Facebook Bans UK Far Right Groups And Leaders

[sadoldgit]

This will no doubt upset a few of the regular posters here, but what does this mean for freedom of speech? I am all for getting rid of these people from social media platforms, but if they don’t transgress the law, is it right?

[rallyboy]

Hate speech breaks the law, there is no problem for free speech.

We just have to see where the line is declared.

[Ludwig]

This will no doubt upset a few of the regular posters here, but what does this mean for freedom of speech? I am all for getting rid of these people from social media platforms, but if they don’t transgress the law, is it right?

They should let these people post what they want but take note of each poster and go and assassinate them. Freedom of speech protected and far fewer c*nts about

[Jonnyboy]

Surprised Pepe isn't all over this thread.

[mickn]

They should let these people post what they want but take note of each poster and go and assassinate them. Freedom of speech protected and far fewer c*nts about

 

Harsh but fair

[igsey]

Nothing to do with the law, Facebook is a private company and can remove who they like.

[whelk]

Next step Christian rugby players

[sadoldgit]

You don’t seem to get the same issues with those of the far left. What is it about those of the far right that makes them so unpleasant, anti social and often psychopathic? As you often see on threads on here, those of a far right persuasion will argue constantly and unsympathetically against anything vaguely liberal. Once you move further left than liberal (mind you, they seem to think that anything closer to the middle ground from their position is fair game) then they ramp it up. Tribalism kicks in across the board of course, but the far right seems to attract the more unpleasant specimens of society.

[Lighthouse]

Next step Christian rugby players

 

I'm not sure I fully understand the logic behind the outrage there.

 

If you're gay and not a Christian, then why does it matter if someone says you're going to Hell? It's meaningless, like giving me a two year ban from attending Pompey games. If you are gay and a Christian, then you've presumably read the bible and all that stuff about lying with another man being an abomination etc. In which case, either Folau is correct or you're a hypocrite and just choosing the bits of the bible which suit your lifestyle.

[rallyboy]

If you have signed a contract as a professional sportsperson, you are always speaking in that capacity.

Once you have retired and are no longer tied by a contract with club or country, that prevents you from damaging the brand, you are free to spout any old homophobic or racist nonesense you want.

You can't be sacked then, just ridiculed.

[Weston Super Saint]

You don’t seem to get the same issues with those of the far left.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-47947775

[whelk]

I'm not sure I fully understand the logic behind the outrage there.

 

If you're gay and not a Christian, then why does it matter if someone says you're going to Hell? It's meaningless, like giving me a two year ban from attending Pompey games. If you are gay and a Christian, then you've presumably read the bible and all that stuff about lying with another man being an abomination etc. In which case, either Folau is correct or you're a hypocrite and just choosing the bits of the bible which suit your lifestyle.

 

If you asked any Muslim are homosexuals going to hell I am sure they say yes although all infidels are presumably.

 

Like Glen Hoddle saying what Hindus believe but somehow that gets ignored as can become very uncomfortable for liberals. Fact that we make think utter hogwash shouldn’t mean they can’t say it.

Free speech is precious

[whelk]

You don’t seem to get the same issues with those of the far left. What is it about those of the far right that makes them so unpleasant, anti social and often psychopathic? As you often see on threads on here, those of a far right persuasion will argue constantly and unsympathetically against anything vaguely liberal. Once you move further left than liberal (mind you, they seem to think that anything closer to the middle ground from their position is fair game) then they ramp it up. Tribalism kicks in across the board of course, but the far right seems to attract the more unpleasant specimens of society.

 

Clueless. The left are full of hate. Most socialists want a fairer kinder society but don’t be fooled by the far left.

[Lighthouse]

If you have signed a contract as a professional sportsperson, you are always speaking in that capacity.

Once you have retired and are no longer tied by a contract with club or country, that prevents you from damaging the brand, you are free to spout any old homophobic or racist nonesense you want.

You can't be sacked then, just ridiculed.

 

I get why they sacked him and why a company wouldn’t want to be associated with his comments, that’s just basic PR. I just don’t think LGBT groups know why they are actually offended.

 

If you believe it then you are going to Hell.

If you don’t believe it then it’s meaningless, so how can it be offensive? He might as well have said Zaarg the giant, mutant, marmalade bat will swoop down from the planet Wibble and eat your soul.

[sadoldgit]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-47947775

 

Which seems to support what I said. Ken Marsh, chairman of the Met. Police Federation is quoted as saying, "This is very, very difficult for us because my colleagues have never come across the situation that they are faced with at the moment. They are dealing with very, very passive people who dont want confrontation whatsoever with the police or anyone else but are breaking the law."

 

Not something you hear said about right wing gatherings, to be fair.

[whelk]

You sage. Extinction Rebellion aren’t violent like the EDL. Controversial viewpoint.

 

G7 summits less peaceful

[Weston Super Saint]

Which seems to support what I said. Ken Marsh, chairman of the Met. Police Federation is quoted as saying, "This is very, very difficult for us because my colleagues have never come across the situation that they are faced with at the moment. They are dealing with very, very passive people who dont want confrontation whatsoever with the police or anyone else but are breaking the law."

 

Not something you hear said about right wing gatherings, to be fair.

 

Do the CPS condone people who break the law?

 

Surely breaking the law is exactly that! Is a murderer any more or less guilty than a rapist? Is someone who disrupts the travel of hundreds of thousands of people by gluing themselves to a train less guilty because they haven't been violent?

 

Peaceful protest is one thing, actively and knowingly breaking the law is another. If the chairman of the Met. Police Federation has an issue with this, perhaps he should take it up with the Mayor of London who has been very clear regarding how he feels the police should deal with those breaking the law....

[shurlock]

Do the CPS condone people who break the law?

 

Surely breaking the law is exactly that! Is a murderer any more or less guilty than a rapist? Is someone who disrupts the travel of hundreds of thousands of people by gluing themselves to a train less guilty because they haven't been violent?

 

Peaceful protest is one thing, actively and knowingly breaking the law is another. If the chairman of the Met. Police Federation has an issue with this, perhaps he should take it up with the Mayor of London who has been very clear regarding how he feels the police should deal with those breaking the law....

 

Head's gone pal.

[BoscombeScummer]

Good. The ban should’ve happened a long time ago.

 

I’d also like to add that it’s heartening to see posters here challenging the nasty rhetoric that seems to have a grip on this board right now. In times like these it takes solidarity and calm, measured but strong challenge in response the ignorance and insecurity of the far right.

 

There should be no place for racism, homophobia or misogyny at Southampton FC, nor this forum. How we carry and represent ourselves is essential in fighting this vile strain of, what I’m sure is a minority, but a very vocal minority. Don’t stand for it.

[whelk]

Lol. Little Miss Perfect.

Yeah can’t move here for far right types. Reckon most have swastika tattoos.

 

I disagree with many on here but fck me I can cope with LD’s misogyny and aware it is probably tongu in cheek

Good for you challenging them. Calm sorts calling for assignations as can’t cope with people having different views.

 

What you need to do is badge them up as far right bogey men so you can carry in your pompous self-righteous world where I expect you don’t laugh much

 

Verbal will be along in mo to back slap

[whelk]

Hey guys we have more in common than that divides us

[Lord Duckhunter]

The left used to be all in favour of free speech, they’re now modern day Mary Whitehouse’s. The pinkos who run the modern Tory party are getting as bad.

 

The mainstream vehicle for the left, the Labour Party, has an absolutely appalling record of anti Semitic hate the past few years, so it’s not confined to the right.

 

Facebook are a private company, they can ban who the hell the like. The market will decide whether they are doing the right thing or are making a error. People crying about it are as bad as the plums who complain about The Sun or Mail. All sides of the political divide need to man up (soggy will probably complain, so I’ll change it to “person” up).

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[sadoldgit]

Clueless. The left are full of hate. Most socialists want a fairer kinder society but don’t be fooled by the far left.

 

I am not talking about those of either side of the spectrum who are clearly off the scale! And where do you get this "the left are full of hate" from? You sound like hypochondriac with his "socialism is dangerous" nonsense. I thought that you were smarter than that?

[whelk]

I am not talking about those of either side of the spectrum who are clearly off the scale! And where do you get this "the left are full of hate" from? You sound like hypochondriac with his "socialism is dangerous" nonsense. I thought that you were smarter than that?

 

If you start talking about the far right it is comparable to talk about far left. I must’ve missed how kind Chairman Mao was with his mass executions; and how tolerant Stalin was of anyone who disagreed with him.

The equivalent comparison of your hippy eco protestors would be some suburban Rotary club types campaigning against a new estate being built in Hertfordshire, not the EDL.

[Ohio Saint]

Nothing to do with the law, Facebook is a private company and can remove who they like.

 

Absolutely the end of the story in this case.

 

If Facebook were a government entity or a tax exempt organisation or similar, then yeah, let's debate it. Facebook, Google, Instagram, if you don't like them, don't use them.

[sadoldgit]

Absolutely the end of the story in this case.

 

If Facebook were a government entity or a tax exempt organisation or similar, then yeah, let's debate it. Facebook, Google, Instagram, if you don't like them, don't use them.

 

It’s not that simple though, is it? Millions of people use these and millions of people are being targeted with unsolicited information, not all of which is kosher. During the EU referendum I got all sorts of stuff sent through from the Brexit camp, much of it untrue. We know that Russia used social media used social media to try and influence the American presidential elections. These platforms are being used more and more to inform and try and change opinions. To say they can do what they like leaves us open to unchallenged propaganda on a global scale. The fastest and most effective way of spreading information/misinformation is via social media. Saying they can do what they want leaves the door open to all kind of problems. Ok, they decide to ban far right organisations, but what if they also had decided to ban Brexit organisations at the time of the referendum? I don’t particularly like censorship, but surely there must be some kind of regulatory body to ensure that social media is not misused? People use social media to keep in touch with friends and relatives. Is it realistic to expect people to leave things like Facebook in droves because they don’t like some of the content?

[Lord Duckhunter]

It’s not that simple though, is it? Millions of people use these and millions of people are being targeted with unsolicited information, not all of which is kosher. During the EU referendum I got all sorts of stuff sent through from the Brexit camp, much of it untrue. We know that Russia used social media used social media to try and influence the American presidential elections. These platforms are being used more and more to inform and try and change opinions. To say they can do what they like leaves us open to unchallenged propaganda on a global scale. The fastest and most effective way of spreading information/misinformation is via social media. Saying they can do what they want leaves the door open to all kind of problems. Ok, they decide to ban far right organisations, but what if they also had decided to ban Brexit organisations at the time of the referendum? I don’t particularly like censorship, but surely there must be some kind of regulatory body to ensure that social media is not misused? People use social media to keep in touch with friends and relatives. Is it realistic to expect people to leave things like Facebook in droves because they don’t like some of the content?

 

Translation;

 

Ban things & people I disagree with.

 

You can only inform and try to change opinions if I agree with you.

 

I am a liberal and don’t want free speech banned, BUT I want a regulator to ban people I disagree with.

 

I am a good person.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ohio Saint]

It’s not that simple though, is it? Millions of people use these and millions of people are being targeted with unsolicited information, not all of which is kosher. During the EU referendum I got all sorts of stuff sent through from the Brexit camp, much of it untrue. We know that Russia used social media used social media to try and influence the American presidential elections. These platforms are being used more and more to inform and try and change opinions. To say they can do what they like leaves us open to unchallenged propaganda on a global scale. The fastest and most effective way of spreading information/misinformation is via social media. Saying they can do what they want leaves the door open to all kind of problems. Ok, they decide to ban far right organisations, but what if they also had decided to ban Brexit organisations at the time of the referendum? I don’t particularly like censorship, but surely there must be some kind of regulatory body to ensure that social media is not misused? People use social media to keep in touch with friends and relatives. Is it realistic to expect people to leave things like Facebook in droves because they don’t like some of the content?

 

It's still that simple. Sure, some kind of regulation for abuse and misuse may be in order for very large organisations. that's why we have laws against monopolies. However, no private entity should be dictated to by a government about it's own sensibilities. The type of misinformation you are talking about? Russia used a supposedly left wing company (Facebook) to manipulate the populace into voting for a right wing entity. These are muddy waters indeed, but no entity should have their freedom of speech impeded.

[sadoldgit]

Translation;

 

Ban things & people I disagree with.

 

You can only inform and try to change opinions if I agree with you.

 

I am a liberal and don’t want free speech banned, BUT I want a regulator to ban people I disagree with.

 

I am a good person.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Smoking too much week again Duckie?

[sadoldgit]

It's still that simple. Sure, some kind of regulation for abuse and misuse may be in order for very large organisations. that's why we have laws against monopolies. However, no private entity should be dictated to by a government about it's own sensibilities. The type of misinformation you are talking about? Russia used a supposedly left wing company (Facebook) to manipulate the populace into voting for a right wing entity. These are muddy waters indeed, but no entity should have their freedom of speech impeded.

 

If you were Putin why wouldn’t you want Trump to be POTUS?

 

TV and radio have regulatory bodies, why not privately owned social media bodies. Are you not aware of the recent issues over a girl’s suicide which her father feels was prompted by stuff on Instagram?

[sadoldgit]

Translation;

 

Ban things & people I disagree with.

 

You can only inform and try to change opinions if I agree with you.

 

I am a liberal and don’t want free speech banned, BUT I want a regulator to ban people I disagree with.

 

I am a good person.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Your comments are straight out of the Tommy Robinson speech book mate. I joined Facebook to keep in touch with friends and family and particularly like any of the political guff that finds its way onto my page. I have blocked loads of extremist guff from both sides, but mainly from the far right because they have sent most of it! A lot of it still gets through because people I know share it. Do you think it is okay that organisations promoting hatred can send unsolicited stuff out on social media? Do you think it is ok for ANY political organisations to tell blatant lies through social media?

 

As for being a good person, isn’t it better to aspire to being good than to aspire to being an ar5sehole?

[Lord Duckhunter]

Your comments are straight out of the Tommy Robinson speech book mate. I joined Facebook to keep in touch with friends and family and particularly like any of the political guff that finds its way onto my page. I have blocked loads of extremist guff from both sides, but mainly from the far right because they have sent most of it! A lot of it still gets through because people I know share it. Do you think it is okay that organisations promoting hatred can send unsolicited stuff out on social media? Do you think it is ok for ANY political organisations to tell blatant lies through social media?

 

As for being a good person, isn’t it better to aspire to being good than to aspire to being an ar5sehole?

 

You’ve lost the plot mate.

 

“Tommy Robinson speech book” lol. I’m not the one getting targeted by extremists, the algorithms are obviously driving it based on your internet history. All I get are holiday companies, betting and recruitment agencies. I don’t get any political views on Facebook. Perhaps you better review your internet history.

 

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[buctootim]

 

Jeez that makes Carry On films look like high art.

[sadoldgit]

Thanks for sharing your viewing material Duckie. No wonder you don’t have time for Facebook!