Charlie Kirk

[carmanmemoranda]

So Trump supporters commenting on UK free speech is a serious threat to your free speech.

OK, we'll just leave it there.

Anybody trying to affect free speech in the UK is potentially affecting my rights, yes. Yours too if you think about it.

 

[Si_]

And I've explained why you are wrong. Trump says you won't be allowed in if you say nasty things about Kirk. That isn't protecting America at all because his own citizens can say it if they like, while protected by their constitution. It's trying to curb free speech, nothing more.

Millions of Americans have convictions for serious crimes but that doesn't mean border control shouldn't prevent people convicted of murder from entering the US. Do you really think that Trump would ban people who speak badly of Kirk yet be OK with the countless numbers that mock and deride Trump himself if he was trying to prevent foreign citizens from speaking freely? Nothing you say stands up to scrutiny.

What has Starmer, for instance, ever claimed that Americans are not allowed to say in the UK? Be specific.

Many people are denied entry to the UK annually because of their views and political opinions. Rappers have been turned away for 'offensive lyrics'. Politicians because they spoke out against Islam. But that wasn't what I was referring to. I said that if you're so concerned about your free speech, worry about the 30+ arrested for non-crime hate speech that are happening daily in the UK, and the numerous arrests for criticising people in positions of authority, not someone on the other side of the world who has no impact whatsoever on what you say.

 

[Si_]

Anybody trying to affect free speech in the UK is potentially affecting my rights, yes. Yours too if you think about it.

The only people negative affecting free speech in the UK are the UK government.

 

[carmanmemoranda]

The only people negative affecting free speech in the UK are the UK government.

Absoloute nonsense

 

[Notch7]

The only people negative affecting free speech in the UK are the UK government.

Not true

The U.K. govt does not prevent free speech

Hate speech is not free speech.

 

[Si_]

Absoloute nonsense

You're so right. It's not like parents are arrested for criticising the way their daughter's school is run, or police are turning up at people's workplaces if they say a man is not a woman.

No, wait...

Parents arrested by Hertfordshire police for complaining about daughter’s school

Maxie Allen and Rosalind Levine say six officers came to their house after primary objected to WhatsApp comments

www.theguardian.com

Police who warned man about 'transphobic' tweet acted unlawfully

High court finds actions of Humberside police had ‘chilling effect’ on Harry Miller’s right to free speech

www.theguardian.com

 

[carmanmemoranda]

Is that by the Government ?

You haven't found any foreign interference?

 

[Si_]

Is that by the Government ?

You haven't found any foreign interference?

What?

 

[Odds]

Has Himmy switched sides?

 

[blup]

No, they don't. I'll try and simplify this as much as I can. There are things called rights. These are things the law says all people must be able to do. In the UK we have them defined in a big book called the Human Rights Act. If the right is not in the big book it does not exist. Entering the US is not in the big book. Committing crime is not in the big book. Other things you may think of that sound good, but are not in the big book, are not rights.

Freedom of speech is protected under international law. You can’t plausibly argue that banning someone from entry because of a meme, or revoking their visa because of a joke, is anything other than suppression of free speech for political purposes. The fact that the law allows it is irrelevant. Free speech is a precious commodity not a tradable good.

Urgh.

Why are American universities being defunded if not because they decline to run a MAGA syllabus? Why are law firms and TV networks threatened with litigation or defunding unless they tow the government line? Urgh indeed.

 

[denso13]

Many people are denied entry to the UK annually because of their views and political opinions. Rappers have been turned away for 'offensive lyrics'. Politicians because they spoke out against Islam. But that wasn't what I was referring to. I said that if you're so concerned about your free speech, worry about the 30+ arrested for non-crime hate speech that are happening daily in the UK, and the numerous arrests for criticising people in positions of authority, not someone on the other side of the world who has no impact whatsoever on what you say.

Whataboutery, you have no examples. It's like Starmer saying to Americans, "if you say anything nasty about Mandelson you'll be banned from the UK".

It's ludicrous.

Do you really think that Trump would ban people who speak badly of Kirk yet be OK with the countless numbers that mock and deride Trump himself if he was trying to prevent foreign citizens from speaking freely?

He has. That's why we're discussing it. Trump doesn't think things through before he says it, that's why he's a laughing stock.

 

[Si_]

It definitely didn't happen that a girl was arrested and convicted for copy pasting the lyrics of her favourite rap song, which is available in any music store and was broadcast to 10 million people at Glastonbury, as a tribute to a friend.

Woman guilty of 'racist' Snap Dogg rap lyric Instagram post

Chelsea Russell said she used the Snap Dogg lyric as a tribute to a boy who died in a crash.

www.bbc.co.uk

It also never happened that a journalist would be investigated by police for calling a man a man

Surrey Police investigation over 'misgendering' tweets

Catholic commentator Caroline Farrow says she is being investigated by police for using the wrong pronoun.

www.bbc.co.uk

Graham Linehan, a US / Irish citizen, definitely didn't get arrested by five armed UK police officers for joking that a woman should punch a man in the balls.

Graham Linehan: Father Ted co-creator arrested at Heathrow over his X posts

Graham Linehan was arrested on suspicion of inciting violence and bailed pending further investigation.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[carmanmemoranda]

It definitely didn't happen that a girl was arrested and convicted for copy pasting the lyrics of her favourite rap song, which is available in any music store and was broadcast to 10 million people at Glastonbury, as a tribute to a friend.

Woman guilty of 'racist' Snap Dogg rap lyric Instagram post

Chelsea Russell said she used the Snap Dogg lyric as a tribute to a boy who died in a crash.

www.bbc.co.uk

It also never happened that a journalist would be investigated by police for calling a man a man

Surrey Police investigation over 'misgendering' tweets

Catholic commentator Caroline Farrow says she is being investigated by police for using the wrong pronoun.

www.bbc.co.uk

Graham Linehan, a US / Irish citizen, definitely didn't get arrested by five armed UK police officers for joking that a woman should punch a man in the balls.

Graham Linehan: Father Ted co-creator arrested at Heathrow over his X posts

Graham Linehan was arrested on suspicion of inciting violence and bailed pending further investigation.

www.bbc.co.uk

All government stuff ?

Still nothing from abroad ?

 

[Si_]

Freedom of speech is protected under international law. You can’t plausibly argue that banning someone from entry because of a meme, or revoking their visa because of a joke, is anything other than suppression of free speech for political purposes. The fact that the law allows it is irrelevant. Free speech is a precious commodity not a tradable good.

Revoking their visa is different because they are already in the country. Denying them entry is not suppression of free speech, neither legally nor practically, as I've explained at exhaustive length.

Why are American universities being defunded if not because they decline to run a MAGA syllabus? Why are law firms and TV networks threatened with litigation or defunding unless they tow the government line? Urgh indeed.

That has nothing to do with the topic I'm talking about.

 

[blup]

Revoking their visa is different because they are already in the country. Denying them entry is not suppression of free speech, neither legally nor practically, as I've explained at exhaustive length.

It is, but it goes by another name.

That has nothing to do with the topic I'm talking about.

Revoking a visa, or denying entry, for vindictive and arbitrary political reasons are exactly the same.