In the news

First they took our face sitting.....

that reminds me... it's my mums birthday next week.

No I wouldn't. But that's a completely different scenario.

This was an editorial judgement. We made the same judgement as Vice: we pixelated the actual execution but otherwise showed the footage unaltered.

It is our job to report the news. To accurately portray what happens in the world. If we sat on that footage and didn't show it, that would be censorship. There's already a country which airbrushes the news to take out the bits they don't like. It's called North Korea.

You say that you find it surprising that people find your viewpoint almost laughable (n.b: I don't) but you are arguing for censorship of the media in the context of a violent attack on a media outlet by people who wanted censorship of the media because they didn't like it because it offended them.

Can you not see the heavy irony there?

unfuckingbelieveable, best answer

https://twitter.com/toby_etc/status/552957614120636416

Ha.

some people make the mistake to think that if somebody criticizes
Islam they somehow agree with Christianity etc. This is not football.

+1
Nor does it make me a EDL or Le Pen sympathiser. I'm an atheist, that's all.

http://www.newsweek.com/naacp-chapter-bombing-colorado-springs-deliberate-says-fbi-297399

I think the best reaction to killing people because of doodles is more doodles. Fucking cunts deserve all the doodles they get. Not to be confused with all the absolute belms who happen to be idiotic enough to believe in a similar bullshit or the unfortunate types who happen to look like they might being caught up in such doodly retribution.

I might have tipped over into bullshit, either way, anyone who believes in anything more than "don't kill" is generally wrong.

Don't kill other people, don't hurt other people, don't steal from other people. All the rest is fluff, bollocks and religion. Quite often all three.

yeah, there are plenty of moozies that aren't nutter, murdering cunts. they might believe in a load of wank, but if they aren't harming you, then to deliberately offend them because of others' shit is a bit cunty.

don't tip hot candle wax on your seedbag is another

Offend them all you want, they can offend me all they want, we should never go further than offence.

Being offended and causing offence should never really be confused.

Fuck off cunts.

Kids are cunts anyway.

Yeah!

I don't get it, cannon law has the same law pretty much word for word. Everyone can dig out an ancient text to do whatever they want.

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P52.HTM

Can. 1369 A person who in a public show or speech, in published writing, or in other uses of the instruments of social communication utters blasphemy, gravely injures good morals, expresses insults, or excites hatred or contempt against religion or the Church is to be punished with a just penalty.

Everyone can dig out an ancient text to do whatever they want.

Herein lies a big problem. Find a 'cause' or 'reason' for any action and you can pretty easily find a text to back it up. And surely it only has to justify the action enough for someone who is pretty dead-set on doing it anyway to be likely they will have a go?

Anyway, must fly, as I'm off to find some arrows before my trip to Chester to 'meet' some Welshmen, or suttin...

The practising of any religion in this country should be made illegal and anyone caught should be shot. We could then start again with the remaining tenth of the hopefully more intelligent members of the population
That would put the cat amongst the pigeons.

The practising of any religion in this country should be made illegal and anyone caught should be shot.

And the foreigns. Don't forget them.

Oh, and the poor. We could get rid of them too.

You are Henry VIII AICMFP.

Yes, I can see the irony, but so what? I just don't think things are that black and white. Censorship isn't a bad thing per se (besides, I'm advocating self-censorship here): it becomes problematic when the people implementing censorship do so to cover their own backs, their corruption, or the truth of the thing. In this instance that does not apply. Like I said, the only motive for showing this video is to improve ratings - or maybe to satisfy one's darker curiosity (and actually, I do accept that as a motive, albeit a dubious one).

But we're flogging a dead horse here; you're not convinced by my arguments, nor I with yours.

Censorship isn't a bad thing per se

Sorry, but bollocks, it is.

Absolutely. Censorship is absolutely a bad thing per se. What Voltaire said. If you don't understand the critical importance of media scrutiny - uncensored and with full freedom of the press - to effective democracy and civil society ain't nobody got time for that conversation.