Britain First banned by Facebook

[Cyclone 10]

But who defines what hate speech is? Politicians.

 

It's divisive (my bold). Now that's interesting. Because stories like the Telford grooming scandal are divisive too, wouldn't you say? Should reporting on them be banned too? Would you support that in the name of "community cohesion"?

Factual reporting of crimes that have happened, no clearly that shouldn't be banned.

Lies designed to cause hate, yes, that should be banned.

And hate speech is defined quite clearly in law.

 

Britain First weren't interested in the truth, or accuracy, they were interested in spreading hate.

[ez8004 10]

A precedent has been set

Namely that politicians can pressure internet providers to censor views they don't agree with.

So no problem with Britain First, but who will Yvette Cooper et all decide is going to be banned next?

 

A precedent that politicians in this country can tell what an American company can do without a court order?

 

Sure it wasn’t all of Facebook’s doing?

[mort 10]

The name calling can cease.

[Halibut 12]

There may well have been political pressure from various sources for Social Media companies to police themselves and their users better - rightly so, in my view. But those implying direct political interference in this case are talking rubbish.

 

Hate speech is defined in law; Facebook have their own codes of user conduct which Fransen and whatever his name is have repeatedly violated despite multiple warnings.

 

They had it coming.

 

As for the comment about 'won't it just drive them underground?' - I think not. Their number of hardcore supporters is actually pathetically small (look at some of the turnouts for their marches) and the rest of their supporters are the kind of small minded, rather inadequate people who'll cling to their fear and loathing of the 'other' but can't be bothered to do much about it. Except possibly get drunk and post rubbish on the internet.

[Dimple 10]

 

Would you also defend ISIS's right to have a Facebook page and defend their right to say what they want - or do you have a double standard going on?

See if you're able to ask without the snide comment and I may furnish you with a reply.

[fill 10]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-43398417

 

Facebook has decided that BF is a hate group, and therefore is banned.

 

I've seen arguments that it's the right thing to do, as they are clearly inciting racial hatred, but also contrary arguments that they're just exercising freedom of speech.

 

I'm personally on the former view. I think they're filth, desperate to cause hatred amongst their ranks of mouth breathers.

 

Any views on this?

 

 

Whilst I do not have any strong views on (we assume) Britain First (even though I can actually spell it) or any other political movement I do have strong objections to anyone that believes they have the right to stop others expressing their opinions. As has been said by better regarded people than myself throughout history.

 

In the past marches or demonstrations by people accused of having nationalistic views have often resulted in violent outbreaks when they were confronted by those that would oppose their views deliberately gathering in the same places at the same time just to provoke disorderly behaviour and even conflict in order to discredit. I recall reading that Hitler's Brown shirts conducted themselves in a similar fashion with those that would have opposed them during their rise to power.

 

You seem to invite comment and yet it is clear from the way in which you have so poorly expressed your somewhat narrow minded views on this topic that expressing one's view to you if it is different from your own will fall on deaf ears.

 

I have little time for anyone that would refer to a fellow human as "filth". Your, apparently uneducated, views would potentially carry far more weight if presented in a constructive and less antisocial manner.

 

As for your comment in reference about people with physical challenges that have difficulty breathing solely through their nostrils .. to be frank anyone that picks on the disabled or disadvantaged is not a person whose presence or opinions benefit society in general. Perhaps you could try to not impose either on others in future.

 

As for facebook I can not help but believe that their motivation for their actions is purely them conceding to the wishes of the majority of those that have expressed an ill-considered opinion in order to better retain their subscriptions. I consider they have done so without proper regard for all potential outcomes.

 

In fairness all social media providers perhaps ought to remove any and all politically motivated rhetoric, parties and or organisations from their sites.

[Naive 10]

Whilst I do not have any strong views on (we assume) Britain First (even though I can actually spell it) or any other political movement I do have strong objections to anyone that believes they have the right to stop others expressing their opinions. As has been said by better regarded people than myself throughout history.

 

In the past marches or demonstrations by people accused of having nationalistic views have often resulted in violent outbreaks when they were confronted by those that would oppose their views deliberately gathering in the same places at the same time just to provoke disorderly behaviour and even conflict in order to discredit. I recall reading that Hitler's Brown shirts conducted themselves in a similar fashion with those that would have opposed them during their rise to power.

 

You seem to invite comment and yet it is clear from the way in which you have so poorly expressed your somewhat narrow minded views on this topic that expressing one's view to you if it is different from your own will fall on deaf ears.

 

I have little time for anyone that would refer to a fellow human as "filth". Your, apparently uneducated, views would potentially carry far more weight if presented in a constructive and less antisocial manner.

 

As for your comment in reference about people with physical challenges that have difficulty breathing solely through their nostrils .. to be frank anyone that picks on the disabled or disadvantaged is not a person whose presence or opinions benefit society in general. Perhaps you could try to not impose either on others in future.

 

As for facebook I can not help but believe that their motivation for their actions is purely them conceding to the wishes of the majority of those that have expressed an ill-considered opinion in order to better retain their subscriptions. I consider they have done so without proper regard for all potential outcomes.

 

 

 

That is an excellent piece of comedic writing. Fantastic use of irony and contradiction to generate a thought-provoking piece of satire. You should submit it to the BBC and ask for a series.

 

Just answer me this. As a passionate advocate of free speech, why do you spend most of your post suggesting that people with views that you don't like, should shut up and go away?

[Resident 1,193]

Fair enough banning BF.

 

Now on to Black Lives Matter and every other hate speech page.

 

Oh wait, minority groups spewing hatred and lies is perfectly fine.......

[Naive 10]

Fair enough banning BF.

 

Now on to Black Lives Matter and every other hate speech page.

 

Oh wait, minority groups spewing hatred and lies is perfectly fine.......

 

I think that the members and supporters of BF were pretty much a minority group.

 

I certainly don't want to be categorised alongside those knuckle draggers.

[Halibut 12]

Fair enough banning BF.

 

Now on to Black Lives Matter and every other hate speech page.

 

Oh wait, minority groups spewing hatred and lies is perfectly fine.......

 

BLM aren't a hate group, nor do they spew hatred and lies, so your point is somewhat off the mark.

 

---------- Post added 14-03-2018 at 22:05 ----------

 

Whilst I do not have any strong views on (we assume) Britain First (even though I can actually spell it) or any other political movement I do have strong objections to anyone that believes they have the right to stop others expressing their opinions. As has been said by better regarded people than myself throughout history.

 

In the past marches or demonstrations by people accused of having nationalistic views have often resulted in violent outbreaks when they were confronted by those that would oppose their views deliberately gathering in the same places at the same time just to provoke disorderly behaviour and even conflict in order to discredit. I recall reading that Hitler's Brown shirts conducted themselves in a similar fashion with those that would have opposed them during their rise to power.

 

You seem to invite comment and yet it is clear from the way in which you have so poorly expressed your somewhat narrow minded views on this topic that expressing one's view to you if it is different from your own will fall on deaf ears.

 

I have little time for anyone that would refer to a fellow human as "filth". Your, apparently uneducated, views would potentially carry far more weight if presented in a constructive and less antisocial manner.

 

As for your comment in reference about people with physical challenges that have difficulty breathing solely through their nostrils .. to be frank anyone that picks on the disabled or disadvantaged is not a person whose presence or opinions benefit society in general. Perhaps you could try to not impose either on others in future.

 

As for facebook I can not help but believe that their motivation for their actions is purely them conceding to the wishes of the majority of those that have expressed an ill-considered opinion in order to better retain their subscriptions. I consider they have done so without proper regard for all potential outcomes.

 

In fairness all social media providers perhaps ought to remove any and all politically motivated rhetoric, parties and or organisations from their sites.

 

 

3/10 - must try harder. I got a minor laugh from you claiming to have no political strong political views and then blaming anti fascists for fascist violence, but in essence, total dross.

[Dimple 10]

BLM aren't a hate group, nor do they spew hatred and lies, so your point is somewhat off the mark.

 

 

Here you go.

 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xet3BnwLtek

[Bob Arctor 11]

As Christian Slater says in Heathers: "They had nothing left to offer the school except date rapes and AIDS jokes".