Corbyn attacker get 28 days in prison, Robinson attacked and police do nothing.

[Gandalf]

Well the Sargon of Akkad channel has 957K+ subscribers and his secondary channel The Thinkery has 413K+ subscribers of which I'm sure there is much overlap. The entire Jess Phillips deal and the disingenuous nature in which the media have covered it looks extraordinarily bad if you actually know anything about how things went down.


Jess Phillips' initial response to the comment was nothing, she wasn't bothered AT ALL (even by her own admission) to double back and now claim offense from the offset looks a bit like simulation at this point and is surely a sign of her falling in the polls.


The BBC just look like absolute partisan idiots. It doesn't take much time to dig into this issue and understand everything about it. You wonder "How can the OK hand sign be turned into a white supremacy symbol?" and this is no different. Carl Benjamin pulls a typical trolling technique in order to get attention, the mob of the perpetually outraged takes the bait (because ALWAYS) and then Carl Benjamin gets a platform in the minds of those folks and hopefully he sets a few free with calm reasoned logic....but I suppose that will be deemed racist any day now as well.



All Jess Phillips, all the BBC had to do in order to NOT "feed the troll" was to take the comment for what it literally was and then no power is given to Carl Benjamin, his words have no weight, and he doesn't give a political push to UKIP. If someone tells you "I wouldn't even rape you".....the correct response is to say either nothing at all or comment on how weird of a thing it is to say and appreciate the fact that physical violence and sexual assault would NOT be visited upon you by that person instead of twisting the words to stay as the victim.



Carl is seemingly doing quite well in his tour. He's certainly seemed to catch everyone else flatfooted and people are not indifferent to him which bodes quite well for his numbers. Meanwhile you've got members of other political parties saying it's "totalitarianism" to follow through on Brexit.....WOW...that should have people violently up in arms, your vote as the people (whether you individually voted Brexit or Remain) has been dismissed by the powers that be, that can't feel good. I mean sure I've disliked votes on Obamacare and the like, but votes matter and when the government refuses action on votes that have been held that's leading down the road of totalitarianism meaning the government decides on it's own even if it's against the will of the people....scary road that road.

There should be nonstop marches and protest in favor of Brexit, but governments always seem less likely to divert course when the people they're impacting are busy working their jobs and providing for their families. The Antifa types are always unemployed, in school, or not useful at all in the workforce ergo they have all the time in the world to protest and cause a ruckus and the government will bend the knee to those assholes. It has to be very demoralizing.

I really do not want to offend you but I think it would be quite disingenuous to not disavow you of the many myths that make up a large part of your post. It may be incredibly difficult for you to ever contemplate it but yourself, Gandalf, and Carl's followers and apologists, really are the perpetually outraged that you seem to think anybody not agreeing with you all are.

Think about it. You are all not only perpetually outraged, but you actually actively seek out and provoke people in order to justify that outrage. I am not saying you are angry or off your head or mentally ill or constantly walking around with a chip on your shoulder but yourself and Gaydalf do repeatedly start threads expressing that outrage. The way you have framed the entire 'Rape Joke' situation is instructive too. Carl or Tarragon or whatever his name is, at this point in time is most certainly not an elected politician. Everything does not come down to a popularity contest and the very same contempt you are and have constantly and repeatedly show the British electorate with your eagerness to see American interests, and those of the deep state and corporate elites served by fermenting and encouraging violence, and the breakdown of order, to satisfy some weird desire to undo decades of peace and cooperation between Britain and Europe is an expression of that false outrage. Think again about why yourself and Gandalf, neither of whom live or will be affected by Brexit are the biggest advocates of the most extreme and unreasonable version of it.

You are indeed both addicted to outrage. Carl obviously is. It is his modus operandi. Do you not think it strange when you and Carl speak about Free speech it is in a way that cheapens and makes the concept worthless? What you are both suggesting is not free speech but the opposite. The shutting down of people's right to reply. Not only that but you are telling people what they should feel. You are not the one being told by people that they hope you are killed by someone pouring molten lava in your vagina. So it is quite hilarious when you then suggest that not only was Carl trolling and encouraging his followers to pile it on, but that you are supposedly in a position to tell someone what 'The correct response ' is. What it really is about is not taking personal responsibility. Carl refuses to apologise and so he has no choice but to pretend that somehow he is the victim in all this.

Carl is quite clearly a cunt and deserves a lot more than a cup of milkshake over his head but in order to twist reality and make him the victim you have to lie and use the same tactics as the perpetually outraged people you think you are so different from do.

The kind of Brexit you want would be incredibly harmful to the average working man and woman in the UK. Gandalf wants this, as does Farage and his sponsor the insurance tycoon Banks. Those pushing for a WTO Brexit want to kneecap Britain. Just like the clueless Americans who supplied money and arms to the IRA and then pretended to be anti-terrorist, you are making the mistake of thinking that to remove the yoke of tyranny you need to use the same violence that extremists the world over from rabid Islamists to Aerican business men intent on maintaining wars in the middle east in the name of profit.

Go and have a look in the Brexit thread and tell me that Yanis idea is not more rational and just.

Tommy is supported (financially and organizationally) by the American Daniel Pipes and The Middle East Forum. I said this years ago but it is worth repeating. This is what Pipes said about Syria

'Western powers should guide enemies to stalemate by helping whichever side is losing, so as to prolong the conflict'


So when you lie and insist that to be antifascist one must be unemployed and not useful in the workforce you let slip your true feelings about expressions of democracy. It is not shocking coming from AL but for you to suggest that anybody who marches against a government bent on removing their human rights and heritage, must have nothing better to do, is a bit worrying.

I hope you can see one day that Tommy does not speak for the majority of Brits, not even the majority of pro-Brexit voters and the Benjamin is a nasty divisive ignorant fool not worthy of a fraction of a fart.

I was mentioned why ?

It is because he cannot help himself, Al. You will notice that he will post and post and reference several posters each time. People have commented on the peculiarities for years and having recently 'come out' it all makes more sense. He is someone who takes snaps for a living, but considers himself an expert who has debunked posters and experts like Noam Chomsky, Jordan Peterson, and Douglas Murray. The irony is that I get accused of having the superiority complex. The irony. But old Beanz cannot seem to see the absurdity as he himself is in his own bubble. He doesn't read the books and doesn't know how to read people, yet somehow knows it all despite not achieving all that much himself. Amazing chap.

My suspicion is that he has used the Mods as a shoulder to cry on by going 'Poor me with my mental condition and a disabled wife and how dare Brock Google my city?'. Thus we lose Beanflicker, Bilbo, Dia, Brock and more as old Beanz simply ran amok with no restraint. Then you have him saying that if he speaks to someone he will 'lose his job and family'. Well, I think some of this explains why he mentions you. He cannot control himself.

[Fenster]

Well did this ever become an apt topic. And Carlgons video yesterday couldn't have been more prophetic. All the cheering and piss taking about Tommy and Carl being attacked, now Farage gets it and all of a sudden politicians are out in force to condemn it. They've shit themselves because they know it will inspire copycats from the other side, whilst the elitist-media and "middle-class hippies" are celebrating the Farage attack.

The double standards are ridiculous.

[Fenster]

Beanz, regardless of the motives of the Robinson supporters and spin of the video, it clearly shows the coppers chaperoning the muslim mob. They're tooled up roaring allah akbar whilst screaming about "nobody offends their religion." If the "counter protesters" lived there, fair enough, but they came from another town.

When Tommy does the the paranoid rant - "the cops are out to get me" - it's hard to not think he may have a point.

[Beanz]

Beanz, regardless of the motives of the Robinson supporters and spin of the video, it clearly shows the coppers chaperoning the muslim mob. They're tooled up roaring allah akbar whilst screaming about "nobody offends their religion." If the "counter protesters" lived there, fair enough, but they came from another town.

When Tommy does the the paranoid rant - "the cops are out to get me" - it's hard to not think he may have a point.

I have never disputed this. Tommy has been on a tour of the UK and I can assure you, just like Carl Benjamin the local firms have all put calls out to make sure that their lads are there in force when they arrive too. Look it up for yourself if you don't believe me. Bold as brass on social media etc. When you buy into the bullshit and kid yourself into thinking only the 'elitist media and middle class hippies' are opposed to people like Farrage , Robinson and Benjamin you don't exactly sound very objective yourself.

Tommy made a rod for his own back and has always told his supporters that the victim status in great for him. When no cameras are present then yes punch and lay into any one protesting his presence but when the cameras are on make sure they play the victim card after provoking people much like Benjamin.

[Fenster]

Beanz, regardless of the motives of the Robinson supporters and spin of the video, it clearly shows the coppers chaperoning the muslim mob. They're tooled up roaring allah akbar whilst screaming about "nobody offends their religion." If the "counter protesters" lived there, fair enough, but they came from another town.

When Tommy does the the paranoid rant - "the cops are out to get me" - it's hard to not think he may have a point.

I have never disputed this. Tommy has been on a tour of the UK and I can assure you, just like Carl Benjamin the local firms have all put calls out to make sure that their lads are there in force when they arrive too. Look it up for yourself if you don't believe me. Bold as brass on social media etc. When you buy into the bullshit and kid yourself into thinking only the 'elitist media and middle class hippies' are opposed to people like Farrage , Robinson and Benjamin you don't exactly sound very objective yourself.

Tommy made a rod for his own back and has always told his supporters that the victim status in great for him. When no cameras are present then yes punch and lay into any one protesting his presence but when the cameras are on make sure they play the victim card after provoking people much like Benjamin.

"Elitist media, middle class hippies" was a quote from Carlagon's video (I quite like it). You see, I actually watch these short videos and read the articles before commenting. Sometimes I don't think you do, like I know most people here don't, otherwise you simply won't give an inch. Ever.

I've often called Tommy a "paranoid fantasist, bullshitter." However, seeing police lead a mob to attack him and seeing the blatant double standards and spin in the main stream reporting of the Robinson attack, then i'll say something is not right.

I can only comment on what I see. I believed the media portrayal of an innocent "man of colour" minding his own business whilst enjoying a milk shake, but then footage showed he was a ranting and raving lunatic chasing Robinson all over the shop. I'm not happy to be fooled by such a bogus narrative and will admit I was wrong, regardless.

Carlagon is willing to debate anyone about his views, he is posting unedited videos. I really don't see how he's not the open free speech merchant he claims to be. The few debates I watched of his, the people challenging almost looked shocked when he assured them the video won't be doctored in anyway.

[Gandalf]

Exactly, he really is what he says. He posts the entire 3-4 hour gatherings on his channel unedited warts and all. Could you imagine any of the main parties going out there meeting with anyone who agrees or disagrees and having a full conversation putting it up like that? They won't do it. The conversations are really intriguing. This new way of politicking is only to be commended. There are things I disagree with him about, but many things I agree with. It is a genuinely positive approach and shame on the media for doing what they do.

People need to look closely and ask the question 'Who are the real intolerant authoritarians here?' It isn't people who advocate for self determination, the end to hate speech laws and promote liberty.

[El Kabong]

My questions (which still remain unanswered) are as follows:
1. What am I "outraged" about specifically?
2. To whom do I look outraged?
3. Why are Tommy Robinson & Carl Benjamin called "fascists"? (note that the question never accuses you personally of calling them that, but folks on your side certainly use the term often and I would like to know why so I can better understand their view)
4. (I'll lump all these together as they are in the same vein) Is the culture not rapidly changing? Is there not massive immigration? If all cultures ARE equal and beautiful and brilliant then what of the English culture? Is that not worth protecting?


5. How have I 'cheapened the entire concept of free speech'? which was a reference to your direct quote which was:

Do you not think it strange when you and Carl speak about Free speech it is in a way that cheapens and makes the concept worthless?

6. You also accused me (and Carl Benjamin) of both "shutting down the right of reply" and "telling people what they should feel" so I politely asked: Who is doing that? How are they doing it? I also asked "I can't force people to feel feelings can I?" which in this case would best be worded in question form as: Do you believe I can force people to feel feelings against their will?
7. (again I'll group these) What makes him(Carl Benjamin) a cunt? What has he (Carl) done specifically to draw your ire? What have I lied about? What has he (Carl) lied about? I'm searching my mind to figure this out. Do I use the same tactics?


I don't feel as though the questions asked were all that horrible given the apparent vitriol you still have for me. I've been quite patient and chalked up the tone of your posts to my misunderstanding the tone in which you feel you are writing....you've never addressed that which leads me to believe more that the tone you've written in is quite on purpose and therefore you're no longer operating on friendly terms with me. Which hell that's certainly your prerogative, but I'm not going to be belligerent with you and if you want to have a civil discussion then perhaps you'll correct yourself, but that's entirely up to you.


Now then, I shall address the post which you believe answered all of my questions. I do hope this is not a futile gesture, I continue to act in good faith treating you in a friendly manner and making no assumptions of you or your character which is why of course I must ask questions and gather that information in order to respond appropriately as my goal is to better understand you and your way of thinking and that is made rather difficult when you refuse to respond to simple honest questions or you respond with mordancy.

[Beanz]

My questions (which still remain unanswered) are as follows:
1. What am I "outraged" about specifically?
2. To whom do I look outraged?
3. Why are Tommy Robinson & Carl Benjamin called "fascists"? (note that the question never accuses you personally of calling them that, but folks on your side certainly use the term often and I would like to know why so I can better understand their view)
4. (I'll lump all these together as they are in the same vein) Is the culture not rapidly changing? Is there not massive immigration? If all cultures ARE equal and beautiful and brilliant then what of the English culture? Is that not worth protecting?


5. How have I 'cheapened the entire concept of free speech'? which was a reference to your direct quote which was:

Do you not think it strange when you and Carl speak about Free speech it is in a way that cheapens and makes the concept worthless?

6. You also accused me (and Carl Benjamin) of both "shutting down the right of reply" and "telling people what they should feel" so I politely asked: Who is doing that? How are they doing it? I also asked "I can't force people to feel feelings can I?" which in this case would best be worded in question form as: Do you believe I can force people to feel feelings against their will?
7. (again I'll group these) What makes him(Carl Benjamin) a cunt? What has he (Carl) done specifically to draw your ire? What have I lied about? What has he (Carl) lied about? I'm searching my mind to figure this out. Do I use the same tactics?


I don't feel as though the questions asked were all that horrible given the apparent vitriol you still have for me. I've been quite patient and chalked up the tone of your posts to my misunderstanding the tone in which you feel you are writing....you've never addressed that which leads me to believe more that the tone you've written in is quite on purpose and therefore you're no longer operating on friendly terms with me. Which hell that's certainly your prerogative, but I'm not going to be belligerent with you and if you want to have a civil discussion then perhaps you'll correct yourself, but that's entirely up to you.


Now then, I shall address the post which you believe answered all of my questions. I do hope this is not a futile gesture, I continue to act in good faith treating you in a friendly manner and making no assumptions of you or your character which is why of course I must ask questions and gather that information in order to respond appropriately as my goal is to better understand you and your way of thinking and that is made rather difficult when you refuse to respond to simple honest questions or you respond with mordancy.

They have all been answered you just want to dictate to me what the answers should be. Look how you have people numbering questions now as though people have to jump thru hoops for you. And now you want to dictate style to me. If i choose to employ mordancy please do not take it personally or tell me to be less incisive. That just makes the whole free speech thing look fake. It's language that is all. If I thought you were a cunt do you not think giving my language and history I would not come straight out and tell you?

1. You are outraged that people can be offended. That puts you firmly on the same side of the fence as people who manufacture outrage . You should not be surprised that people can be offended and certainly not employ the same tactics or justify people like Benjamin becoming professional victims.

2. Everyone in the Universe. Nobody. Who cares? If you want to be outraged that is your call but there is an awful lot out there that will push your buttons, whoever you are. Is that the kind of stress you want in your life?

3. Because they put nationhood above the individual. This again is another example of people pressing the outrage button when they do not like people exercising the same free speech they employ to not only offend but encourage and motivate other people into repeating and expounding their rhetoric. They hate being called fascists because they think that they are not the Devil incarnate. They forget that the Fascists of Spain and Italy were clever idealists who mobilised citizens into a movement that it's members thought haled lofty ideals that would be good for their country. Like traditional fascists Robinson and Benjamin misrepresent their opponents. They use the same language of discrimination that their critics employ to claim the position of victimhood. These are people who wish to ban universtity courses they do not agree with and turn back womens, black and gay rights in order to avoid giving up their own radical right wing authoritarianism.

They share the same overriding motivation that fascists have of wanting to install an overriding power that will remove the rights of individuals. They believe in things such as too much civilization. They believe it will lead to decadence and so reject great cultural milestones like the Enlightenment preferring to advocate a divine hierarchy where a charasmatic leader is in place for racially pure peasants to follow. ( Look up Stoecker, Böckel, and Fritsch for more on this)

Often like Hitler they never hold an electoral majority but are swept into power by conservatives. They will use racial and ethnic scapegoating and tie in things like feminism with Jews and weakness.

I could go on.

Fascism did not start and end with Hitler and the Nazis and you do not need to be anti-Semitic to be a fascist.

4. English culture is only one part of British culture and English culture itself has often not only been protected by foreigners and cultural ethnic groups from outside it, but can only be defined by it's history which is ALL about immigration. To pretend you can define it in any other meaningful way is not only ignorant but deeply unpatriotic. If a culture is not rapidly changing, then it is dead, however uncomfortable that may be to contemplate. Mass Immigration is a result of actions taken by countries now moaning about it. It is a fact of life on Planet earth that we will roam and you can pretend you have more rights to a piece of land or a country than other people but it is an illusory concept like money. How do you define English culture do I get to define it or does Tommy? Or other posters here?

I treasure English culture and history but I am not so blind to think it superior to all others just like the current version of Western civilization is not either. English culture itself is often not beautiful and brilliant and so I would not expect other cultures to be defined so narrowly and crudely.

If i go into a mosque In London am I somehow less English then someone else who does not? What if i bend my knees in a Buddhist temple in Milton Keynes? what if i choose to make the call to prayer in Leeds or go to Synagogue in Exeter or Cornwall? What if i ask to not work on a Saturday am I less English then? What if I only eat hamburgers and wear a stetson and spend my weekends line dancing and playing at being a cowboy?

If i am a practicing Catholic am I less English than a protestant?

5. In the way you use free speech as a tool to defend those who would shut it down. You both use it like a cover all excuse for any kind of speech as though using it responsibly is not necessary. You deny that such a thing as hate speech exists even when it is employed to motivate people to kill based on scapegoating a race or ethnicity etc to justify that murder. If you really believed in Free speech you would welcome the idea of accepting it can be misused and has power.

6. Yes. ...

Of course you can force people to feel feelings. That is why speech is so powerful. You can make people afraid or excited, depressed, turned on, sickened, etc

Words are not just words and never were

CUNTY KONT FUCKKITY CRAPSHITTER WANKSTAIN DANGLEBERRIES

Not you so much but Benjamin shuts down the right to reply by editing his videos to portray those he is critical of in a way that is not representative of their position at all. His disciples do it on her all the time. So i can even say in a thread I am not in favour of political correctness and believe you can joke about anything until I am blue in the face, but they (those who use his method) will still insist that I am MR Pc because it is an easy strawman to demolish even though it does not represent my views in anyway. So you will see I am called both a sponger and part of the media elite , an SJW and a racist, a fake Jew and a Gentile hater, a little Englander and in favour of mass immigration, etc


7. I don't have any vitriol where you are concerned and I don't particularly have that much hate for Benjamin though he is without a doubt an arrogant and ignorant cunt. He loves to stick up for right wing wankers and then like Peterson call himself a classical liberal. What they both really mean is that their farts are too good for both the left and right and they inhabit some kind of intellectual and moral high ground others can only ever aspire to. Arseholes.

I will let you know when I make an angry post and then maybe things will be a little clearer for everyone.

[El Kabong]

Thanks for both these reply posts they are awesome and of course I don't want you too stop engaging with me nor do i find you too troublesome to deal with. I have only just read these after posting my reply to your reply before these

Well then let's both hope your previous response doesn't get me to lose my cool

If I wanted to dictate what the answers were I wouldn't ask the questions. I want the answers to be as clear and in depth as possible so that misunderstandings can be avoided as I've found most forum fights can be avoided through clarity. Sorry that my numbering questions irks you, but again I do that for clarity and so that it is easier for me to follow along from previous posts. Nobody HAS to jump through hoops, I'm merely setting things up for myself so I better understand things and I'm more organized, I certainly hold no power over how you decide to respond or not to my posts. As for the issue of tone, I've never felt comfortable in judging the manner in which you post and I wouldn't put it past anyone to be passive aggressive and given that I'm attempting to bridge a gap here and I'm trusting you to do the same as you had previously indicated I have only questioned the tone rather than assume and retaliate which would have landed us right back in the rut we had previously been in.


1. "You are outraged that people can be offended." Not in the slightest, I will typically wonder WHY someone takes offense or what the point of taking offense over seemingly trivial matters are, but hey it's their life and if they wish to live it in a way where they're constantly aghast dropping the monocles into their martini glasses then that's one way to live. My disdain comes from people making cases to affect my personal freedom and liberty to do something and THAT is what I get hacked off at.

2. "Everyone in the Universe. Nobody. Who cares? If you want to be outraged that is your call but there is an awful lot out there that will push your buttons, whoever you are. Is that the kind of stress you want in your life?" They're free to push my buttons, they're not free to make laws limiting my freedom and liberty.

3. Do they? Ayaan Hirsi Ali doesn't fit the profile both Carl and Tommy like her and believe she's a fierce warrior and the epitome of what TRUE Feminism is. Yet she's black, she's formerly Muslim, she's not English at all not British at all, but her work, her unwavering stand against Militant Islam inspires their own work. Ayaan tweeted "People ask me about the Tommy Robinson saga in the UK. Here is the best piece I have read on it:https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/...mpression=true" ...looks like support to me and from someone foreign, of color, and from a different religious background.

And this little pearl from the article in question: "Indeed he (Tommy Robinson) was once charged with assault for head-butting a Nazi sympathizer who wouldn’t leave an EDL protest. Not many people bothered with those details. The assault got reported, but not the cause. So the fact that Robinson had head-butted a Nazi became yet more evidence that he himself must be some kind of Nazi." ...seems of import to take notice of if we're to fully judge his character.

I've not seen or heard of Carl Benjamin or Tommy attempting to shut down anyone's free speech. I know for a fact Carl Benjamin welcomes haters, he's eager to talk with them. "They hate being called fascists because they think that they are not the Devil incarnate." I didn't understand this, is the bold & underlined "they" referring to Tommy & Carl or Fascists because that could have multiple meanings and I want to correctly understand rather than assume. I also don't think either Carl or Tommy want laws to crack down on the free speech of others, they'd be horrible hypocrites if they did that. "They use the same language of discrimination that their critics employ to claim the position of victimhood." oh they absolutely do and that is done in order to prove a point it's showing someone what life would be like if the shoe were on the other foot. Carl Benjamin HAS called for bans on certain college courses as he sees them as poisonous and a waste of time and money, the courses he says that about aren't going to keep people from getting jobs unless of course you're a professor of one of those classes....but hey let the market decide if someone wants to waste thousands of dollars becoming dumber then by all means go ahead let the government fuck your credit up for the rest of your life.

"They share the same overriding motivation that fascists have of wanting to install an overriding power that will remove the rights of individuals." Are there examples of this being said or referenced or hinted at?

The Fascists of Italy were led by Mussolini who said "Fascism recognizes the real needs that gave rise to Socialism and trade-unionism, giving them due weight in the guild or corporative system in which divergent interests are coordinated and harmonized by the unity of the state" and Mussolini himself was an avid Socialist in WW1. But people can change, I don't think Socialism and Fascism are all that different, they're both totalitarian, they're both replacing everything with "The State", and they're both systems of single party government either you're in THE party or you're in deep shit.

4. Well of course there are differences in English & British cultures as one is the part of a whole. There's plenty that goes into culture and sure it's changing all the time, but evolving or replacing? How fast need it evolve or be replaced? And in one directions or many? It looks a right mess to have extreme feminists who believe in slut walks and toplessness right next to full head to toe niqabs and burkahs...which direction are we as a society going to go? Neither group wants a middle ground and that is a big problem which can/will/has caused conflict already and it'll get worse before it gets better. The main issue I see with change is that it's happening at an exponentially fast rate...I personally living in a "refugee town" as it were have noticed more people with difficulty speaking English than there used to be, and it's not that I hate them or loathe them or want them to go back where they came from it's in order for us to truly be good neighbors we need to be able to communicate clearly. Plus it's unfair to them if they're getting fucked over by not speaking the language and of course that happens it happens to people who speak English and are dealing with people speaking foreign languages too, it doesn't foster a climate of togetherness or community and those are important things right?

"It is a fact of life on Planet earth that we will roam and you can pretend you have more rights to a piece of land or a country than other people but it is an illusory concept like money." OK then so I can just walk into your house and take food out of your fridge? Or are there rules against that? I could walk right in to say The Pentagon or 10 Downing St and make myself at home or would that be frowned upon? Prisoners have their mobility restricted, why? I mean surely as they are human they should move as others do. Money is used in place of barter for those incapable of producing goods and services on their own, there are rules to it and how it works to deny that is to pretend we're no different than cavemen....cavemen by the way would also have territory they patrolled and
protected chimpanzees even do that and they go to BRUTAL war if someone oversteps the boundary so it's not as if we've always been free to frolic wherever we wanted to, quite the opposite really.
I treasure English culture and history but I am not so blind to think it superior to all others just like the current version of Western civilization is not either. English culture itself is often not beautiful and brilliant and so I would not expect other cultures to be defined so narrowly and crudely.

Well if you're joining a group hell bent on the demise of England/Britain and turning it 100% Muslim (or returning from your stint with ISIS or Al Qaeda) then yeah I'd say that's "less English". No Buddhism like Islam isn't a race or ethnicity but a religion and one of free will that you can join at your leisure. Judaism is both a religion and an ethnicity and therefore is a bit different, but an ethnic Jew can be of a different religion obviously. It doesn't make you less English. What do these people believe about the rule of law and what are their philosophies? What do they share besides the same land? Foods, sporting events, arts, history, community, sometimes religion, festivals, do they band together to defend their homeland? Do they consider England their homeland?

1/2

[El Kabong]

2/2

5. Who am I defending that would "shut free speech down"? It IS an excuse for any kind of speech, using it responsibly is down to the person using it and the company they keep. I for one wouldn't curse in church, I CAN but I do not as I have respect which is a decision I make of my own free will and that is appreciated by those I share my community and place of worship with. If speech can be used to motivate someone to kill then does it not follow that speech can be used to maintain peace as well? Outlawing someone from expressing themselves even if it's hateful and vile is the same as outlawing their THOUGHT of those things and that is dangerous, I also feel as though nasty people who think evil things ought to show themselves so the civilized world(meaning those people of whatever cultures etc) can see them for who they are and make their choice to follow along with hate OR to choose love and choose peace. It is because I recognize it's power does not ONLY lie in evil which is why I want it free.

6. "Words are not just words and never were" then I'm afraid you've given up your power to whoever has the ability to speak. I for one do not believe that you are some mindless zombie that I can command into tears or joy or ....well maybe if I scream "DO JUMPING JACKS FOR 5 HOURS STRAIGHT!!!" you'll actually comply, but for some reason I doubt it.

Well Carl Benjamin is using his speech and YouTube as the platform, YouTube is available to any number of people and they're free to respond as they wish Kevin Logan has done that often and in the same manner albeit his reasoning is different of course and that is fine. People have assumptions of you like they have assumptions of me or anyone else, it's misunderstanding (accidental or on purpose), miscommunication (they read what you didn't write, you write something in a manner that is difficult to discern what you mean), reading requires reading comprehension and if you're tired or drunk or distracted all of those things can impact your reading comprehension and likewise if you're angry or upset or happy or feeling another extreme of emotion it can skew what someone has written.

7. I'm pleased you have no animus towards me. I wonder what got you started hating Dr. Peterson and to think he's nihilistic is something I can't wrap my mind around but hey whether it's him or Carl or Tommy or Trump or whoever you're not obligated to like anyone if you don't have to I just wanted a clearer picture of why...I mean I hated Derek Jeter (American baseball player) for no other reason than he played for the Yankees other than that I had great respect for the guy.

Well there's that