Should I be allowed to burn the flag if I want to?

[Andy1976 10]

. If some followers of a certain religion dont like the fact we remember our war hero`s ,( which is what the poppy is all about ) i suggest they go and live in another country , and have their British citizenship taken away .

 

'It's a bit of paper and plastic. I don't care what some idiot does with it. If they think that'll bother me, they're wrong. It bothered me when they shot at me, but that wouldn't.'

 

So said my dad, the 20 year soldier, with the father who fought in WW2.

 

I share his view on it. No one is stopping people using poppies as symbolic of those lost, despite what the Mail says. Just because someone else disagrees, doesn't make our (and I always, always buy/wear a poppy) rememberance any less significant.

 

I wouldn't care if someone burnt a bible, quran, any other holy book, poppy, flag of any country, picture of the queen or anything else. It's an item. Can't force others to agree with our beliefs.

[L00b 441]

Trevor Noah pointing out the same thing

It's getting to be quite a list, isn't it? Steve Bannon, James Mattis, Tom Price, Steven Mnuchin, Wilbur Ross...

 

...at the rate he's going, I wonder if he secretly hopes to resurrect McCarthy to head Homeland Security

Edited December 1, 2016 by L00b

[Flanker7 20]

. If some followers of a certain religion dont like the fact we remember our war hero`s ,( which is what the poppy is all about ) i suggest they go and live in another country , and have their British citizenship taken away .

 

'Some followers' & 'a certain religion'

 

What a waste of space.

 

Are you going to define the above terms?

Because, at the moment you could find 'some' candidates in every religion in the country. AND how would you decide which of the 'some' would you deem worthy of deportation? As I said a waste of space.

 

I think I know which religion you are on about I just wish you had the ****s (strictly competitor) to come out and say it.

[Zamo 10]

Lol. There's a column with people like you in it in Private Eye. It's the errant apostrophe that makes it for me.

 

Seriously though, do you agree with the notion espoused by Trump that flag burners should be jailed or stripped of their citizenship?

 

Making it illegal to burn the flag would be breach freedom of speech principles and I would oppose that. But the principle of freedom of speech doesn't extend to a right not to be judge for your expressions.

 

Therefore, if a non-US citizen expresses anti-American views then it is potentially reasonable for US authorities to decide they have breached a term of their visa, revoke it and deport them. Same situation for nationalised citizens if US authorities deem them to have lied when they pledge allegiance to the US... withdraw the citizenship and deport them.

 

American doesn't need to mess with it's constitutional principles, it just needs to tighten up immigration policy and control. It is the sort of thing that would be welcomed by the majority here in the UK.

 

---------- Post added 01-12-2016 at 09:46 ----------

 

'Some followers' & 'a certain religion'

 

What a waste of space.

 

Are you going to define the above terms?

Because, at the moment you could find 'some' candidates in every religion in the country. AND how would you decide which of the 'some' would you deem worthy of deportation? As I said a waste of space.

 

I think I know which religion you are on about I just wish you had the ****s (strictly competitor) to come out and say it.

 

Of course we all know what religion he is talking about... it's the one with an extremism problem that is the biggest threat to world peace today. Unfortunately, having the balls to be specific on SF will only get your post reported (ironically by the same people so keen to point out what an ogre Trump is for wanting to deny freedom of expression), deleted and you risk a ban. The hypocrisy of the leftist/liberal elites is both breathtaking and (thankfully) transparent... it is a key driver behind the surge towards to the political right that is going on across the western world.

[Gamston 10]

Perhaps anyone wishing to burn the Union Flag, should move to Buenos Aires, where they are more likely to come across like minded folk and their efforts may be welcomely received.

[mikem8634 10]

It's getting to be quite a list, isn't it? Steve Bannon, James Mattis, Tom Price, Steven Mnuchin, Wilbur Ross...

 

...at the rate he's going, I wonder if he secretly hopes to resurrect McCarthy to head Homeland Security

 

It certainly is. I'd also love to know how those who maintain that he is anti-establishment rationalise away all mention of Wall Street, Soros, Goldman-Sachs and Washington from the CVs of his appointees?

[L00b 441]

It certainly is. I'd also love to know how those who maintain that he is anti-establishment

rationalise away all mention of Wall Street, Soros, Goldman-Sachs and Washington from the CVs of his appointees?

Woah, there, cowboy...BIG non-sequitur in that sentence!

 

[mikem8634 10]

 

Of course we all know what religion he is talking about... it's the one with an extremism problem that is the biggest threat to world peace today. Unfortunately, having the balls to be specific on SF will only get your post reported (ironically by the same people so keen to point out what an ogre Trump is for wanting to deny freedom of expression), deleted and you risk a ban. The hypocrisy of the leftist/liberal elites is both breathtaking and (thankfully) transparent... it is a key driver behind the surge towards to the political right that is going on across the western world.

 

Yet you continue to deny that targeting Islam is a key driver behind Islamic extremism.

 

EDIT - note that I should have said unfairly targeting Islam and Muslims, and that unbeliever quite rightly called me out on it.

 

---------- Post added 01-12-2016 at 12:03 ----------

 

Woah, there, cowboy...BIG non-sequitur in that sentence!

 

 

Go for it. I'm happy to admit if I'm wrong.

Edited December 1, 2016 by mikem8634

[unbeliever 10]

Yet you continue to deny that targeting Islam is a key driver behind Islamic extremism.

 

I'm probably content to deny that. What do you mean by "targeting"?

[mikem8634 10]

I'm probably content to deny that. What do you mean by "targeting"?

 

The bringing about of negative consequences for anyone other than those directly involved in extremism.

Edited December 1, 2016 by mikem8634

[unbeliever 10]

The bringing about of negative consequences for anyone other than those directly involved in extremism.

 

There is legitimate criticism to be directed at those not directly involved in extremism. From those who fail to speak out against it and those who are apologists for it to those who speak positively of it or even encourage it in others, to those who fund it.

The primary occupation of Islamic extremists is to oppress and persecute other Muslims, and you do them no favours placing the bulk of the blame i the wrong place.

 

Conservative Islam is "extremist" by nature. It's a testament to the fundamental goodness of some people that they manage to reconcile Islam with secular morality and function in a modern peaceful society. I'm surprised that there are so many.

Islam doesn't need any help from outside forces to be extreme. There is on endless war within Islam between those who see at least some place for secularism in the world and those who do not.

[Andy1976 10]

I'm probably content to deny that. What do you mean by "targeting"?

 

It almost certainly is.

 

If you look at any news story on Facebook, whenever anything happens (the axe attacker the other day for example), the first thing that people do is say "oh I bet it's Muslims". When it transpires it's a white guy, they're a lone-wolf, mentally ill etc.

 

It becomes a self fulfilling prophecy. You tell someone they're a bomber, they're a terrorist, they're 'bad' often enough, and they will be. It works for most things - tell a child they're bad often enough, and they will be.

 

The quickest way to send people towards extremism is to ostracise and outcast them, pushing them that way.

 

---------- Post added 01-12-2016 at 12:15 ----------

 

There is legitimate criticism to be directed at those not directly involved in extremism. From those who fail to speak out against it and those who are apologists for it to those who speak positively of it or even encourage it in others, to those who fund it.

The primary occupation of Islamic extremists is to oppress and persecute other Muslims, and you do them no favours placing the bulk of the blame i the wrong place.

 

Conservative Islam is "extremist" by nature. It's a testament to the fundamental goodness of some people that they manage to reconcile Islam with secular morality and function in a modern peaceful society. I'm surprised that there are so many.

Islam doesn't need any help from outside forces to be extreme.

 

How many times do we see people accused of supporting extremism because they fail to 'speak out against it'. Constantly.

 

I don't speak out against the IRA, ETA and all the other non-muslim terror groups. I don't particularly distance myself from many criminals, but that doesn't mean I support them.