.

Fundamental Freedoms

2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:

(a) freedom of conscience and religion;

( freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;

© freedom of peaceful assembly; and

(d) freedom of association.

Canadian Hate Laws: Hate Propaganda

Advocating genocide

318. (1) Every one who advocates or promotes genocide is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years.

Definition of “genocide”

(2) In this section, “genocide” means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy in whole or in part any identifiable group, namely,

(a) killing members of the group; or

( deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction.

319. (1) Every one who, by communicating statements in any public place, incites hatred against any identifiable group where such incitement is likely to lead to a breach of the peace is guilty of

(a) an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years; or

( an offence punishable on summary conviction.

NEED I POST ANY MORE ?Am I a criminal for posting my opinions on a private owed web forum site ... well there is more to that too

Ok just one more Quote: Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini

"Those who know nothing about Islam pretend that Islam counsels against war. Those people are witless. Islam says: 'Kill all the unbelievers just as they would kill you all!' Does this mean that Muslims should sit back until they are devoured by the infidel? Islam says: 'Kill them, put them to the sword and scatter them.' Islam says: 'Whatever good there is exists thanks to the sword.' The sword is the key to Paradise, which can be opened only for the Holy Warriors! Does all this mean that Islam is a religion that prevents men from waging war? I spit upon those foolish souls who make such a claim."

Edited November 14, 2010 by tniuqs

[JPINFV]

Please Note: British Soldiers are ordered to defend the country by their Government, logically disrespecting the Troops is contempt of the Government.

Is contempt of government a crime?

So that JP liberal can educate himself in another country's laws, the BNA act preceded the:

Oh, that's rich. I'm a liberal? Excuse me while I laugh. Libertarian? Sure. To steal a line from a radio talkshow host that I used to listen to, I'm more conservative than liberal, more libertarian than conservative, and more cynical and skeptical than anything else.

NEED I POST ANY MORE ?Am I a criminal for posting my opinions on a private owed web forum site ... well there is more to that too

I guess it's a good think that this event didn't occur in Canada then, anyways. Reported in a Canadian paper, sure, but their source is the Daily Mail (AKA Daily Fail) from the UK. At least I'm qualifying my statements as, "If this was the US" when discussing the legal issue, however the legal issue is different from right and wrong, and censoring a group for no better reason than you dislike the message is de facto wrong.

[Lone Star]

*NOTE*: I am only posting this because the person who wanted it posted was having difficulty in doing so....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cetGUdada8g

[tniuqs]

Is contempt of government a crime?

Well with that point you WIN the debate hands down it is acceptable to protest in this manner.

(see video again)

I have now saved it to my desk top in my "freedom of speech file" and I will set up a Power Point Production for next years Remembrance day presentation in my home town, to demonstrate why the US, CAN, BRIT, OZ, and NZ troops died for "freedom of speech"

Yes JPINFV your absolutely correct in everything you have written and I must agree with point you have made, I bow to your superior knowledge, your understanding of the ramifications of global politics and interpreting the Laws of many lands for the readership.

Will you ever forgive me ?

FUCK OFF YOU CLOWN !

[JPINFV]

*NOTE*: I am only posting this because the person who wanted it posted was having difficulty in doing so....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cetGUdada8g

Really? THAT is what people are upset about? A group goes, makes themselves look like morons while in a cordoned off area removed from the ceremony(which they make no attempt to move away from), and burn a few pieces of what looks like plastic (not smart), but in a manner that doesn't present a fire hazard to surrounding structures? That is what people are mad about? I see a very distasteful demonstration, but if it occurred in the US, nothing illegal about it.

[paramedicmike]

Yes JPINFV your absolutely correct in everything you have written and I must agree with point you have made, I bow to your superior knowledge, your understanding of the ramifications of global politics and interpreting the Laws of many lands for the readership.

Will you ever forgive me ?

FUCK OFF YOU CLOWN !

Seriously, Squint? I thought you were smarter than this. This type of response from you, especially your little hidden message at the bottom, seems very unlike the rest of your posts throughout this site. I understand you feeling passionately about this. I even understand why the protest upsets you. However, resorting to name calling and telling those who present a respectful counter argument what they can do with themselves is really beneath your usually astute replies.

Did you really think people wouldn't notice?

ETA: I have to agree with JP on this. This is the protest you were upset about? A small group of people making fools of themselves in a fenced off area away from the main ceremonies? Will you next ask for a limit to a free press because without them this little moronic demonstration wouldn't have received any air time?

Edited November 15, 2010 by paramedicmike